Featured Ephesians 2

Van,
I am merely pointing out in YOUR post the inconsistency in which you present.

That you disagree and avoid does not present that there is not inconsistency in that which you present.

The all knowing God you present doesn't know all because He in His limited estate must find out information ("now I know" is what you quoted) and then "formulate" some plan in which perhaps leaves room for modification if necessary as if God can "repent" of what He planned. (note does not the Scriptures state that God repented?)

Therefore, your presentation of an all knowing God is not a God that knows everything from the beginning to the end.

Why not have a presentation of a truly knowing God. He has no need to plan (as one may develop a scheme) but shares as He determines with humankind. To humankind it would seem as if God planned, but from God's perspective as all knowing, there was no developing a plan, rather the communication to humankind what was already determined.

 

Ephesians 2: 1And you were dead in the trespasses and sins 2in which you once walked, following the course of this world, following the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that is now at work in the sons of disobedience—3among whom we all once lived in the passions of our flesh, carrying out the desires of the body and the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, like the rest of mankind.​

One of the more remarkable aspects of this text is the revealing of what the folks already know about themselves.

An honest person doesn't have to be told they are a sinner, they will acknowledge they are a sinner, that nothing of lasting value is ever within their nature to achieve.

Paul presents that people are dead. Dead as used in the Scripture means physical death. It is also metaphorically used as Spiritually dead for unbelievers are cast into the Lake of Fire which is called the "Second Death."

John states that the non-believer is "condemned already." That is they are as "dead men walking."

But another remarkable presentation of this passage, also readily agreed upon by even the unbeliever, is that the unbelievers "follow" what is popular, profitable, socially acceptable, customary that is called "the world." Not only follow it, but thrive and are driven by it.

Lastly, within that agreement that the person knows they are a sinner, that they agree in following the world, there is little to offer in defense concerning who is the authority in their life.

The passions, the desires, and the society in which one lives does not present one as being more than "BY NATURE children of wrath." That such a condition is not some decent into decay, but is the condition of all "the rest" of mankind - DEAD.

So, in what manner can one who, without the quickening of the Spirit in which God makes a change in that person, proclaim from their own estate of bondage to sin, sinfulness, and the devil that which is "credited as righteousness."

The answer of course: They cannot.

It is impossible.

So the next words the Apostle writes are extremely important!

4But God, being rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us, 5even when we were dead in our transgressions, made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved), 6and raised us up with Him, and seated us with Him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus, 7so that in the ages to come He might show the surpassing riches of His grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus.​

It is not a matter of human attainment, no part of human offering, no human hope, brings or even can bring the "dead in our transgressions" alive to be credited in Christ.

Paul is clear. He brokers no other presentation. The direct and specific work of God in individual lives the (us - the you, and me, and all that believe) is that specific work of God.

 

Look at post #24 Van.

See if your view is based on Scripture or if it is merely that you claim your view is based on Scripture.

"You pretend scripture does not mean" what God states. "Your problem is with Scripture, not with me."

Your greatest consistency resides in being inconsistent.

 

Present one scheme other than Pelagian (which is heresy) in which people are considered as completely capable without any assistance from God FIRST to make a decision in which God will credit them as righteous.

You desire to be so anti something that you actually do not know that ALL schemes show that God is the first actor in salvation, not humans. He first loved, He first gave, He first reconciled...

I don't disagree.
The Lord Jesus said to those unbelievers around him, "Even you know how to give good gifts." BUT he did not say they know how to give perfect gifts. That is reserved for the God of all creation.

And I explained that the word "desire" is not as humans who crave. It cannot be used in that manner.

Rather, the word is used as God has placed His best offer and no other will be made.

Young man, I was once were you are. Full of spit and vinegar, and even presented much as you do.

But then I sat with the Scriptures, and God took me to where I am.

Do not assign that which you know nothing about and have no concept.

 

That you do not know of a single verse means that you obviously haven't been reading multiple threads which present such Scriptures.

Never ask for you to be calvinist. What I desire is that you take the Scriptures at face value. When the Scriptures show the validity of an area in an soteriology scheme, then agree with Scriptures then agree in that area. When the Scriptures show the validity of an area of an eschatology scheme, then agree in that area.

But do not dismiss something just because you disagree from where it came. I have contended for the faith in many areas, I had to be very widely read from many folks in whom I would not esteem. Yet, the information allowed me to address issues without or with little personal bias.

So, parents know what to feed their children. That is good. But is it perfect?

The Scriptures state, "Every good thing given and every perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of lights, with whom there is no variation or shifting shadow."

So, no human can give or acquire of their own will that which is perfect.

That some may teach that does not mean that the Scriptures conform to such a presentation.

I am old. I am near giving an account to God for all I have been given, taught, lived, and served.

He has given me insight. I share with you in hope that you will gain at least an bit of insight, if not that, at least a bit of understanding so your responses reflect that which is right.

These things are not a matter of calvinistic thinking, it is a matter of what the Scriptures teach.

I have attempted to lead you away from a certain teaching that is heretical. I am thankful that you clearly state that God must be involved in the work of the Holy Spirit.

But, I also see a need to continue to grow in understanding. I am not presenting that you accept.

However, the Scriptures do present themes such as election, predestination, atonement, depravity, perseverance.

These are Bible words. They are not exclusive to a scheme that you desire to refute.

What do you know about these specific words?

How are they applied? For example in Ephesians 2.

Did you understand post number 24?

Can you refute what is stated in that post using other Scriptures?

 

Notice how this deflection is not based upon facts. He makes the OP of the thread (Ephesians 2) something entirely different by distracting, and then claims I "am avoiding addressing the issue."

He refers to the FACTS of post #24 as "no content, no effort..."

Yet, he cannot take that post and defend his view using Ephesians 2. He must grab at something else and make some attempt.

So just to show how wrong in this matter he drifts, her is the statement as it reads as a passage. In it the reader may discern what is the truth.

1Peter 2:

1So put away all malice and all deceit and hypocrisy and envy and all slander. 2Like newborn infants, long for the pure spiritual milk, that by it you may grow up into salvation— 3if indeed you have tasted that the Lord is good.​

The "you" does not occur in the original language, but is the identification of one eating, such as "I eat, I taste." The significance is that the "you" does not pertain to a grouping - that would be "you all," but to the specific individuals of a grouping - all the individuals of "I" .

4As you come to him, a living stone rejected by men but in the sight of God chosen and precious, 5you yourselves like living stones are being built up as a spiritual house, to be a holy priesthood, to offer spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ. ​

Did you see the transition from individuals to the collective? The "you come to Him" as not a grouping but becomes a grouping by the statement "you yourselves" and then the plural "stones" in verse 5.


Peter continues in validating this "stone" by stating OT passages.

6For it stands in Scripture:

“Behold, I am laying in Zion a stone,
a cornerstone chosen and precious,
and whoever believes in him will not be put to shame.”

7So the honor is for you who believe, but for those who do not believe,

“The stone that the builders rejected
has become the cornerstone,”

8and

“A stone of stumbling,
and a rock of offense.”

They stumble because they disobey the word, as they were destined to do.
​

I bolded this section because it shows in one sentence the refutation of @Van's thinking. Folks were (as Jude also states) DESTINED to disobey. NOT predestined, but they are "condemned ALREADY" destined to the lake of fire (as John states).

Next is that which the poster would use to imappropriately boast.

9But you are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for his own possession, that you may proclaim the excellencies of him who called you out of darkness into his marvelous light. 10Once you were not a people, but now you are God’s people; once you had not received mercy, but now you have received mercy.
​

Now, certainly, the original validates that Peter is speaking of the nation formed by believers. This is indicated by the English words "race, nation, a people." HOWEVER, such does not suddenly become "corporate election, and that is the basic disagreement.

The statement is NOT about grouping, nor how the grouping is formed, it is about the purpose of the grouping. That is what is to be taken from that passage. To attempt to present some formation of the grouping from that passage is error.

11Beloved, I urge you as sojourners and exiles to abstain from the passions of the flesh, which wage war against your soul. 12Keep your conduct among the Gentiles honorable, so that when they speak against you as evildoers, they may see your good deeds and glorify God on the day of visitation.​

Again, the "you" are all non-existent in the original. Rather the wording is such that it is making certain of individual accountability is both before the "gentiles" the heathens, and before God "on the day of visitation.

Does anyone not know we all stand, individually, to give an account? This passage indicates another place to give validity to individual election and individual accountability.

I call on Van to set aside his error.

As always, if those, far closer to scholarship in original languages then my forgetful work, do find that I have presented something that is not consistent with the original sources, please do not hesitate to correct me. I do not desire to post what is not faithful to the Scriptures and do remain submissive to better scholarship in the original than I can now offer.

 

Well, I tried.

Typically of Van, he again deflects.

Does anyone else notice he brings up Ephesians 1, but the thread is about Ephesians 2?

Did anyone notice he did not post the passage and point to specific areas presenting the truth?

He posts avoidances and actually expects readers to be impressed.

Btw, do not let him bring confusion about “lived not as a people.”

That has no importance to the topic, brings nothing of value to the table.

I’m a believer, have I always lived like a believer?

He is faithful even in my unfaithfulness.

He loved, before we loved Him.