Featured Can You Come to Christ on Your Own Part II

Acts 20:20-21 teaching you publicly and from house to house, solemnly testifying to both Jews and Greeks of repentance toward God and faith in our Lord Jesus Christ.

Act 20:25 I went about preaching the kingdom

Act 20:27 I did not shrink from declaring to you the whole purpose of God

Act 20:28 the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to shepherd the church of God which He purchased with His own blood

Paul is telling the Elders what he had done and what they should do. He preached the gospel and they were to guard the flock after he departed.

Does the text say that no one came to faith when Paul preached the gospel message? No one can save themselves but they can and do respond to the gospel message, that’s called free will.

Austin in what way do you think Acts 20:15-32 relates to your question?

Act 17:23 Therefore what you worship in ignorance, this I proclaim to you

Act 17:27 that they would seek God, if perhaps they might grope for Him and find Him

Act 17:30 God at present exhorts all men everywhere to repent

Act 17:31 He will judge the world in righteousness through a Man whom He has appointed

Here again we see that Paul is proclaiming the gospel message and indicating that they can seek for God and if they do they can find Him. God exhorts all men to seek Him because His desire is for all to come to repentance 1Timothy 2:3-4. And we see that some of those that heard Paul speak at the Areopagus did respond to his gospel message and believed.

Act 17:34 But some men joined him and believed, among whom also were Dionysius the Areopagite and a woman named Damaris and others with them.

So once again we see free will in action. We do not see in these texts that you presented any indication that God had caused them to believe.

Austin you are reading into the text what is not there.

 

You tell me. This is a thread on "Can You Come to Christ on Your Own."
Here you seem to be telling me that the passage you chose has nothing to do with the topic.
You keep proving my point that you just pick sentences you like, without any connection to context.

I highlighted this passage. Paul is not indicating they can get to God on their own. I note you left out all the other verses that I highlighted. Once again, you show us that context means nothing to you.

Where is free will actually taught in this passage? You are projecting your philosophy of free will into the verse, but the passage doesn't teach what you are teaching. Again, you show us your method of reading the Bible.

Here's the highlighted passage once again. Note God's appointment in the passage.

*Acts 17:22-34*

So Paul, standing in the midst of the Areopagus, said: “Men of Athens, I perceive that in every way you are very religious. For as I passed along and observed the objects of your worship, I found also an altar with this inscription, ‘To the unknown god.’ What therefore you worship as unknown, this I proclaim to you. The God who made the world and everything in it, being Lord of heaven and earth, does not live in temples made by man, nor is he served by human hands, as though he needed anything, since he himself gives to all mankind life and breath and everything. And he made from one man every nation of mankind to live on all the face of the earth, having determined allotted periods and the boundaries of their dwelling place, that they should seek God, and perhaps feel their way toward him and find him. Yet he is actually not far from each one of us, for “‘In him we live and move and have our being'; as even some of your own poets have said, “‘For we are indeed his offspring.’ Being then God’s offspring, we ought not to think that the divine being is like gold or silver or stone, an image formed by the art and imagination of man. The times of ignorance God overlooked, but now he commands all people everywhere to repent, because he has fixed a day on which he will judge the world in righteousness by a man whom he has appointed; and of this he has given assurance to all by raising him from the dead.” Now when they heard of the resurrection of the dead, some mocked. But others said, “We will hear you again about this.” So Paul went out from their midst. But some men joined him and believed, among whom also were Dionysius the Areopagite and a woman named Damaris and others with them.

 

Austin you quoted two passages and asked two questions. I answered those so you response is curious. What passage did I choose?
These are the ones to posted are they not? Are you just getting confused or are you loosing it?

Is Paul telling the Elders at Ephesus that they came to Christ on their own?

*Acts 20:15-32*

Is Paul telling the people in Athens, at the Areopagus, that they can come to God on their own?

*Acts 17:22-34*


Did you actually read what I wrote, i doubt that you did. I just used those verses to show you that Paul preached at the Areopagus. I noted the verses or rather the words that you highlighted. Did you read the verses that I referenced?

"that they should seek God, and perhaps feel their way toward him and find him" note that they should seek & they should feel their way, FREE WILL

But some men joined him and believed, Note they heard Paul preach and then they chose to join him and some of them believed. They were not forced to join Paul or to believe, so again FREE WILL

but now he commands all people everywhere to repent, Now this Greek word {commands} could have been translated via various words some of which are "exhort or entreat" which actually fits the context better. Why is that you ask, well think about this. Since God is sovereign and you say He controls all things then if we use the word "commands" as would fit your understanding of commands then all people must repent but if we were to use "exhort or entreat" then we see that God, as He has said elsewhere, desires all to repent but does not force anyone to do so.

I answered your question so why would I deal with verses that did not pertain to the question.

The only thing appointed is the man {Christ Jesus} who will judge the world. Again you are taking words out of context and throwing them together it the vain attempt to support your view.

 

Good stuff JD73,

The issue is, where did these "many" come from and were they mass- produced by The subject of sin not being dealt with, by it being what nailed Jesus to the cross and thereby killing Him?

"Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?" Matthew7:22.

How could the "many" here have this false assurance that they had worked on His Name and think they were saved?

By being told, "believe", "choose", "decide", "have faith", or worse, sign a commitment card, "Make Jesus their Lord", or pray a sinner's prayer, without that appeal appropriately including, "The subject of sin being acknowledged and dealt with, by THEIR PERSONAL SIN being what nailed Jesus to the cross and thereby killing Him?'"

This where Pink is saying these folks went too far in saying, "We deny duty-faith and duty-repentance—these terms signifying that it is every man’s duty to spiritually and savingly repent and believe (Gen. 6:5; 8:21; Matt. 15:19; Jer. 17:9; John 6:44, 65)."

Whereas, the other preachers also believed every man’s duty to spiritually and savingly repent and believe", they were heavily Preaching Jesus and the fact that He died for THE SINS of those who must believe", "choose", "decide", "have faith",...etc.

And those preachers have not left out that sinner must "bring forth fruit meet for Repentance"* and to not just for the sinner to mentally consent to Spiritually dead "believe", "choose", "decide", "have faith", or "receive the Gift", etc.

*Proper examination of the profession of faith, before baptism ( entrance into a church membership) protects the church to have a Regenerate membership.

Because Both said, in effect, what the first group said, "We deny also that there is any capability in man by nature to any spiritual good whatever."

The second group simply preaches Christ and Him crucified, with the understanding of a real need for genuine Spirit wrought REPENTANCE to be SHOWN, as the RESULT of God Giving them, "repentance and faith", and Him Giving REGENERATION, as opposed to them just mentally "believe", "choose", "decide", "have faith", or "receive the Gift", in "a Jesus", HISTORICALLY, ONLY AND WINDING UP BEING PART OF THE DECEIVED "MANY", in Matthew 7:22.

This is man's Human Responsibility, but, "can they come" on their own?

The "many" in Matthew 7:22 wouldn't be lost, if they could have.

THAT IS PREACHING JESUS.

Correct, leaving them lost.

SIN AGAINST GOD CAUSED US TO NEED A SAVIOR.

Do those told to "believe", "choose", "decide", "have faith", or "receive the Gift", etc., Get this??

Right.

This is the Human Responsibility part.

This is God's part. Not just to mentally "believe", "choose", "decide", "have faith", or "receive the Gift", etc.

The result of Christ's preaching is to receive or reject it, not to
"believe", "choose", "decide", "have faith", or "receive the Gift", without CONVICTION of sin, Spiritually Wrought Repentance and Faith, and therefore without GOD.

By God Saving them and Giving the SPIRITUAL ABILITY to "believe", "choose", "decide", "have faith", or "receive the Gift", by The New Birth.

THAT is IT. PREACH JESUS. Against SIN.

Right. That is what we know as ( un-saving) "Enlightenment" (Hebrews 6:4-6).

There you go. When the sinner does "believe", "choose", "decide", "have faith", or "receive the Gift", etc., it must be examined, by themselves, and others, if they have been Given Spiritual Repentance and the New Birth.

Or, they are still reprobate, unsaved, decieved, lost sinners, on danger of being part of the " many".

And filling our Pulpits and Pews with unregenerate souls.

Preaching repentance toward God and of faith in our Lord is profitable.

Not just to fleshly "believe", "choose", "decide", "have faith", or "receive the Gift", or worse, sign a commitment card, "Make Jesus their Lord", or pray a sinner's prayer, without that appeal appropriately including, "The subject of sin being acknowledged and dealt with, by THEIR PERSONAL SIN being what nailed Jesus to the cross and thereby killing Him?'"

Paul was called Preach THE GOSPEL, not "easy Believism, Decisionism", "duty Faith".

This is the current definition and state of "Duty Faith", that was posted by the one calling himself kyredneck?

They are against it, and say it is as Eternally dangerous and possibly ETERNALLY FATAL, as "Easy Believism", "Decisionism".

They say:

"Duty is an obligation, a responsibility. Faith, on the other hand, is a gift.

"The two are distinctly different."

From: The Association of Historic Baptists » • The Duty-Faith And Free-Offer Issue

"Duty-faith. Say the words again and think about them. Duty, faith. They should not even be spoken in the same sentence, far less linked together and presented as the essence of the gospel of Jesus Christ. Yet preaching man’s duty to trust in Christ is said by some to be the foundation of a proper gospel ministry.

"Duty is an obligation, a responsibility. Faith, on the other hand, is a gift.

"The two are distinctly different.

"Duty is about law. Faith is about grace and our new nature in Christ.

"Duties, when followed, produce efforts, faith, when given, produces spiritual life. Efforts do not save sinners, but grace does."

We should preach Sinai (the law, from The Bible: "there is none good", they are condemned already,) before Calvery, so the sinner sees their sin and are in need of Jesus, as Savior.

And don't wind up as deceived and part of the "many".

" John 6:37, “All that the Father gives Me will come to Me, and the one who comes to Me I will certainly not cast out.”

 

This is VERY COOL. To exhault, and worship God, by showing Him at Work, in the blue type.

 

It's almost as if you're saying that we are supposed to enter in at some kind of a "strait" or narrow gate that is restrictive enough that only one person at a time can get through.

 

The verses did pertain, but perhaps you didn't observe that they did.

 

You highlight words and the say the verses pertain but as of yet you have not written anything that would support you errant view. Just pulling random words out of context is the calvinist way of doing exegesis but it means nothing. I can show you biblically that there is no God by using your style of biblical study.

You still have not dealt with the numerous texts that I have posted that disprove your philosophy but that is normal for you.

 

Did you not recognize that the highlighted words showed you God's Sovereign causation in the salvation of men?
Sliverhair, I left all the words there. That's why it's called highlighting. You read the entire text and see the words in highlight that point out the reason why we can know God is the cause of every persons salvation.

What passages have I failed to deal with concerning your dogged determination to tell God that he takes the backseat to yourself in your own salvation?

You keep making unsupported assertions and think you have a valid point. Anyone reading the threads can see you are grasping for straws,using statement as your argument.

 

Amen and Amen! Salvation is a personal transaction in a point of time between one sinner and God.

 

No, Jesus makes that clear twice Jn 6:44,65

44 No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day.

65 And he said, Therefore said I unto you, that no man can come unto me, except it were given unto him of my Father.

 

*Hebrews 9:15-17,24,27-28*
Therefore he is the mediator of a new covenant, so that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance, since a death has occurred that redeems them from the transgressions committed under the first covenant. For where a will is involved, the death of the one who made it must be established. For a will takes effect only at death, since it is not in force as long as the one who made it is alive.

For Christ has entered, not into holy places made with hands, which are copies of the true things, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God on our behalf.

And just as it is appointed for man to die once, and after that comes judgment, so Christ, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time, not to deal with sin but to save those who are eagerly waiting for him.

 

What is your point in posting these verses in response to my comments to Dave?

 

So...you don't see how they connect to your statement?
You wrote: "Salvation is a personal transaction in a point of time between one sinner and God."

Ponder what you wrote and what the sermon to the Hebrews says.
A Covenant is a personal transaction between God and His child. It is a Will. It signifies who the beneficiaries are and what they inherit. Jesus established this covenant with his children upon his death.

 

Friend, In that same passage Jesus says the following;

Joh 6:40 And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day.
Why don't you ever quote that verse.

Have you ever seen the Son?

I already know the answer. It is NO. These people to whom Jesus was talking at this time were not asked to believe that he had died for their sins, been buried, and raised from the dead by God the Father. That is what you and I must believe now. Believing that is not what he was asking of them. If it were, then no one, and mind you I said no one, would have life because none of his closest followers, the apostles, believed that, and it can be easily proven if one believes the testimony of the scriptures going forward from this chapter. I have already stated proof and you have rejected it and ignored it.

What Jesus Christ required of these Jews is that he was what he claimed to be and that was THE SON OF GOD, the Messiah who was promised in all the OT prophets, and he was confirmed by the OT metaphors and that he was here to establish his kingdom. He was actually crucified by these Jews for making this claim and you can read about this in the parts of the gospels that informs us what was nailed to his cross in explanation of his crimes. These people who believed the testimony of God from the OT would have no problem believing later after he was killed that God raised him from the dead.

You are absolutely wrecking the context of the scriptures and have believed and consequently preached a very false doctrine of the person and work of Jesus Christ because you have ignored context and history.

Follow the logic:

Joh 20:30 And many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book:
31 But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name.

So, answer the question in your mind, why did Jesus feed the 5000 men and those with them on the mountain that set up this exchange the next day? According to John it was to convince them to believe he was the Son of God.

Now, in this same gospel, and chonologically after the events of Jn 6, John recorded this at the empty tomb on resurrection Sunday;

Joh 20:1 The first day of the week cometh Mary Magdalene early, when it was yet dark, unto the sepulchre, and seeth the stone taken away from the sepulchre.
2 Then she runneth, and cometh to Simon Peter, and to the other disciple, whom Jesus loved, and saith unto them, They have taken away the Lord out of the sepulchre, and we know not where they have laid him.
3 Peter therefore went forth, and that other disciple, and came to the sepulchre.
4 So they ran both together: and the other disciple did outrun Peter, and came first to the sepulchre.
5 And he stooping down, [and looking in], saw the linen clothes lying; yet went he not in.
6 Then cometh Simon Peter following him, and went into the sepulchre, and seeth the linen clothes lie,
7 And the napkin, that was about his head, not lying with the linen clothes, but wrapped together in a place by itself.
8 Then went in also that other disciple, which came first to the sepulchre, and he saw, and believed.
9 For as yet they knew not the scripture, that he must rise again from the dead.
10 Then the disciples went away again unto their own home.

No one would be so numb as to argue that John 20 did not happen after John 6. That tells us that the apostles were not believing that Jesus Christ would die, be buried, and rise from the dead in John 6. However, those who believed what Jesus asked them to believe would have life (future tense) and he would raise them up at the last day.

What did they, the apostles say they believed about Jesus Christ in Jn 6? They can speak for themselves and I will quote them.

Joh 6:67 Then said Jesus unto the twelve, Will ye also go away?
68 Then Simon Peter answered him, Lord, to whom shall we go? thou hast the words of eternal life.
69 And we believe and are sure that thou art that Christ, the Son of the living God.

What else needs to be said?

 

You do realize that the overall context of what you had posted does not support your view. I read the whole post and what you try to accomplish by highlighting those words really does not work as you seem to think it does.

So Paul, standing in the midst of the Areopagus, said: “Men of Athens, I perceive that in every way you are very religious. For as I passed along and observed the objects of your worship, I found also an altar with this inscription, ‘To the unknown god.’ What therefore you worship as unknown, this I proclaim to you. The God who made the world and everything in it, being Lord of heaven and earth, does not live in temples made by man, nor is he served by human hands, as though he needed anything, since he himself gives to all mankind life and breath and everything. And he made from one man every nation of mankind to live on all the face of the earth, having determined allotted periods and the boundaries of their dwelling place, that they should seek God, and perhaps feel their way toward him and find him. Yet he is actually not far from each one of us, for “‘In him we live and move and have our being'; as even some of your own poets have said, “‘For we are indeed his offspring.’ Being then God’s offspring, we ought not to think that the divine being is like gold or silver or stone, an image formed by the art and imagination of man. The times of ignorance God overlooked, but now he commands all people everywhere to repent, because he has fixed a day on which he will judge the world in righteousness by a man whom he has appointed; and of this he has given assurance to all by raising him from the dead.” Now when they heard of the resurrection of the dead, some mocked. But others said, “We will hear you again about this.” So Paul went out from their midst. But some men joined him and believed, among whom also were Dionysius the Areopagite and a woman named Damaris and others with them.

This is the typical method of Calvinist interpretation. Pick out various words that you thing support your errant view. God saves but He saves those that actually trust in His son. In context how do you think your highlighted words support your errant view? Just pulling random words out of context is the calvinist way of doing exegesis but it means nothing.

I looked at your random words and corrected your errant understanding of then but as per normal you ignore so here is my response again. Perhaps this time you will deal with the text of the post? Doubt it though.

Did you actually read what I wrote, i doubt that you did. I just used those verses to show you that Paul preached at the Areopagus. I noted the verses or rather the words that you highlighted. Did you read the verses that I referenced?

"that they should seek God, and perhaps feel their way toward him and find him" note that they should seek & they should feel their way, FREE WILL

But some men joined him and believed, Note they heard Paul preach and then they chose to join him and some of them believed. They were not forced to join Paul or to believe, so again FREE WILL

but now he commands all people everywhere to repent, Now this Greek word {commands} could have been translated via various words some of which are "exhort or entreat" which actually fits the context better. Why is that you ask, well think about this. Since God is sovereign and you say He controls all things then if we use the word "commands" as would fit your understanding of commands then all people must repent but if we were to use "exhort or entreat" then we see that God, as He has said elsewhere, desires all to repent but does not force anyone to do so.

 

Are you making the case for a collective salvation?

 

I'll say that the way of Salvation and the Blessings of Salvation, were the same in The Old Testament, as in The New Testament and you can look 'em up.

Are you sure you want to have two, or more, ways of Salvation?

From: https://www.monergism.com/thethreshold/sdg/gill/A_Body_of_Doctrinal_Divinity_-_John_Gill.pdf

1e. In the blessings of Salvation; they are the same under both administrations.

Salvation and redemption by Christ is the great blessing held forth and enjoyed under the one as under the other (2 Samuel 23:5; Hebrews 9:15).

Justification by the righteousness of Christ, which the Old Testament church had knowledge of, and faith in, as well as the new (Isaiah 45:24,25; Romans 3:21-23).

Forgiveness of sin through faith in Christ, all the prophets bore witness to; and the saints of old, as now, had as comfortable an application of it (Psalm 32:1,5; Isaiah 43:25; Micah 7:18; Acts 10:43).

Regeneration, spiritual circumcision, and sanctification were what men were made partakers of under the first, as under the second administration of the covenant (Deuteronomy 30:6; Philippians 3:3).

Eternal life was made known in the writings of the Old Testament, as well as in those of the New; and was believed, looked for, and expected by the saints of the former, as of the latter dispensation (John 5:39; Hebrews 11:10,16; Job 19:26,27).

In a word, they and we eat the same spiritual meat,
and drink the same spiritual drink,
for they drank of that Rock that followed them,
and that Rock was Christ (1 Corinthians 10:3,4).

 

Nothing changes, man cannot come to Christ on their own, meaning they cant believe on Him on their own.

 

It is no wonder that you have such a errant view of the salvation of God. So it is not the bible you believe but rather you pick and choose the words you like and ignore the rest. As has been said many times, Calvinism and context never go together.