Featured One thing a Calvinist has never done.

Here we go again...

In order to call upon the name of the Lord, one must believe. In order to believe, one must have faith. And faith cometh by hearing . . . and hearing by . . .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
wait for it . . .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
...hearing by the word of God.






It doesn't say faith is awakened. It doesn't say faith is reanimated. It says faith comes to one by hearing. And as John told us so long ago, those with ears to hear can hear what the Spirit says to the churches.

 

I agree completely.
Those that reject the TRUTH, have rejected it because they freely chose to reject it.

However, that only answers HALF of my question.
Why did those that accepted the TRUTH, believe it?
Was it for the same reason?
Did they freely choose to accept the TRUTH?

 

I disagree.
Here's a group of Jews that already knew that repentance had to be granted:

" When they heard these things, they held their peace, and glorified God, saying, Then hath God also to the Gentiles granted repentance unto life." ( Acts of the Apostles 11:18 ).

Utilyan,

Believing God's word is by faith ( Hebrews 11 ), not by sight / what seems right to us as men ( Proverbs 14:12, Proverbs 16:25 ).
It's not required to "make sense" to us in order to be believed.
But I also know that with time and study, what formerly did not make sense to the believer, begins to do so over time.

Why you keep making reference to "common sense" and "logic" as applying to our belief of the Scriptures, is something that I have no answer for... and quite frankly, it continues to baffle me why a Christian would be unable to recognize that they should toss out their own understanding of anything, in favor of trusting God's every word ( Proverbs 3:5-6, Matthew 4:4, Luke 4:4 ).

The Bible is not and never has been subject to our own corrupted thinking...
but rather as believers ( Christians are called "believers" not only because we believe on Christ for the forgiveness of sins, but because we believe God's every word ), whose hearts and minds have been changed by God, His word should be the thing that changes our way of thinking.

Instead, what you seem to keep arriving at, is that the Bible should subject itself to us and our thinking, and not us and our thinking to God's words as found in the Bible.


The words on the page are true...
If you reject them ( any of them ) then I can only go with what I suspect.
That your "common sense" and unbelief of the words themselves are what is getting in the way.

Again, I urge you to believe the words for what they say.
If you find that you cannot, then I'm sorry for that.

 

Utilyan,

I "portray" God according to His every word.
I've tried to show you those words that are actually written on the pages off and on for over two years now.

Why you seem to believe parts of the Bible, but reject other parts, I am not able to tell you with any authority or accuracy;
But what I can say is that you don't seem willing to believe whatever it says.

We can go over the Scriptures again that show that man's nature, outside of the grace and power of God, is to willfully reject Him and His words if you like.
I'm only here to help, sir, not to tell you anything that is not contained in the Bible.

 

" But Esaias is very bold, and saith, I was found of them that sought me not; I was made manifest unto them that asked not after me.
21 But to Israel he saith, All day long I have stretched forth my hands unto a disobedient and gainsaying people." ( Romans 10:20-21 ).

Here's what I see without any "glasses" ( provided by John Calvin, the "Reformers", Augustine of Hippo, John Wesley, Luis de Molina or any other man ):

20) But Isaiah is very bold, and says, " I ( the Lord ) was found of them that did not seek after me ( those who did not seek me, found me ); I was made manifest to them that did not ask after me ( I was shown to them that did not ask about me ).
21) To Israel, God says, "All day long have I stretched out my hands to a disobedient and "gainsaying" ( speaking against in a contradictory manner ) people."

Out of curiosity, what do you see when you read the passage in question with your own "glasses" on?

 

sure I understand what you are saying, but this depends very much on the theory that all humans are mere machines, as they have no free well, which is not what the Bible says, when we read of "choose this day whom you will serve", etc, etc!

 

so you are accepting FREE WILL?

 

and your Bible verses are?

 

"words on the page", eh?
The way you add "to be" to Ephesians 1:4?
The way you add "of the elect" to John 3:16?
The way you change "shall be saved" to "are saved"?

The way you turn "none that seeketh after God" to "no one calls upon him"?

No one seeks after God.
So Christ came to seek men.
Once they hear the gospel, they can then call upon him and get saved.

Nothing in Romans 3:10-18 said we can't call on God. Show me the verse.
The Calvinistic reasoning there is a non sequitur.
Let's grant, for argument's sake only, that I cannot (actually, won't) call the Prime Minister of Canada.
Does it logically follow that I cannot therefore answer the phone if he calls me?

No need to reword Romans 3:10-18 to fit your Calvinistic gnostic paradigm.

"words on the page"...

 

You have not addressed the passage. Please give an alternative interpretation.

Please don’t attribute beliefs to me that I have not stated. I base my beliefs on scripture, not “theories”. I don’t believe people are machines.

Please address John 3:8.

peace to you

 

I accept that men have the FREE WILL to reject the TRUTH and do evil. I accept that men innately exercise that free will every day.

However, that only answers HALF of my question.
Why did those that accepted the TRUTH, believe it?
Was it for the same reason?
Did they freely choose to accept the TRUTH?

 

Five pages and counting for folks to deny the obvious, Calvinism says people cannot call upon the name of the Lord and be saved, because of total spiritual inability. But if people can do as scripture says, then total spiritual inability is false doctrine.
Continue to post absurd defenses of the indefensible.

 

this is very simple. Jesus was telling Nicodemus, who had just asked Him about being born again, that how was it possible for a person to reenter his mums womb, etc. To which Jesus replies, that this new birth is not something physical, that can been seen by the human eye, and is spitirual, like the wind that cannot be seen, and is brought about by God the Holy Spirit, Who is invisible. nothing to do with what you are suggesting!

 

Acts 28:23-24

So when they had appointed him a day, many came to him at his lodging, to whom he explained and solemnly testified of the kingdom of God, persuading them concerning Jesus from both the Law of Moses and the Prophets, from morning till evening. And some were persuaded by the things which were spoken, and some disbelieved.

If faith was a "gift" from God as some teach, then why was Paul here trying to "presuade" these to believe in Who Jesus is? They would have done so without any "persuasion", because the Holy Spirit would have "enabled" those who believed, as they would have been part of the "elect"!

 

We have agreed on a few basic beliefs concerning John 3:8.

The passage concerns salvation. The new birth is a supernatural event. The new birth is the result of the work of God Holy Spirit.

The “meat” of the passage is, “The wind blows where it wills..... so is everyone who is born of the Spirit”.

This is a further explanation of John 1, which says the children of God are born by the will of God.

Clearly, imo, the passage is focused on the will of God Holy Spirit in the new birth just described by Jesus.

Do you have an alternative interpretation of “the wind blows where it wills.... so is everyone who is born of the Spirit”. I know you already spoke to the “invisibility” of wind/spirit, but what of the reference to “will” concerning wind/Spirit and those born of the Spirit?

Additionally, what of the repeated theme from John 1 that the children of God are born by the will of God?

peace to you

 

It refers to the supernatural spiritual new birth that is the work of the Holy Spirit Who does the regeneration of the sinner as He desires, which is what the word really means. You are reading too much into the word

 

Actually members of this board have shown time and time again that everyone does not.

 

You are offering counter arguments to a statement that I have not made. You requested that I explain why I believe that God would have to do something ... which is a tall order to begin with ... and I agreed to explain why IF you would answer why YOU believe that one person believes the Gospel Truth and another person hears the same Gospel Truth and does not believe. What is the difference between the two people since the MESSAGE and MESSENGER were identical?

You have been willing to explain why one man does not believe (his free will choice), but refuse to answer the other half of my question. Since YOUR answer determines the starting point for my response to YOUR QUESTION, I have no choice but to offer Matthew 21:27 in response.

Sorry, I honestly tried to explain it to you but we had no common ground from which to begin a conversation. I have no idea why you think some people believe.

 

Looks like we agree

Thanks for the conversation

peace to you

 

but only after the sinner repents and believes.