Featured Free will and the gospel

• Van,
  
  Even you have to admit my patience with your exuberance to disparage is worthy of at least some small esteem.
  
  Your own words betray you.
  
  Here again, you succumb to the basic frailty of your thinking.
  
  You said, “Fallen people seek God via faith or works or both...”.
  
  “...butMatthew 23:13 shows that claim too is bogus, because those fallen people were "entering the kingdom.”
  
  That a person may out of their own will generate some ability in order to gain God’s attention, and having attained to some unknown standard, God will acknowledge their effort and grant them entrance into the kingdom - in other words, they are saved.
  
  No regard for the work of the Scriptures and that of the Holy Spirit.
  
  So Van, if you think I have misrepresented you, you can certainly call some others to your defense, but ultimately they would merely agree with your view that ungodly heathen can of their own authority gain the kingdom of God - salvation.
  
  
  YOUR own words!

 

No, receiving the gospel does not result in salvation. But that is not the issue. The issue is if total spiritual inability were true, the second soil would not have received the gospel period. That is the issue you should address in your response.

I think I have made the case, and on one who accepts the truth of scripture could disagree, total spiritual inability is bogus doctrine, as demonstrated by Matthew 13, Romans 9:16, Romans 9:31-33 and Matthew 23:13.

 

RSR, name calling yet again. And did I say fallen people has the ability to seek God and respond to the gospel without irresistible grace? Yes. Did RSR define "special grace?" Nope. On and on they dance, name calling, changing the subject, and misrepresenting the views of others. But do they address Romans 9:16, Romans 9:31-33, Matthew 13 or Matthew 23:13? Nope

 

Agedman continues to think he should be esteemed for mi8srepresenting my views. LOL

Note that Agedman rejects the truth I posted but provides no response to Romans 9:16, Romans 9:31-33, Matthew 13 and Matthew 23:13. Next Agedman suggests that Matthew 23:13 says they were entering the kingdom without seeking God and trusting (putting their faith in ) God. LOL

This is all they have, no response to scriptural truth.

 

No, just because someone receives the gospel does not mean God credits that faith as righteousness. The people of Matthew 7 who said "Lord, Lord" were not saved.

But again, you are not responding to the issue, which is that if total spiritual inability were true, the second soil would not have received the gospel. If total spiritual inability were true, the folks of Romans 9:16 would not have willed to be saved. The folks of Romans 9:31-33 would not have been seeking God by faith, by works or both.

Please respond to this fact, total spiritual inability for all people all the time is unbiblical. Say yes you agree, or no you still disagree and then explain why.

 

I am sorry Tim71, but you chose not to address the issue, that total spiritual inability is obviously bogus. No need for further discussion, as all Cal-leaning folks use "change the subject" tactics to avoid addressing the issue,.

 

Yet another effort to change the subject to whether you misrepresented me. Folks, this is all they have.

And the discussion is not about the hidden meaning of "special grace." A term not found in scripture.

Finally, in yet another off topic effort to change the subject, RSR continues to name call.

But did he, or any Cal address the fact total spiritual inability is unbiblical as clearly demonstrated by Romans 9:16, where some men will to be saved, or Romans 9:31-33 where people seek God by faith or works or both, Matthew 13 where some receive the gospel, and Matthew 23:13 where people were entering the kingdom, thus seeking God. Total Spiritual Inability is bogus and so rather than address the truth of scripture, they change the subject.

 

Amazing, is that none of the Scripture in Van's list addresses the OP subject, either.

His exuberance doesn’t allow him to recognize the error of his own words.

The determination to discredit spiritual inability has driven him to the embracing of total spiritual ability, irregardless of the use of Scriptures and determined work of the Holy Spirit.

It has emerged as his one trick pony now in this thread.

Get this, Van, NONE of the Scriptures you have offered support your thinking on this matter of spiritual ability as you desire to discredit spiritual inability.

Just the opposite.

 

Did I mention the downright denial of the obvious, people willing to be saved proves total spiritual inability is unbiblical? All they have is tis not so and Van is bad for saying so. In post after post.

BTW, did I say or suggest the fallen have "total spiritual ability?" Nope. So again the Cal misrepresents my view to change the subject. Falsehoods piled on falsehoods. Talk about a one trick pony.

 

Spiritual ability isn’t a matter of almost, or just about, it isn’t like the rheostat that withholds water flow until the car engine warms sufficiently, and it isn’t like the dimmer on a light that allows for infinitely measures of current. It isn’t a restriction of a blood vessel that can be opened by surgery. It isn’t as the person gasping their last breath extending their final measure of strength in a cry of need.

Spiritual ability is or is not. Either one has spiritual ability and all that such presents including the ability to gain the attention of God by innate will, or one does not have it and is fully impassive until the Word of God and the work of the Holy Spirit illuminates and enlivens that person.

Perhaps you not grasping this has lead you to misrepresent the Scriptures.

 

Did you see any reference to scripture? Neither did I!
Did you see bogus claims about limited spiritual ability, i.e. able to understand milk but not meat, as taught in 1 Corinthians 3:1-3?
Did you see once again the bogus claim of "the ability to gain the attention of God by innate will" after denying he made the charge? BTW, God is all-knowing and therefore knows about those seeking Him.
Falsehood after falsehood folks, changing the subject from the bogus doctrine of total spiritual inability. Just read Romans 9:16 and consider how a person could will to be saved if total spiritual inability is true? Just read Romans 9:31-33 and consider how people would seek God through works or faith or both if total spiritual inability was true. Not to mention Matthew 13 where 3 or four soils respond to the gospel, and Matthew 23:13 where fallen people are entering the kingdom, demonstrating some spiritual ability.

 

And again, the Scriptures Van offers do not support the thinking he is giving them.

 

From the internet:

Lets see, we love Him because He first loved us.
No one comes to Christ unless drawn by the Father.
So point one of Semi-Pelagianism is bogus.

We love Him, because He first loved us.
God demonstrated His love toward us by dying for us while we were sinners.
Therefore God's revelatory grace comes before we seek Him.
So point two of Semi-Pelagianism is bogus.

Is salvation brought about by God alone (yes) or does our faith merit salvation (No).
God credits our worthless faith as righteousness (or not) therefore salvation does not depend upon the man that wilsl, but upon God who has mercy on whom He chooses.

Pay no attention to those who misrepresent the views of others.

 

Yet another "tis not so" post, devoid of any scripture.
Just read Romans 9:16 and consider how a person could will to be saved if total spiritual inability is true? Just read Romans 9:31-33 and consider how people would seek God through works or faith or both if total spiritual inability was true. Not to mention Matthew 13 where 3 or four soils respond to the gospel, and Matthew 23:13 where fallen people are entering the kingdom, demonstrating some spiritual ability.

 

Van makes the statement with a Scripture reference, but does not show the actual Scripture.

Why, because they don’t really support his statements.

Why not start with Romans 9. Explain total spiritual inability is exempt.

 

More change the subject nonsense. All anyone has to do is click on the blue references to get an antiquated version of the verses.

Romans 9:16 as found by clicking on it: 16 So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy.

Certainly this board would be better served by using the NASB, or LEB, or WEB, but it is what it is.