Featured Matt. 23:13 (again!)

Once again we have an effort to deny the obvious, fallen men were in the process of entering heaven. They did not enter, and no one enters on their own power. To ascribe that view to me is simply misrepresentation, calculated to obscure the issue.

Does John 3:19 say or suggest all fallen people hate the light? Nope. Some people believe in Christ, verse 18. The ends driven exegesis continues, fallen people become each and every fallen person. Twaddle.

John 6:39 simply says each and every one God gives to Jesus is saved forever. This is not in dispute. When God transfers a person from the realm of darkness into the kingdom of His Son, that is the act of giving someone to Christ.

John 10:26 says folks who are not "of My sheep" do not believe. But all those in believe in God, who believe God's promise of a Messiah, these who are willing and open to the gospel, are "of My Sheep." These comprise the fields white for harvest. The effort to conflate "of My Sheep" with "My sheep" is twaddle.

John 10:27 is non-germane, we are discussing the attributes of the fallen, not the saved.

Matthew 23:13 means what it says. No special understanding is needed. Fallen men, who were not being compelled with "irresistible grace" we in the process of "entering heaven." If they had been under the compulsion of "Irresistible grace" they could not have been blocks. Therefore they were unregenerate. And they were entering heaven so they had some spiritual ability. QED

 

No one stops a sinner from entering into heaven but the sinner. They have zero desire for the things of God.

 

Every one who enters heaven was a sinner.
The men of Matthew 23:13 had considerable desire for the things of God.
Folks, just read the verse, or Matthew 13, or the story of the rich young ruler. The bible teaches of folks trying to be reconciled to God through works rather than faith, but none the less seeking God. The claim that no one ever seeks after God conflicts with verse after verse.

 

I have only encountered one person holding Martin's doctrine who actually represented my views instead of endless strawman arguments.

Next, we get the nit pic defense, challenge everything such as the men of Matthew 23:13 were fallen, unregenerate men of flesh, supposedly with total spiritual inability. According to Martin's view, to be entering heaven they would have regenerated by "irresistible grace." But they were blocked, thus unregenerate. And all this was explained in post # 3

Next, I will be asked to explain what I mean by the word "is."

 

Van, you are out on a broken wing of a tree all by your lonesome.

As MM has said:"To try and turn it [Matt. 23:13] into a theological trampoline and bounce up and down on it is foolishness of the worst kind."

"It is not a soteriological discussion...to use v.13, without support from elsewhere in the Bible, as the lynch-pin for a whole theological opinion is very unwise."

It's interesting that this particular verse as well as 2 Peter 2:1, and 2 Peter 3:9 [by others]are used as if those passages are soteriological. The latter is dealing with eschatology!

Van has his unique views which a number here have called Vanology. His novel interpretations are being exposed for what they are --unbiblical. That's not to say he doesn't cite Bible passages --he does. However, his spins on Scripture are not in accordance with sound hermeneutics to say the least.

 

I answer Martin's question, top of post # 7, yet Martin asks again, feigning incredulity.

This is all they have, offer personal attacks and misrepresent the view as presented. Shuck and jive, folks shuck and jive.

I have offered 4 different lines of evidence, each supported by multiple passages, demonstrating total spiritual inability is mistaken doctrine.

Note no actual denial of Matthew 23:13's teaching has been offered. Fallen, unregenerate men of flesh were entering heaven, therefore possessing sufficient spiritual ability to seek God effectively. QED

 

I'm wondering why the leap has been taken that entering the Kingdom of Heaven = Entering Heaven ??

This false premise has derailed somebody's ability to perceive the truth of what Jesus meant

 

It would seem from reading Mathew 23 that Jesus is speaking to both multitude and also to the disciples concerning the errors of the Pharisees and the religious leaders of Israel.


When Christ comes to verse 13 it seems he changes audiences and is now speaking directly to the Pharisees charging them with deliberately sabotaging the efforts of those Jews who are wanting to come into the kingdom of heaven and it is interesting that Christ uses the terminology “kingdom of heaven” since the phrase is only used in the book of Mathew which is expressly written to the Jews.


It is also interesting that Jesus in his previous altercation with the Pharisees (Matt 21) that because of their refusal to believe and because of their deliberate tampering with the fruit (souls) God expected from Israel they forfeited their part of setting up the kingdom of God and the gentile nations (alluded to) would take their part in the future (till the time of the gentiles be fulfilled).


Matthew 21 certainly address the Pharisees resistance to bearing fruit (souls) for the Kingdom of God so it is likely that Matthew 23 is a similar attack by Christ. The religious leaders who were primarily the Pharisees were using the law to prevent people from embracing Christianity. The Pharisees could not stop people from being saved but they could badger them to prevent them from choosing Christianity as a life style.


While I am not a fan of Calvinism I believe salvation is not the direct connotation of this verse rather it is the badgering or persecution of the religious Jews against those Jews who are wanting to embrace Christianity.


BTW to say the original post was not about soteriology and then immediately apply it to Calvinist Soteriology was misleading.


thjplgvp

 

And the absurdity continues. Matthew 23:13 says fallen men who were in the process of entering heaven, and therefore seeking God, were blocked. This demonstrates both fallen, unregenerate men have some spiritual ability, and (2) they were not being compelled by irresistible grace.

Neither post 1 or 2 refuted anything. You ask why they are considered fallen, but do not say they were regenerated. Then you start talking, spuriously, about other verses, not Matthew 23:13.

I believe Matthew 23:13 is but one example of 4 different lines of evidence, none of which have been refuted, teaching total spiritual inability is bogus.

 

One of the tools of denial is to claim parts of scripture can be ignored if they are not the main subject of a passage. This is bogus. In the sentence, She got on the yellow school bus, yellow school are not the subject, but to turn around and claim she got on a green city bus is absurd. The men who were entering heaven, were blocked. To claim they were not really entering heaven, or were not really blocked is absurd nonsense.

 

which translation are you reading that in?

are you suggesting that people were trying to kill themselves, and Pharisees were keeping men from dying?

Nobody goes to heaven without dying, you know

 

Hi JamesL, not sure what your point is. It seems an effort to change the subject. The issue is that fallen people, unsaved have limited spiritual ability, they can receive and accept the gospel. Martin maintains they cannot unless compelled by irresistible grace. That view has been shown to be bogus.

If you want to debate entry into the spiritual realm of God during our physical lifetime, start another thread and state your case.

 

I'm merely trying to dissect what you've stated.

You said these men were entering heaven, which they could not possibly do until they died. And that the Pharisees were preventing some from entering heaven

So, the logical conclusion is that you believe the Pharisees were keeping them from dying.

 

Yes, such were some of you...1 Cor. 6:9ff

That text says nothing of the sort but your presuppositions and looking for a proof text has made it say this to you. Dogma should always rule, not a proof text to support an ax one intends to grind. The lost have no desire for the true God.

Much of nothing here but some pretense as to a self-proclaimed victory with no substance. You'll have to do better than alluding to some pretend audience ('Folks') and to Scriptures not exegeted nor commented on that allegedly prove you as correct.

The RYR didn't seek God, didn't keep the commandments, and broke all the 10 as have all the lost. He was a covetous idolater, and like the religious lost whom you exalt, merely thought he sought after God. The only one good, as he found out, is God. Not him nor anyone else, yet you make men out to be good.

So then Cain must have been really seeking God by his own works. How terrible for him to be rejected. Poor fellow, he was seeking God but got rejected. His effort to seek God should have gotten a reward, as per you he was sincere. Too bad you weren't there to intercede for his efforts.

Not so, it conflicts with your false interpretations of Scripture and flies in the face of your misunderstanding thereof and against your exaltation of man. No one seeks after God, it is God who seeks after man, and specifically of the elect. Note Romans 3:10ff.