Featured Free will makes God appear impotent.

Thank you.

A lot...
A new processor for my computer...
More sleep...
An R.A. Allan single column HCSB in Tan Goatskin...
World peace... (which will probably occur before the single column HCSB from Allan:laugh

But from you?

For now I'll settle on accurate handling of the scriptures.

OK. The both of you can torture the text and be wrong together.

And if we're going to do an appeal to authority contest I'm pretty sure I can win.

The fundamental problem in all this is you totally ignore what Jesus actually said. You say that more knowledge is all that is needed, when actually Jesus says that you need the Father drawing you. You say that this knowledge enables the sinner to trust Christ, when Christ himself said it is actually the Father who enables sinners to come to the Son. You say that knowledge doesn't cause someone to come to Christ, but it enables them, they can still refuse - yet Jesus said that EVERY ONE who learns from the Father will come. It's that simple. So either you misunderstand what learning from the Father means, or Jesus was confused. I vote that you are mistaken.

No one said God listens for us, that's just misdirection on your part. Try to focus please.

Again, you have a fundamental misunderstanding of what Jesus is referring to. When he says those that learn from the Father, he does not mean that God is collecting people up, bringing them to a class room and teaching a New Testament Survey! The whole context of John 6 is dealing with why these people refuse the Savior.

After all he has done and all they've seen, why do they continue in disbelief?

That is the context, Jesus is explaining their unbelief, and this hearing and learning from the Father is clearly parallel with being drawn by the Father, being given by the Father, enabling by the Father etc.

But you can't deal with that because it entirely refutes your position, so you have to jump around, to other passages dealing with other issues in other contexts to try and piece together something resembling coherent thought. Which is why you jump to Romans 10:

If you cannot see the difference between Romans 10 and John 6 I really can't help you.

In John 6 Jesus is dealing with the inward calling and drawing of God in order to explain the crowds unbelief. Romans 10 is dealing with the outward profession of faith in response to gospel preaching.

Coming from you that means practically nothing.

Actually it does, and very clearly too. Every single one who hears and learns from the Father will come to the Son. Not a single one is lost. Every single one that is drawn by the Father will come to the Son, and not a single one is lost. If you would consistently read John 6 in its own context and not butcher it, you would see that the only options are either particular redemption or universalism.

Everything I have posted here is in accordance with scripture. I did not come to these conclusions from listening to men, but from my own study of the text. John 6 and John 10 are what convinced me of Calvinism, on their own. Of course I do listen to other men of faith, living and dead, because I would be stupid to ignore great resources of godly men that the Lord has used, but they have never and will never be the determining factor in my understanding of scripture.

 

How do you know Paul was the last one? You don't, you are just basing it on an argument from silence. I have no reason to discount the testimony of anyone if it led to a true conversion.

 

And? That doesn't refute anything. It merely shows Gods grace in reaching out to mankind, has nothing to do with the free agency of the individual.

 

Believe taht the corrct understanding of that passage on hebrews 6 is either one of two things:

that those being spoken of were those under the Old covenat who heard the Gospel of Jesus as messiah, saw evidence of that in their assemblies, and yet in the end, turned back to Judaism, as John would say of them "Went out from us, as they were not with us
OR

The author is using that to state that since we have been etrnally saved by God thru the death of jesus, that state would be something not even a real possibility, as he later on states that he is persuaded that those he os addressing are/will be the ones to show forth fruit and evodence of being really saved, by remaining in the faith!

 

It must stink to be you.

You do get accurate handling of the scriptures from me, and I've proved that by showing well known theologians who agree with my interpretations perfectly.

Yeah, I'm sure you know a lot more than Albert Barnes did.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Barnes_(theologian)

When Wiki writes an article on you, I will be impressed. :thumbsup:

Don't be so sure.

I didn't ignore John 6:44 at all. I agree 100% that no man can come to Jesus unless the Father draws him, but verse 45 explains how this is done, by TEACHING men about Jesus from the word of God. Only those men who have HEARD, and LEARNED, and been TAUGHT can come to Jesus.

And how are men taught from the Father? How do they hear from the Father and learn? From the Word of God. God doesn't supernaturally zap people with this knowledge.

No, if you believe in Jesus, it is because someone preached the word of God to you. And those spiritual truths revealed to you is what attracted and drew you to Jesus, just like everyone else.

I am not ignoring John 6:44, I am explaining it SCRIPTURALLY. Albert Barnes agreed with this as well.

It is you that teaches falsehood. Nowhere do the scriptures teach that God draws men with irresistible grace, you cannot possibly show it.

Show it. You can't do it.

Free will and a love of sin my man! That is the answer. Men can reject God's grace, and some men do! They love sin more than they love God. They hear the message and understand it, but they want to continue in their sin.

It is no mystery, and you do not have to have a doctorate to understand this, it is obvious to anyone with a lick of sense.

I am not like you, I am not wed to certain "orthodox" positions. You must know that by now. I believe what I believe the scriptures truly teach, and I don't care if that upsets others or not.

None of what you are saying here is found in the Bible. Show me where the scriptures say God calls some men with a "general call" and others with an "effectual call". You can't do it, because it doesn't exist.

You believe something totally man-made that cannot be found in scripture anywhere. Unbelieveable!

No, Hebrews 6 teaches that men can be enlightened and even brought to repentance, and yet fall away in unbelief.

But no man can come to Jesus unless they have heard of him and learned about him from the word of God, which was given to us by the Father.

LOL! You cannot show one word of scripture to support your view. I challenge you to show where the scriptures say God regenerates or "zaps" a man to come. I challenge you to show where the scriptures teach there is a "general call" and an "effectual call"

Put your money where your mouth is. Prove your view IF you can.

I'll be waiting.

 

OK, first of all, I only have a few minutes online in the morning, I have to go to work, so that is why I did not answer you.

But the truth is, I cannot answer you. It is not that I appeal to mystery as some sort of way of not answering you, it is that in reality I do not know the answer to your questions.

No one knows the answer to these questions.

But that does not prove your view. You do not know what happens to these folks either. You do not know for a certainty that God casts every one of them in hell. He MIGHT, he MIGHT NOT.

You need to give up this form of false argument. You need to quit letting yourself be deceived by this false form of argument. Just because no one can explain what happens to folks who never hear the gospel does not prove Calvinism. It does not prove that God passes some people by. It doesn't prove ANYTHING.

We could speculate all day long about what happens to these persons, and that is all it would be, SPECULATION.

This doesn't prove your view Willis, it really doesn't. It doesn't prove my view either, it doesn't prove anything.

Perhaps when we get to heaven we will learn the answer to this question. Perhaps not. I don't know, and neither do you.

 

Not really.

I am immensely blessed.

And so someone agreeing with you is the proof of your correctness? That's interesting.

OK, he's on Wikipedia - so is Joseph Smith. What's your point? Winman, it seems the more you lose a debate the more irrational your defense becomes, because this is a really silly way to determine who is correct.

No you are not. You are 100% ignoring what Jesus actually says. He does not say that these people who come to him are taught about the Father by other believers, but he says they are taught BY the Father. There is nothing here whatsoever that implies this teaching is done through any secondary means at all, otherwise Jesus would be wrong in saying that every one that is taught comes. This is not education that enables a decision to be made - you are outright making that up - it is instead a powerful, inward, compelling that infallibly brings one to the son of God.

I am not denying, in anyway, the necessity of preaching the gospel and the absolute necessity that one must hear the gospel in order to be saved. however, this text in John 6 is not dealing with the outward preaching of the gospel, but the inward response to God's drawing.

And like you, he is wrong.

If we are going to go this direction then I give you Matthew Henry:

And Jameison, Fausset and Brown:

Heck, I'll even give you Chuck Smith!

Where does Jesus say that they refuse to come to him because of their "free will"? Again, Jesus is explaining their unbelief. He says precisely nothing about their will, but that they do not believe in him because they have not been given to him by the Father (v36-40).

Oh yes. I am aware you are not interested in biblical orthodoxy.

It's such a shame that you believe interpreting scripture in it's proper contexts means one is "wed" to certain positions.

Already showed you one place - John 6. You refuse to see it, but you can't refute it.

So Jesus was either confused, or lying when he said that none that come to him will be cast out - that of everyone that he receives, none will be lost?

I can agree with that. Of course that has zip to do with John 6, but you are correct that people must hear the gospel in order to be converted.

Already done.

 

Especially since theBible seems to make it clear that jesus last personal visitation was to the Apostle born out of season, paul!

 

Hi Convicted;
Once you were freewill your self.
You Said;

I admit that no one can come to the Lord unless they are drawn, but to say no one has a choice is ridiculous. Everyman has a choice and until it can be proved to me they don't from scripture. I will not fall for that one. Men cannot come to God unless they are drawn. Men are not saved by there own ability, but by the convincing of them by the Holy Spirit.

The decisions of men have no effect on God's abilities or, reputation and it is presumptive to assume it does. We can't think for God and His power is beyond every man. Freewill exist or, else I would not have been able to resist Him as long as I did.

The only men who have no choice for Salvation are those who have had no offer of Salvation made to them. They simply have no choice because they aren't aware they have one. They have no idea of Jesus. No idea of a Savior or even that they need one.
MB

 

Then quit complaining.

Well, Barnes was a Calvinist, so he shouldn't be in agreement with me, but he was, because that is what the scriptures are actually saying. No scripture is of personal interpretation, you can't simply make the scriptures say what you WANT them to say.

Albert Barnes was an actual theologian, he didn't make up some story about meeting an angel who gave him some special reading glasses so he could read some gold plates he found buried in the middle of the woods in New York State in the mid 1800s with ancient hieroglyphics written on them.

So, it is your argument that is ridiculous, not mine.

Jesus said every man that comes to him was taught by the Father. They have heard and learned from the Father. This is what draws them to come to Jesus.

Jesus was talking about the Word of God, the Holy Scriptures. You can deny if you want, but that is what Jesus was speaking about, and Albert Barnes knew that.

God doesn't supernaturally zap people with the gospel. If you heard the gospel, then you either read it in the scriptures, or you heard a preacher preach the gospel from the scriptures. That is how you came to know and understand the gospel, and this is what enabled you to come to Jesus and believe on him.

You would be foolish to deny that God brings people to Christ by the foolishness of preaching. It doesn't say God zapped them.

You do not have one word of scripture to support this "inward call" or "effectual call" or whatever you want to call it. There is not a single scripture in all the Bible that teaches this.

If so, then please present the scripture that teaches this. It should be EASY for you to do.

I can show you where Jesus says people will not come to him because of their free will.

Jhn 5:40 And ye will not come to me, that ye might have life.

There it is, plain as day, Jesus said these unbelievers "will not" come to me. He didn't say they "cannot" come to me. By their own free will they rejected Jesus and refused to come to him.

See, the difference between you and I is that I actually present SCRIPTURE that supports my view. You simply make unsupported claims.

For many it is orthodox to baptize babies. Will you do that because it is orthodox and been done for 2000 years? Why not?

Again, Albert Barnes a respected theologian interpreted the scripture exactly as I did.

You haven't shown one word that teaches a "general" and "effectual" call. You can't do it, because no such scripture exists.

You must think people are stupid. Nobody is fooled, you have shown exactly ZERO evidence for your view. You couldn't show it if you wanted to. You have simply let other people tell you falsehood, and you have fallen for it hook, line and sinker.

I don't disagree with this at all. Where did you get this from?

In Romans 10:14 Paul asks HOW SHALL THEY BELIEVE IN HIM?

Paul is directly addressing the ABILITY to believe on Jesus for salvation in this verse. There is no other verse like in in all the Bible.

Does Paul say or imply a person has to be regenerated to believe in Jesus? NO, Paul simply implies they must HEAR of Jesus.

Did Paul say or imply they must be regenerated to have the ability to hear? NOPE, he implies that a preacher must be sent to preach the gospel.

That's it. Period. Paul implies that all that is necessary for any man to believe on Jesus is that a preacher come and preach the gospel to them so they can hear it. End of story.

Now that is what the scriptures REALLY say. They don't say you have to be zapped to believe, they don't say God has to send an "effectual" call for you to believe.

You have let men pull the wool over your eyes.

 

None have a choice to reject either then. Your doctrine gives man the perfect excuse and is not even justice in man's flawed justice system.

 

So none if the OT saints were saved? No babies?

 

What about Rahab the harlot? What did she know?

Heb 11:31 By faith the harlot Rahab perished not with them that believed not, when she had received the spies with peace.

Are we to imagine that Rahab knew the gospel? Yet this scripture clearly implies she was not only physically saved, but saved when she died as well.

 

Who's complaining? Not me.

And Chuck Smith was extremely anti-calvinistic, and shouldn't agree with me yet he did. Big deal.

I was pointing out that you were arguing his merit as theologian, contrary to mine, based on the fact there is a wiki page on him. That proves nothing.

While true, you have the quotation backwards. Jesus said:

Jhn 6:45 NASB - "It is written in the prophets, 'AND THEY SHALL ALL BE TAUGHT OF GOD.' Everyone who has heard and learned from the Father, comes to Me."​

Everyone who hears and learns comes. I agree that everyone who comes will have first learned, but the specific way Jesus phrases this refutes your position. You are saying that multitudes will learn and hear yet never come. Jesus denies that by saying that EVERY ONE who has heard and learned from the Father will come.

You cannot prove from John 6 that he is speaking of the word of God. It simply isn't there at all. You make this assertion yet you have totally failed to prove it. Yes hearing the gospel and understanding it is the outward cause of coming to faith, but that is not what John 6 is talking about, that would be Romans 10. But again, your commitment to your tradition and the sovereignty of man prevents you from actually understanding the scriptures.

It is plain, from a clear consistent reading of this chapter, that Jesus is here speaking of something inward not external. And it is infallible. The language Jesus uses makes it clear that he nor the Father will fail at all. All the Father gives to the Son will come, the Son will receive them all, none are lost and all are raised at the last day. We see that all who are given by the Father are "taught" by the Father and every one of them will come to the Son.

There is no way whatsoever that you can make this out to be the external preaching and teaching of the gospel, unless you believe that every single person who has ever heard the gospel will be saved.

So John 6 clearly presents the inward, infallible calling straight from the Father.

The following verses also point to the inward, effectual calling by God:

Act 2:39 NASB - "For the promise is for you and your children and for all who are far off, as many as the Lord our God will call to Himself."

Rom 1:6 NASB - among whom you also are the called of Jesus Christ;

Rom 8:28, 30 NASB - And we know that God causes all things to work together for good to those who love God, to those who are called according to His purpose. ... and these whom He predestined, He also called; and these whom He called, He also justified; and these whom He justified, He also glorified.

Rom 9:11, 24 NASB - for though the twins were not yet born and had not done anything good or bad, so that God's purpose according to His choice would stand, not because of works but because of Him who calls, ... even us, whom He also called, not from among Jews only, but also from among Gentiles.

1Co 1:26 NASB - For consider your calling, brethren, that there were not many wise according to the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble;

Gal 1:15 NASB - But when God, who had set me apart even from my mother's womb and called me through His grace, was pleased

Eph 4:4 NASB - There is one body and one Spirit, just as also you were called in one hope of your calling;

1Th 5:24 NASB - Faithful is He who calls you, and He also will bring it to pass.

2Ti 1:9 NASB - who has saved us and called us with a holy calling, not according to our works, but according to His own purpose and grace which was granted us in Christ Jesus from all eternity,

Heb 9:15 NASB - For this reason He is the mediator of a new covenant, so that, since a death has taken place for the redemption of the transgressions that were committed under the first covenant, those who have been called may receive the promise of the eternal inheritance.

1Pe 1:15 NASB - but like the Holy One who called you, be holy yourselves also in all your behavior;

1Pe 5:10 NASB - After you have suffered for a little while, the God of all grace, who called you to His eternal glory in Christ, will Himself perfect, confirm, strengthen and establish you.

2Pe 1:10 NASB - Therefore, brethren, be all the more diligent to make certain about His calling and choosing you; for as long as you practice these things, you will never stumble; ​

Simultaneously scripture teaches that much of our gospel preaching will be ignored and rejected in the world. That would be what has been termed the outward or external call. That can be and often is rejected.

That says nothing of a free will. It says the will not come to him, but says nothing of their desire to come or their ability. The rejected Christ, not because of some free will, that's silly. If they were truly free they should recognize that Jesus is what they desperately need and would be trampling each other to get to him. Instead we have a clear demonstration that their will is in bondage and they will not come to Christ even though he is what they need.

And again, in John 6 Jesus actually does say that they cannot come unless the Father grants it:

Jhn 6:65 NASB - And He was saying, "For this reason I have said to you, that no one can come to Me unless it has been granted him from the Father."​

See above.

Except that I came to this conclusion from studying the Bible, not from just adopting others views and I have consistently shown what John 6 teaches and other passages in support of my view. Of course you don't actually care about that, you just want to insult me and malign my character.

I agree that in Romans 10 Paul does not talk about the necessity of regeneration or of the inward call.
That's because that is not the point of Romans 10.

He is speaking of the response to the preaching of the gospel, particularly regarding Israel's rejection of the gospel. He is not trying to explain the reason for their unbelief (other than the fulfillment of prophecy) like Jesus is in John 6.