Featured Not Closed Theology

So what… we are not reformed nor do we follow John Calvin in baptizing babies, being sacrimentalists, etc. If being scriptural is coincidental then guilty

 

OK then, where does spiritual life begin?

 

That stands right up there with the my dad can beat up your dad argument. You could have 1000 that agree with you I will stick with the bible.


Jesus made it clear but for some reason you choose to listen to man rather than Him. Why is that?

Luk 10:26 And He said to him, "What is written in the Law? How does it read to you?"
Luk 10:27 And he answered, "YOU SHALL LOVE THE LORD YOUR GOD WITH ALL YOUR HEART, AND WITH ALL YOUR SOUL, AND WITH ALL YOUR STRENGTH, AND WITH ALL YOUR MIND; AND YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF."
Luk 10:28 And He said to him, "You have answered correctly; DO THIS AND YOU WILL LIVE."

Luk 10:36 "Which of these three do you think proved to be a neighbor to the man who fell into the robbers' hands?"
Luk 10:37 And he said, "The one who showed mercy toward him." Then Jesus said to him, "Go and do the same."

 

When one freely trust in Christ Jesus for their salvation.

 

So What? You keep saying your not Calvinist but I have yet to see that difference. And when you say the DoG is scriptural you are in error. Actually I don't think many of those that call themselves Calvinist follow Calvin but they do follow the philosophy that he articulated.

 

You still don't see it.
The only one who showed mercy was the good Samaritan (Jesus). All others did not help. That is the first thing the lawyer has to understand. He is the person who is half dead. Once he is healed by Jesus, his responsibility is to go and do likewise (like Jesus).

The lawyer wasn't going to get it because his questioning to Jesus was never legitimate inquiry. He was thinking that the Priest and Levite had the answer and he should be like them. He tried to justify his behavior, which Jesus shows him that he cannot justify himself.

For some reason you choose to listen to something outside of scripture. Your philosophy, rather than Jesus.

 

I quote scripture of Christ speaking and you say I do not listen? You give your philosophy rather than Christ and you think I should listen to you. Give your head a shake.

You are doing just what I have seen Calvinist's do a number of times. You are reading into the text what you want to find. Read what the Holy Spirit inspired not what some man tells you the Holy Spirit meant.

By your own words you show that you do not trust scripture as you have to change it to fit your theological view, Samaritan = (Jesus), Lawyer = the half dead man, what the Levite and priest represent or even the donkey you have not said but I am quite sure you have some special name/meaning for them. The text does not say or indicate what you say but why let that interfere with your preconceived ideas.

So @taisto you will continue to listen to your preachers and scholars and I will listen to Jesus and trust the Holy Spirit inspired text.

 

Hmmm…. I’m moving on, speaking to you is like talking to a brick wall.

 

I quote scripture of Christ speaking and you say he's not the good Samaritan and we are not the man who was beaten and left for dead. And you think I should listen to you. Give your head a shake.
You are doing just what I have seen humanists do a number of times. You are thinking you are in better condition than you actually are. You are ignoring the text and rejecting the words of Jesus while replacing it with a tale not taught by Jesus.

By your own words you show that you do not trust Jesus words as you change them to fit humanism. You ignore what Godly teachers, preachers, and theologians have said for 2 millenniums while you embrace your humanism.
So, @Silverhair will you continue to follow humanism and your teachers of humanism or will you heed the words of Christ Jesus.

Jesus tells you what I have presented and you have no eyes to see or ears to hear.
I will listen to Jesus and leave you to follow your humanist teachings.

 

You do not like have a mirror held up to you. You keep saying one thing and what I find on the net re PB says another. When you claim not to be a Calvinist and you hold to the same theology what do you think one should conclude about the PB.

 

You are funny.

 

How dence are you? Personally I don’t care what you think because it is irrelevant to my belief system.

 

Now no need to get testy. Why do you get so upset when I just point out what your own PB preachers say. The DoG is a Calvinist mainstay and you have said you hold to it so logically you hold to Calvinist theology. Now whether you want to call yourself a Calvinist is your choice. But why get upset with me when I point out your inconsistencies.

 

@taisto since you like to read into the text and give special meaning to various words I thought you might like these. Should fit right in with your method of reading the text.

It identifies the good Samaritan with Jesus, the oil and wine as the sacraments, and the inn as the church, showing that God’s mercy may be found only in the sacraments of the church (Augustine).
By binding up the wounds of the man, the Samaritan shows that he has many remedies for healing. The next day when he arrives is the Lord’s day, the day of resurrection. The two pence he gives him are the two Testaments for preaching the gospel, for the innkeeper is a steward of the mysteries (Ambrose).

 

I never indicated to anyone that I am an Arminian ie human decisions are not the critical point in my salvation, God is. My theology is not seeking to clamor for attention, rather it puts God first, not a gospel that preserves a determinative role for personal choice, very humanized and relativized. The result is a theology of self. And of course this is what the spirit of the age demands, people clamoring for attention.

 

well congratulations… you have called him out! You have named him properly … this is the boards ‘ Rumpelstiltskin’ LOL and by naming him properly you can disarm him… well done

But let’s completely spell it out shall we…if humans are free to resist God, then God is not free to act, then HE is bound by the creatures freedom. If God is to be free to act, humans must be bound by Gods will. In that explanation, I summarize the differences between a Monergistic and a Synergistic faith. My faith is based on the Gospel of our Lord & Savior Jesus Christ, not all other religious systems (namely Humanism) that distort our relationship with God, and I firmly believe that if human’s think that contributing any essential part towards his or her salvation, he or she effectively becomes their own savior. It’s all in Gods Grace. And this is where we all sing, “Amazing Grace.”

 

So by your own words you actually do not believe the bible:

Rom 1:16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes

Rom 10:17 So faith comes from hearing, and hearing by the word of Christ.

Rom 10:13 For "whoever calls on the name of the LORD shall be saved."

Rom 10:9 that if you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved;
Rom 10:10 for with the heart a person believes, resulting in righteousness, and with the mouth he confesses, resulting in salvation.

Eph 1:13 In Him, you also, after listening to the message of truth, the gospel of your salvation—having also believed, you were sealed in Him with the Holy Spirit of promise,

Joh 3:16 "For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life.
Joh 3:17 "For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through Him might be saved.
Joh 3:18 "He who believes in Him is not condemned; but he who does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

Crying out to God for salvation which the bible says we must do is the opposite of clamoring for attention, it is humbling oneself and saying I need you. This is the opposite of those that think they are so special that God picked them out of all the sinners in the world to be saved, that is presumption taken to it's limits.

We agree on one thing, only God saves. He saves those that freely trust in His risen Son.

 

@Silverhair. Like I said earlier, everyone has to understand their theology and perception of it in their own way to some extent. Calvinists agree that everyone who believes will be saved, that you must hear the gospel in order to be saved, that every single person that is saved will have faith and without it they will not be saved. Where there is disagreement is how you perceive this happens. Is it true that God, because he has endowed us with an autonomous free will that is capable of making a contrary choice at any time - must then wait passively to see what our decision on this will be. Or, does God have some level of actual control in this.

If He does have some level of control does it involve providing opportunity only or does it involve that plus "conviction" or that plus "quickening" or that plus outright determinism? Also, if God knows the future, even as you say a future free choice, then from the time God knows your free choice, are you truly free to change your mind and thus make God wrong or are you somehow bound to that action because it truly was your actual free choice all along? If you say yes, you can always change your mind up until the time the event occurs then God cannot possibly know the future. If you say no, because all God is doing is correctly predicting your free choice so it's still your free choice then a Calvinist will say that because the choice is known by God and yet allowed then it falls under His sovereignty and can be said to be part of his ordained plan. Additionally, it can be said that you did do what you wanted to according to your free choice, yet that choice was under God's sovereignty and worked into His overall plan. It can also be said that you acted freely, and are morally responsible for doing what you did - even though in an overall sense it fitted into God's sovereign plan. Thus destroying the argument that you are not responsible unless the choice is absolutely autonomous.

When you keep putting up verses that everyone already agrees with with the intention to make it seem like they disagree with scripture you are using a false argument and just making people angry. Take on the points I raised in this or fold it up.

 

Splendid!

 

So seeing that your view means that man can not resist God in any way, that means they only do as God has determined for them to do so does that mean He made the Pharisees and lawyers reject Him? And what about those that burned their children in the fires as offerings to Molech and those that worshiped Baal, did they just do what God determined for them to do or do they resist God's will for them?

So @Earth Wind and Fire your claiming that man has nothing to do with his salvation but what does the bible say?

Lets look at what the bible says about the gospel message:
Rom 1:16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ, for it is the power of God to salvation for everyone who believes

Which in the case of most people means they hear a gospel presentation
Rom 10:17 So then faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.

Then it is the responsibility of those that heard the message to make a choice, trust in Christ or reject Him
oh 3:18 "He who believes in Him is not condemned; but he who does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

So what we see in the bible is that the person has to hear and trust then God saves.
Eph 1:13 In Him you also trusted, after you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation; in whom also, having believed, you were sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise,

Does man save himself NO but God only saves those that freely trust in His risen son, Christ Jesus.

There is a God given condition to salvation.
Rom 10:9 that if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved.

By your view we have no requirement for the cross, the gospel message, evangelism etc. The fact that the bible is clear in regard to all of these it should give you pause. Responding to the gospel message is not humanism it is biblical.