Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Steven, you were always the seed. You were never the soil. Go re-read the parable.
God sows the seed. (Let that sink in.) God throws the seed on different soils (Is his toss accidental or haphazard?) The seed may lie dormant in good soil for a long time. God determines its growth.
Humans certainly can obey or disobey rules. They do so for selfish reasons, based on what they think will benefit them the most.
Humans will not repent of this selfishness and submit willingly to the Supremacy of God. God must break their will and cause a man to submit. When God chooses to do this, a man cannot stop God from doing so.
Not a child of the Father until saved in Christ!Where does it say that in scripture. Because I was a lost sinner once 4 years ago. Satan was my father back then, I know it. But I was always a prodigal son in need of my savior and God. My heavenly Father and His Son Jesus Christ.
Jesus called the {Pharisees and scribes who saw and heard Him and still did not believe children of Satan!Ah, but these same Jews heard the Gospel when the new covenant was established by Christ's death and resurrection. As Romans 9-11 explains they were provoked to jealousy by their obstinate actions, since even the Gentiles were entering the Kingdom before them. There repentance was still desired.
yes, as that was a wandering son who was still in a saving relationship with his fatherThe prodigal is...a son, not a pagan, not from a different family. The prodigal is not a lost sinner. The prodigal is a son who needed to repent. The father waited for his son to return.
The story speaks to us, who have been redeemed and then go wandering...
Job is afflicted because God points him out to Satan and intentionally moves Satan to make claims that deny God's Sovereignty. God says, go ahead. Satan attempts. God proves Satan wrong. God is Sovereign.I'm going to say from the get go, I am trying to be respectful with all of my posts.
Job is afflicted by God for a nebulous reason, and God explodes at Job for thinking he knew enough to rule the creation. That said, Job's humble response does away with the Adversary's argument. I see Job as one of the most applicable and beautiful books of the bible. But I have suffered like Job just over a much longer time in my own life. I am not joking or being emotional. I am a 100% disabled man and have been for years. This on top of many other sufferings.
That said, I don't see how Job applies to the topic of predestined salvation or wrath.
There is nothing original. Sheep are chosen children of God. The sons are chosen children of God. Both receive their inheritance. Both use it differently. Both remain sons despite their actions.Whoa, that is a very original reading of the prodigal son to me. The context is given in Luke 15. We have the parables of the lost sheep and lost coin all to answer the critics of Jesus who complained he sought the salvation of "sinners." These critics appear to be the son that hated his prodigal brother. They do not understand the importance of their Hebrew brethren. Jesus is still going to the Jews at this point. The gospel to the Gentiles is not in full swing yet until after the great commission. The parable is an explanation of Jesus' ministry to the Jews seen as prodigal outcasts.
No one has ever said there is no ability to obey God's commands according to the law.Thank you for clarifying.
Total inability to do righteous acts is not found in scripture. God isn't breaking me unless I'm determined to be evil and obstinate. In my case I spent three years in torment losing all faith in God and Jesus as a moderate Baptist. This eventually caused me to choose faith in the biblical Jesus and set out on a new and true journey as a pilgrim.
As John stated to us, made children by the will of God!No one has ever said there is no ability to obey God's commands according to the law.
What the Bible declares is that you and I have no ability to choose our adoption. God chooses who his children are and chooses the moment they are adopted.
There is nothing original. Sheep are chosen children of God. The sons are chosen children of God. Both receive their inheritance. Both use it differently. Both remain sons despite their actions.
Job is afflicted because God points him out to Satan and intentionally moves Satan to make claims that deny God's Sovereignty. God says, go ahead. Satan attempts. God proves Satan wrong. God is Sovereign.
No one has ever said there is no ability to obey God's commands according to the law.
What the Bible declares is that you and I have no ability to choose our adoption. God chooses who his children are and chooses the moment they are adopted.
Steve, is the son actually a son, or is he a stranger?I'm just going to have to disagree. I think you are reading into the text more than the context presented, which I view as dangerous.
Yes, God was the LORD on His throne in Job's circumstances. I just differ with you, due to scripture, on whether God wants all saved and has given mankind moral ability. I see Job as a fantastic example of Job's God-given ability to choose righteousness even amidst impossible suffering. Job's righteousness is such, with God knowing all along, that Job's actions destroy Satan's logic that God is only loved because He gives blessings to people like Job.
Thank you for clarifying. OK, having said that, I guess the only big problem we have is not moral ability, as you say, but whether God extends mercy to all through Jesus Christ in an unlimited atonement.
I must say you have done well to make a mockery of 4 point Calvinism, which would have been decimated by this point in time.
The problem I see is that you have verses, strong ones, to say God only elects some to salvation, and I have verses that say God wants all saved. I don't think we will bridge that gulf, but thank you for a solid debate. You honed my responses.
Steve, God does not say, "I want all humanity to be saved." If God said that then God would have to admit that He cannot get what He wants. God would therefore be less than all-powerful.I'm just going to have to disagree. I think you are reading into the text more than the context presented, which I view as dangerous.
Yes, God was the LORD on His throne in Job's circumstances. I just differ with you, due to scripture, on whether God wants all saved and has given mankind moral ability. I see Job as a fantastic example of Job's God-given ability to choose righteousness even amidst impossible suffering. Job's righteousness is such, with God knowing all along, that Job's actions destroy Satan's logic that God is only loved because He gives blessings to people like Job.
Thank you for clarifying. OK, having said that, I guess the only big problem we have is not moral ability, as you say, but whether God extends mercy to all through Jesus Christ in an unlimited atonement.
I must say you have done well to make a mockery of 4 point Calvinism, which would have been decimated by this point in time.
The problem I see is that you have verses, strong ones, to say God only elects some to salvation, and I have verses that say God wants all saved. I don't think we will bridge that gulf, but thank you for a solid debate. You honed my responses.
Steve, is the son actually a son, or is he a stranger?
If he is a son, did the son choose his father or did the Father choose the son? With respect, it is you who is reading what is not there into the prodigal son story.
Steve, God does not say, "I want all humanity to be saved." If God said that then God would have to admit that He cannot get what He wants. God would therefore be less than all-powerful.
Steve, God does not say, "I want all humanity to be saved." If God said that then God would have to admit that He cannot get what He wants. God would therefore be less than all-powerful.
My OP in thread #1 has scriptures that say otherwise. They imply strongly God doesn't always get what He wants. How is God so often displeased in scripture by human actions? You really believe the sole reason is because He knows the eternal destiny of objects of wrath. That isnt a good explanation of the text.
Steve, you have had these verses and accompanying passages explained to you, in their context. None of these verses make your point or support your assertions.Here are the verses I cited for God wants the salvation of all.
Romans 11:32 NASB
32 For God has shut up all in disobedience so that He may show mercy to all.
2 Peter 3:9 NASB
9 The Lord is not slow about His promise, as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing for any to perish but for all to come to repentance.
1 Timothy 2:3-4 NASB
3 This is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior, 4 who desires all men to be saved and to come to the [c]knowledge of the truth.
Matthew 23:37 NASB
37 “Jerusalem, Jerusalem, who kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to her! How often I wanted to gather your children together, the way a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, and you were unwilling.
Ezekiel 18:23 NASB
Do I have any pleasure in the death of the wicked,” declares the Lord God, “[k]rather than that he should turn from his ways and live?
Ezekiel 18:32 NASB
"For I have no pleasure in the death of anyone who dies," declares the Lord GOD. "Therefore, repent and live."
Ezekiel 33:11 NASB
"Say to them, 'As I live!' declares the Lord GOD, 'I take no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but rather that the wicked turn from his way and live. Turn back, turn back from your evil ways! Why then will you die, O house of Israel?'
Lamentations 3:33 NASB
For He does not afflict willingly
Or grieve the sons of men.
Steve, you have had these verses and accompanying passages explained to you, in their context. None of these verses make your point or support your assertions.
Let's start here as common ground of agreement.These moral choices and "If, then" prophecies God gives us are not rare in scripture. They happen often, and the ultimate calls are to Israel to live by God's Torah, and later to believe in Jesus Christ and the Gospel.
I thought you already had the answer in just the above quote. If-Then moral choices have been always given to Israel to obey the Law of Moses and to later believe in the Gospel of Christ - why then are all under the curse of the law and why is Israel still in unbelief even today, if it was so possible?So, why the so often repeated calls to choose morally and repent if it is impossible?
It assumes moral capacity*. God has endowed us with moral cognizance. Sin has corrupted it through its deceitfulness and rendered that capacity unable to be exercised as designed - much like us all being endowed with the capacity to walk or see but an accident or a genetic mutation rendering us unable to exercise that originally designed capacity. The bible does not assume moral ability to obey God in the flesh - it confirms the contrary in fact in Rom 8:7-8. One can ever obey God only in the Spirit.The bible seems to assume moral ability to obey or disobey God.
The law served its purpose for Paul. as he was made aware that he coveted, and that his own righteousness meant nothing to Holy God !Let's start here as common ground of agreement.
I thought you already had the answer in just the above quote. If-Then moral choices have been always given to Israel to obey the Law of Moses and to later believe in the Gospel of Christ - why then are all under the curse of the law and why is Israel still in unbelief even today, if it was so possible?
Just taking the law, there's enough and more exhortations by God to obey it, right? Why the continuous requirement to keep it when God Himself reveals it cannot be kept?
Rom 3:19 Now we know that whatever the law says it speaks to those who are under the law, so that every mouth may be stopped, and the whole world may be held accountable to God.
Rom 3:20 For by works of the law no human being will be justified in his sight, since through the law comes knowledge of sin.
The purposes of God commanding for His law to be kept was not for its keeping per se - He knew it was impossible for man to keep. But in so commanding, man will see his continuous failures and hence its impossibility, will see his own rebellion and enmity against God, will trace the reasons for it and realize that there is an exceedingly deceptive nature of rebellion(sin) in him which he was not aware of until he was exhorted to obey the command. And having reached this point, he would then stop persisting in such dead works and instead put his trust wholly on only the One who can ever work these out in him. The impossibility of the law for us to keep is what shows us our initial hatred towards God and then drives us to Christ with our awareness of our total inability in the flesh.
If you accept the above which can be proven from Scriptures, then take it further and compare how the total inability of the flesh (due to sin in it) fares in obeying the commands of God in the law vs the commands of God in the Gospel, given the same initial rebellion and hatred towards God.
It assumes moral capacity*. God has endowed us with moral cognizance. Sin has corrupted it through its deceitfulness and rendered that capacity unable to be exercised as designed - much like us all being endowed with the capacity to walk or see but an accident or a genetic mutation rendering us unable to exercise that originally designed capacity. The bible does not assume moral ability to obey God in the flesh - it confirms the contrary in fact in Rom 8:7-8. One can ever obey God only in the Spirit.
No they don't. Let me return the bluntness. You quote only a verse, a couple sentences, while ignoring the context. Such hermeneutics is used by people who are antagonistic to the gospel and want a prooftext for their pet belief. I do not think you wish to follow their methods, but instead you wish to seek God. Therefore, I encourage you to read the whole passage around each verse so you can perceive context and thus see your error. I trust God will help you.I must be blunt, the so called explanations I was given mutilate the text. I can explain each of these in context and show that God is not as the Calvinists or Monergists explain. I could say that all of the Monergist texts can be explained with a credible theory from Synergists.
I don't think we are going to change each other's mind in any way, we got to the quote scripture at each other point, which is the end of a scriptural debate.