Featured Is Acts 17:30 only the elect or the entire human race?

You assigned that to what he said therefore you claimed it was his position. He never said it was his position therefore assigning to him is dishonest.

You say it presented God as being weak but does he believe that makes God weak? If he doesn't then you have misrepresented his position. Maybe you should be more clear that you see his position as weak rather than suggesting he does.

I say the particular position presents God as weak. Your position presents God as one who cannot reach into the heart of man and convict him unless he is first regenerated. I say God is much greater than that and can convict man to the point of making a choice to receive Him or not without regenerating Him. In fact He can do it anyway He wants to. The lack of regeneration is not a problem for Him.

 

Yes.

HankD

 

God used Judas own desires to betray Jesus, as was prphecied that one near him would do that to Him, but God also determined that Jesus would die on the cross, and sinful men did as they wanted and put Him there!

 

Howdy Van, the ONLY way that a Born Again Christian is Holy is ONLY because of Christ, but really they are sinners who deserve to be right now thrown into Hell. We Christians will be sinners until the day we die, that's why we need a Savior!

The natural man considers the gospel to be foolishness, so why would he/she choose it?? Nicodemus did not receive what the world's best preachers preached to him, why, because he wasn't born again. RE: John 3:3.

1Co 2:14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

 

Van, all does not mean all all the time.

 

Well you are right and wrong.
You are right about the bad critique of Icthus' position.
But you are wrong about your position, no matter j=how sincerely you hold it. (-:


let me explain. First, for arguments sake, lets assume man is not regenerated first. I don't believe they are regenerated before faith. Where you fail in your analysis of the situation.
Here is what you said:

Is that a Biblical point of view, or just one based on tradition?
Well its not in the Bible at all.
So how do you know it as a truth?
You don't.

Let me ask you a personal question. Why did you choose to receive Jesus?
Your answer will show the emptiness of your tradition.

 

Howdy Robert,

We (born anew believers) become holy, perfect, and justified (just as if we did not sin) when God puts us spiritually in Christ.

Therefore the command "be perfect" is something achievable. Just as "be reconciled" is something achievable. The whole effort to claim God gives us commands that we cannot achieve is bogus, fake theology.

No verse or passage says the gospel is foolishness to all natural men. As I said before "the things of God" refers to spiritual meat in 1 Corinthians 2:14, not spiritual milk. 1 Corinthians 3:1 clearly teaches men of flesh can understand spiritual milk.

All men refers to all humankind.

John 3:3 teaches we must be born anew to enter and therefore see heaven from the inside.. Lots of people reject the gospel, and then some (a few) subsequently repent and fully embrace the gospel.

 

Howdy Robert, I watched the first few minutes of video, but it appeared to offer the same old discredited TULIP.

To be spiritually dead is to be spiritually separated from God and unable to do anything of our own to get across that separation.
However, in Matthew 23:13 we see spiritually dead (unregenerate) men entering the kingdom of heaven until blocked by false teachings. We know they were not under the influence of "Irresistible grace" because they were blocked, and therefore fallen natural men have some limited spiritual ability.

 

There is no past, present or future tense in eternity.
I suppose an argument could be made for a neverending present tense but IMO even that is to narrow a window.

We see eternity and eternity events here on planet earth through a tiny peephole.

The new birth is an eternal event : before, after IMO does not apply.

Before what? After what?

I suppose we could say that there is/was/will be a changed life after it happens.
Perhaps God snatched it out of eternity into our individual time stream.

But even in the act of physical birthing there is conception and then a time of incubation before the actual birth event.

Just musing.

HankD

 

Welcome old feith,

Indeed this passage is (or has now become) a bone of contention here at the BB.
But the BB is a place of debate and no one will remove you unless you issue doubts as to someone's salvation.

So, I am not a calvinist and I believe Acts 17:30 means what it says without any further explanation.

Personally there should be no upset among calvinists for this verse even if they take it at it's obvious meaning.

It could possibly be a test command as when Jesus at the feeding of the 5000 said to His disciples

Matthew 14:16 But Jesus said unto them, They need not depart; give ye them to eat.

Impossible - without God's intervention of course.

Another such passage is :

Revelation 22:17 And the Spirit and the bride say, Come. And let him that heareth say, Come. And let him that is athirst come. And whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely.

Hmm, "will" and "freely" in the same clause!

HankD

 

I am not a Calvinist I am a Baptist, the Doctrine of Free Grace was preached and advocated 1500 yrs before John Calvin was born by Jesus Christ and his apostles. If you would read the 3rd chapter of Romans the Apostle Paul addressed you issue at length. I am not trying to be-little you don't take this the wrong way but you're understanding of the doctrine of justification is why you can't see this truth, my advice to you is that you make an in depth study of how God justifies sinful man while remaining just himself.

 

What does the Bible say? God has shared with us how he brings reconciliation. You seem to claim that God may break his declared process merely on a whim and a desire to change. Your argument is not logical.

 

Calvin must be your friend.

 

He is and my brother as well.

We don't see eye to eye on a few things, but who am I?

HankD

 

Indeed, I don't agree with every comment Calvin made. He, like you and I, is a flawed individual who sees God in a clouded mirror. We do our best to rightly discern the words of God.

 

The invitation to come and the command to repent doesn't make the person capable of obeying same as getting a letter from your banker demanding payment doesn't means you have the money to do so

 

Doesn't mean you don't either.

BTW and IMO (but close to a conviction) "grace alone" and "free will" are not mutually exclusive.

HankD

 

I don't seem to say that at all. That is your imposition on my words.