What 3 verses say that a lost man cannot believe the gospel?

Amen, Van. In Rom 8 the contrast is squarely being made between the Law of Moses that Israel was continuing to place herself under and the law of Christ, which makes them free from the law of Moses. I know that Paul is giving bedrock truths for the Christian faith here but God uses object lessons to teach them. He takes a whole chapter 7 to praise the holiness of the law and assuring all that when one husband is dead it is lawful to be married to another. He also explains the frustration of trying to elevate to it's standards of perfection. He is contrasting the old and new systems for Israel. Explanation for them would have to be made for them somewhere considering that they had as the people of God observed the law for so many centuries.
It would be silly to make this argument using this prop for gentile believers who have never faced such frustration because they have never been under the law of Moses.The truths that are presented here concerning the freedom in Christ that gentiles experience are made in Paul's letters to the Ephesians and Colossians In Romans 8 there are many great truths that we can know and apply but when he is talking about walking in the flesh, in context, he is referring back to Rom 7 and to the law. Rom 7-11 is in the immediate context of those who are called the people of God and no chapters in the scriptures are more "Jewish." Gentiles are addressed in chapter 11 beginning at verse 13. There is literary context to scripture but there is also historical and prophetical context. Knowing these things will make ones understanding much more fruitful.

Here is a passage that illustrates my point.

Rom 10:1 Brethren, my heart's desire and prayer to God for Israel is, that they might be saved.
2 For I bear them record that they have a zeal of God, but not according to knowledge.
3 For they being ignorant of God's righteousness, and going about to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God.
4 For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth.

The first 3 verses is historical stuff and why do we need to know that since we are so far removed from Israel in September of 2020?

The fact is we gentiles need to know and understand how and why and when God allowed us into these particular blessings of his redemptive workings. These chapters along with the history book of Acts enlightens our minds and we can know and rejoice in this great salvation.

 

"reprobate" Jeremiah 6:30

"not" John 13:18

"never" Matthew 7:23

 

That wouldn't be the way I phrase the question..but sure, I get what you mean and yes, that can be a question that merits answering.

The question was specifically whether any are able to attend to even a few spiritual things, at least partially, that would be pleasing to God before they are indwelt with the Spirit of Christ, wasn't it? And you quote 1Cor 3? Are these not already indwelt with the Spirit and do they not already belong to Christ (v.16,23) - how then does this prove the 'opposite message'?

 

To clarify,

Oh absolutely, yes.

Again, this isn't even an exclusive calvinist interpretation - there is the flesh that we are born in first, and then we are born again in the spirit. This leads to the distinction between the outer man and the new inner man - the outer man is the flesh which is still sinful and the inner man is being built up by God after the new birth. Those who are indwelt by the Spirit can still walk according to the flesh, but can someone who is not yet having the new inner man ie who is still only in the old outer man alone walk according to the Spirit? Eph 4:20-24 explains the clear contrast with no overlap possible.

Firstly, not all who walk by the flesh are unregenerate - that isn't implied at all. I am only pointing out that regardless, walking by the flesh can bring no good that's pleasing to God and you all seem to agree on this. And I am in agreement that one indwelt by the Spirit in the new inner man can indeed walk by the flesh. The final point then is to determine if one not indwelt by the Spirit can walk by the Spirit in the outer man alone? I'd think 1Cor 2 would be pretty conclusive.

However you read it, Rom 8:9 is pretty clear that you are "in the Spirit" only if you have the indwelling Spirit of Christ, else you're not. Can it be read otherwise at all? And if one is not "in the Spirit", then they are "in the flesh" and none "in the flesh" can do anything pleasing to God.

 

Romans 15:1
We will be attacked by our brothers in the Lord in the same way Messiah was ridiculed and attacked by his enemies while on the cross (Ps 69). Be of the same mind as the Messiah of that psalm, endure it for their benefits.


Joy unspeakable full of glory

 

No, they do not understand any of the word of God save only the message of salvation by grace thru faith, they are totally unable because they are spiritually dead.


Joy unspeakable full of glory

 

The unsaved man because of his total depravity cannot exercise his will to believe the gospel. So why won’t the unsaved man believe what he can clearly see defined as grace salvation in the Bible? Because he can’t. People that make faith the gift are ignoring the clear writing of scripture that requires faith in order to be saved. Over 200 passages mention that faith is the prerequisite to obtaining salvation. Faith is not a work because faith is in the object that saves and not in itself as the saving factor.

It is God that saves and salvation was not because God was big hearted enough to forgive man. Not at all. God saved man by paying the price of man’s debt for sin.

By making faith the gift I can see how this could be misconstrued by some as heretical but if you ask a Calvinist how is is saved he will always tell you it’s by the cross. Therefore one must include them as in the faith. A larger issue for me is their replacement theology. The fact that the majority of strict and hyper Calvinists teach replacement theology provides the evidence of the allegorical hermeneutic employed in other students of the Bible like in Judaism, Islam, and extra biblical cults. That my friends is how you dismantle the tulip. You prove the impossibility of interpretation that they use to teach their theology. Once this is seen, it becomes clear that in the areas of other doctrine that the Calvinist may not be the first choice for the child of God seeking righteousness and truth in this life.

Joy unspeakable full of glory

 

Done that repeatedly.

 

If you care to learn, sure.

 

What's the connection? Why is it mandatory for a calvinist to subscribe to replacement theology and if anyone does, how does it come to bear on say, total depravity?

 

Push the button, if you care to, at all.

 

Cool. If the Gentiles (me) have never been under the Law, then they were never under the curse of the Law and consequently never had any need to be redeemed from such curse by Christ. Guess I shouldn't read myself into Gal 3:13-14 either since it was particularly meant for the Galatians alone and not me in 2020?

Is it beyond basic understanding that the righteousness of the law is Lev 18:5 alone, which could be applicable even to any gentile who has a law unto himself (Rom 2:14) where he believes he will receive life in that he did the commands of that law? If a person believes he will receive life in that he has done the command to have faith, that is still being under the law of works - faith is to not believe in anything you do but to throw oneself on what Christ alone does in you.

 

The problem is not total depravity, that is what scriptures teach. What I am trying to point out is how great people of faith are capable of error, specifically they error of abandonment of a strict literal hermeneutic.

It is only possible to make the scriptures say what we want it to say if we, willingly or accidentally violate the principles of taking God’s word literally and at face value.

Thus if one adheres to replacement theology like Mormons do, they show the hazing of their arguments with an unclear conscience.


Joy unspeakable full of glory

 

• [Mat 5:27-30 NASB] 27 "You have heard that it was said, 'YOU SHALL NOT COMMIT ADULTERY'; 28 but I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart. 29 "If your right eye makes you stumble, tear it out and throw it from you; for it is better for you to lose one of the parts of your body, than for your whole body to be thrown into hell. 30 "If your right hand makes you stumble, cut it off and throw it from you; for it is better for you to lose one of the parts of your body, than for your whole body to go into hell.
  
  
• [Mat 18:8-9 NASB] 8 "If your hand or your foot causes you to stumble, cut it off and throw it from you; it is better for you to enter life crippled or lame, than to have two hands or two feet and be cast into the eternal fire. 9 "If your eye causes you to stumble, pluck it out and throw it from you. It is better for you to enter life with one eye, than to have two eyes and be cast into the fiery hell.
  
  
• [Mar 9:43-48 NASB] 43 "If your hand causes you to stumble, cut it off; it is better for you to enter life crippled, than, having your two hands, to go into hell, into the unquenchable fire, 44 [where THEIR WORM DOES NOT DIE, AND THE FIRE IS NOT QUENCHED.] 45 "If your foot causes you to stumble, cut it off; it is better for you to enter life lame, than, having your two feet, to be cast into hell, 46 [where THEIR WORM DOES NOT DIE, AND THE FIRE IS NOT QUENCHED.] 47 "If your eye causes you to stumble, throw it out; it is better for you to enter the kingdom of God with one eye, than, having two eyes, to be cast into hell, 48 where THEIR WORM DOES NOT DIE, AND THE FIRE IS NOT QUENCHED.

Shall we take God’s word literally and at face value?

 

First the question was not whether able to attend to spiritual things. The question was whether an unregenerate could set their mind on spiritual things. Next you suggest Paul did not say he was speaking as to men of flesh. But the fact is right there in scripture and cannot be ignored, sidestepped or misrepresented. The unassailable fact is men of flesh, according to Paul, can understand spiritual milk. Therefore the answer to the actual question is yes, unregenerates can at times set their minds on spiritual things such as spiritual milk.

What Romans 8:9 does not say is unregenerates cannot set their minds of things of the spirit. Quite the opposite it suggests some can set their minds on spiritual things and not be indwelt. Alternatively, the unregenerate cannot set their minds on their Spirit if they have no Spirit. So two truths are taught by Romans 8:9, unregenerates can set their minds on the things of the Spirit, but not directly from the not yet indwelt Spirit. The truths of spiritual milk are some of the things of the Spirit, and we set our minds on those truths from external information, the gospel of Christ.

All Calvinists must deny this obvious truth, because it blows a big hold in the fiction of total spiritual inability.

 

[John 10:25-30 NASB]
25 Jesus answered them, "I told you, and you do not believe; the works that I do in My Father's name, these testify of Me. 26 "But you do not believe because you are not of My sheep. 27 "My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me; 28 and I give eternal life to them, and they will never perish; and no one will snatch them out of My hand. 29 "My Father, who has given [them] to Me, is greater than all; and no one is able to snatch [them] out of the Father's hand. 30 "I and the Father are one."

 

Yes!

The contributing factor of division between the Jewish leaders of the first century and with the Messiah was in how they interpreted the law vs the Messiah’s interpretation of the law. Just ask Archangel.

With that in mind, the sermon on the mount would best be renamed by us to: The Messiah’s interpretation of the righteous requirements of the law of Moses in contradistinction with the Pharisaic interpretations.

When you understand what is happening from within a first century Jewish background you see clearly what Jesus meant. You may never have caught the following but the house built on the sand was literally the Jewish interpretation of Mosaic Law as taught by the traditions of the elders. The house upon the rock is the teachings of the Messiah and in this particular instance the topic of discussion was the 613 commandments in the Law of Moses.

Next question


Joy unspeakable full of glory