Just trying to sort things out for myself....

Yep.

Men always have free will, meaning they can do what they WANT to do. A regenerated heart, is a heart made new, though, and it wants different things than it wanted before. It wants to follow Christ and it no longer has a desire to keep on following Satan. So while a regenerated person might be free to walk away from Christ IF that's what he wanted, he will not want to walk away from Christ because he's now got that new heart that has new desires.

Which is why many people prefer to use the term efficacious grace (grace that works). Irresistable (or efficacious) grace is not about spiritural rape or force, but about grace that in the end won't be resisted, because it is grace that works to make the person willing.

Well, that's sort of the nutshell version of it, but it is really a much more nuanced position than that.

There is provision in the doctrine of limited atonement for atonement for absolutely anyone who come to faith. But just like the OT sacrifices were intended only to benefit those who were under the umbrella of the nation of Israel, Christ's sacrifice is only intended for those who are under the umbrella of His people--those whose hearts are circumcised, those who are faithful.

 

I suppose all the elect of God will be spiritually raped.

"All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out." --John 6:37

"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. It is written in the prophets, And they shall be all taught of God. Every man therefore that hath heard, and hath learned of the Father, cometh unto me." --John 6:44, 45

And Paul...

"Whereof I was made a minister, according to the gift of the grace of God given unto me by the effectual working of his power." --Eph. 3:7

And Peter...

"(For he that wrought effectually in Peter to the apostleship of the circumcision, the same was mighty in me toward the Gentiles" --Gal. 2:8

Perhaps you should abandon Arminianism, worthy of nothing better than the hell from whence it came, and believe the Gospel of grace that honors God.

 

Just stop and think for one moment...

If Irresistible Grace is the truth, you just carged God with "spiritual rape."

"Examine yourselves, whether ye be in the faith; prove your own selves. Know ye not your own selves, how that Jesus Christ is in you, except ye be reprobates?" --2 Cor. 13:5

I would encourage you to do that.

 

No, the church is not "True Israel." Israel is defined by national and ethnic consideration. True Israel are regenerated descendants of the line of ABraham. The chruch is made up of all peoples, not just the Israelites.

In the OT, becoming a proselyte to Israel did not give one full access and rights in teh covenant community. That breaks down the analogy you use here. In addition, you have the matter of desire that Russell addressed. One can do anything they want to do. The reason why some don't get saved (i.e., join the Church) is because they do not want to.

 

Welcome to the Arminian view.

The point you take above is indeed Arminian except the term "regenerate" is incorrect. God is fully able to "seek and save the lost". He draws the Lost to Him. John 12:32 "I will Draw All mankind unto Me" - but that does not mean "all mankind is born-again". Regenerate is too strong a term.

"He is the light that coming into the world gives light to EVERY one of mankind" John 1 - but that does not mean "everyone of mankind is regenerated - born again".

He "stands at the door and knocks, so that if ANY of mankind hears his voice AND OPENS the door - He will come in" Rev 3:20.

He is not willing for "any" (anyone)to perish but for ALL to come to repentance (2Peter3) - so He draws us - and thus enables our choice - but that drawing is not surprise-one-stop-born-again it is enabling the lost to make the choice that they could not make otherwise.

In Christ,

Bob

 

Hey LandonL,

Wellcome to the Calvinist view:

Just compare the following:

'All mankind' does not mean every single individual born on this earth. Rather it means 'all kinds of man'. See context please. Jesus talks about Greeks and Jews..all kinds of man. Also see John 6:65,66: "For this cause have I said unto you, that no man can come unto me, except it be given unto him of the Father. Upon this many of his disciples went back, and walked no more with him." Respectively John 10:26: "But ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep". Note the cause of their unbelief carefully! Why weren't those pharisees drawn?

Yes, but we all open this door ONLY after the Holy Spirit regenerates us!

Just ponder on this question: If God, before the foundation of this world already knew that not 'ALL' of mankind WILL be saved, why would He still want 'ALL' man to be saved? Or can His foreknowledge be altered by man's choice? Can anyone surprise God? This would create an inconsistency in His holy and perfect nature!!

Furthermore, 'all man' in I Tim 2:4 means 'all kinds of man', since the apostle in I Tim 2:1-3 exhorts believers to pray for "all men", meaning all kinds of man: "kings" and "all that are in authority" because God wants all kinds of man regardless of race, position, etc. to be saved.
Also, if 'men' in verse 4 means every single individual, than based on the context again we MUST interpret 'men' in verse 5 as every single individual as well. But if we do that, we have Christ as mediator between God and all man which is of course contrary to what Scripture teaches.
See what 'all men' means in: Tit 2:2-11 and 3:2 or Acts 22:15 and 21:28.

II Peter 3:9 is again a different ballgame. First, here the target audience is believers ONLY! He wants none of His elect to perish but He is longsuffering towards US (believers) so that all of His chosen ones would (and they will!!) come to repentance.

The point is, we need to be very careful how we interpret certain words, specially 'all', 'all man', 'world' and such like. Context and the author's writing style should never be ignored!

Gracefully yours

Pardi

[ June 22, 2003, 02:59 AM: Message edited by: Felix Pardi ]

 

quote:Bob
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
John 12:32 "I will Draw All mankind unto Me" - but that does not mean "all mankind is born-again". Regenerate is too strong a term.]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Have you been able to identify some humans that are not in fact part of "ALL Mankind"??

I look forward to hearing about them.

 

John 10:26 says: "But you do not believe , because you are not of My sheep".
Your interpretation of this verse would sound like "You are not of My sheep because you do not believe". Can you honestly say there is no difference between the two?

Again: words do have limits to their meaning by context!!!

About John 6:41-45. These words come immediately after the assertion that all that the Father gives the Son will come to the Son. Reformed scholars assert that the ones who are drawn are the ones who are given by the Father to the Son: the elect. They point to the immediate context which identifies those who come to Christ as the elect. But the rest of verse 44 explains why it must be so: "and I will raise him up on the last day." Who does Jesus raise up on the last day? Verse 39 says He raises all those given to Him by the Father; verse 40 says He raises all who are looking and believing in Him; verse 44 says He raises all those who are drawn by the Father. The identitiy of those raised on the last day to eternal life is absolutely co-extensive with the identitiy of those who are drawn! Obviously, then, it cannot be asserted that Christ, in this context, is saying that the Father is drawing every single individual human being, for 1) the context limits this to those given by the FAther to the Son, 2) this passage is still explaining the unbelief of the Jews, which would make no sense if in fact the FAther were drawing these unbelievers to Jesus, and 3) if that were so, universalism would be the result, for all who are drawn are likewise raised up at the last day.

Again, the word 'world' could have many different meanings!! It does not always mean every single individual in the world. "Do not love the world or anything in the world". Can you see the result of your assertion? If this use of "world" is to be taken in the extensive, universal sense of every single individual, this passage now tells us not to love all men!

It seems that arminians basically drive on 3 main verses (Mat 23:37, 1 Tim 24 and 2 Pet 3:9). Notice that there is almost no argument that would not go back to these passages and use them.

Your assertion that Christ is the mediator for ALL mankind is absurd. Does it not follow that Christ fails as mediator every time a person negates His work by their all-powerful act of free will? One could hope that no biblical scholar would ever promote such an idea, for anyone familiar with the relationship between atonement, mediation and intercession in the book of Hebrews knows well that to make such an assertion puts the entire argument of Hebrews 7-10 on its head. For the moment, we simply point out that it is far more consistent with biblical theology to recognize that Christ mediates in behalf of the elect and perfectly saves them than it is to assert that Christ mediates for all (but fails to save all).

2 Peter 3:9. Peter limited his use of "all" and "any" to a specific audience, "you".

Amen to that. Just make sure we don't fall into the same mistake and turning entire verses on its head.

Make sure now you do not love the "world"!!


In Christ,

Pardi

 

quote:Bob
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There is no OTHER mediator - no other option. ALL mankind is faced with the fact that they have ONLY ONE mediator between God and mankind.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It frequently falls to Calvinists to make the argument that man's failure is really God's failure.

This argument applied to Adam would say "did not God FAIL to create Adam sinless SINCE Adam used his all-powerful free will to CHANGE sinless perfect mankind into SINFUL fallen mankind".

Basically they ignore the fact that it has never "Worked" to blame God for man's failings.

Christ IS STILL the savior of the world EVEN if NNE accepts Him.

He is STILL the Atoning sacrifice for OUR sins and NOT for our sins only but for those of the WHOLE WORLD (1John 2:2) EVEN if no one accepts.

He STILL stands at the door and knocks Rev 3:20 EVEN if no one opens the door so that He may come in.

He is STILL the light that coming into the world lightens EVERY man EVEN if men loved darkness rather than light.

The Arminian texts of scripture - are endless.

Again - the attempt to "pretend" that man has NO part and that FAILure if it occurs - is God's FAILURE - is to USE the Calvinist doctrine INSIDE the Arminian argument - something Arminians never do. ONLY by ASSUMING that Calvinism was TRUE can you take a small piece of the Arminian argument and show that IF Calvinism it true - then the Arminian snippet does not hold up.

But that is not a "kind of proof" against Arminianism. In fact it is also not a proof FOR Calvinism. It is just a flawed argument.

IF you want to show a flaw in the Arminian argument - you actually have to use it.

Again - merely stating the obvious - but that is often the case when showing the flaws in Calvinism.

Wrong again. In 2Peter 3 Peter speaks of those THAT ARE NOT reading the book of 2 Peter. He speaks of those that HAVE NOT come to repentance. And He argues that God is waiting for THEM because He is NOT willing for ANY to perish.

There is NO indication that "only the elect were allowed to read the book of 2Peter" as Calvinism has hoped so often.

quote:Bob
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amen! In fact "inserting qualifiers" to please our preferences would totally mess that up. Better to go with letting the Bible speak for itself.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Bob said
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"God so Loved the World... Yes Really!"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Love your neighbor as yourself"

"Who IS my neighbor" Christ responds that ALL are and Christ then points out "God causes the rain to fall on the just and the unjust" Prove yourselves to be children of your father who is in heaven - arbitrarily select the MANY that live around you and show no concern at all for them... ooops (that would be the Calvinist model of God) .. rather we are to LOVE ALL not just those that we suppose "might be elect".

For God so loved the World. Here in deed we have ALL used in the SAME context. We are to love our neighbor - ALL mankind - not just those we arbitrarily select out. And SO PROVE to be the children of your Father in heaven.

In Christ,

Bob

 

Hello dear,

Sorry for such a long delay in my reply, I was busy with school and other matters. It is good to be back. Hope you are doing alright!!! Blessings to you!

Let's jump right into the heart of the matter. Are you too afraid to touch or comment on John 10:26 or 6:41-45? How about some exegesis on those verses?

Also we are anxious to read your comments on 'God so loved the world' and on 'do not love the world' parallel. What does world mean in each?

And again, what is your assertion on 'faith' itself? Is it the gift of the Holy Spirit or is it not?

Respectfully

Felix

 

"God So loved the World...yes Really!"

WE are told to "Love our neighbor as ourselves" and are also told "Judge not that you be not judged" In other words we are not ALLOWED to "try and ONLY love the elect". Rather - it ALL mankind that we are to love "As ourselves" and "So prove yourselves to be children of your Father who sends rain on the just and the unjust".

The SAME WORLD that "God so Loved" - that includes (as John 1 teaches) EVERYONE of MANKIND - is that group of People that we are to "love as ourselves".

When we are told "Not to love the world nor the things in the world" it is the "context" of Heaven vs Earth - of Satan's realm (the god of this world) VS Christ's heaven "My kingdom is NOT of this world else would my followers fight to defend Me".

So if it is "Satans realm" and "Satan's way of self over God's way of Love" then - we are NOT to love the World and God ALSO does not love the WORLD - not ANY OF IT.

But when it comes to the PEOPLE of the WORLD - ALL of MANKIND - "He is the Light that coming into the WORLD enlightens EVERYONE of mankind" John 1..... Yes Really!

In Christ,

Bob

 

Hello Bob,

Thanks for the reply and I can truly say that I was glad to read it, specially reading this:

Correct me if I am wrong but according to what you wrote, the word 'world' can have at least 2 different meanings? If yes, that is the first step on your part in sorting out all of these occurences of the word. And I admit, it is not an easy task; I just started studying this and I can not say that I have mastered this material. But so far, this one word alone, in the Gospel of John can have at least 3 or 4 different meanings (based on the context of course)...

Anyway
We need to hear from LandonL to see where we are going with this thread. Talk to you all soon.

With Love in Christ

Felix

 

Felix - I do not deny that sometimes the "world" is used in a context to mean "only that which is opposed to God" and in that case you are not allowed to love "any of it" - nor does God.

But WHEN the context IS LOVING the world it is also with reference to lost mankind IN the world JUST as loving your neighbor DOES NOT differentiate between neighbors (love some but not others) NEITHER does "God so love the World" differentiate between SOME of His lost children in the world and OTHERs.

EITHER the context is "The World view of LOVE of SELF" and then NONE of it is acceptable - "OR" the context is "The World of LOST humanity - created by God - the family separated from God". A "World" in which "Each ONE" is considered "My neighber" and I am under obligation to love them "As my self" AND so prove myself to be a child of My Father in Heaven.

In Christ,

Bob

 

What matters most is your "faith condition" when your spirit departs the flesh in the first death.

If your faith is in God, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, You will not be judged unto the second death, for you will not face such judgment. If you do not believe then you will be judged and then cast into the lake of Fire, which is eternally the second death even though it will not be eternal.

Everything else is lifestyle! Believer vs unbeliever.

So who can Believe? Both Jesus' forerunner John the baptist, and Jesus, say that "anyone" or "whosoever believeth" shall not perish but have everlasting life. Since Jesus is God, man would be foolish not believe what HE says.

All mankind has been given the same "tools" by which to come to faith. All mankind is given by the SAME God who created ALL, the information necessary, and upon which belief is based. He leaves it up to us to believe or not believe.

Those who do believe are given the benefit of the Holy Spirit to reinforce the individual's belief to where it becomes lifelong, saving faith. Those who have that faith are the elect of God, and cannot be easily deceived, or easily dissuaded. They are faithful and True to God.

 

What of the lifestyle then where it opposes the Law of God?

Bro.Dallas Eaton

It is much more a difference in believer vs. unbeliever than a matter of simple lifestyle choice. If belief is all that is required I submit to you that no man now in the judgement of hell's torment can be held there for now if not then, they most certainly do believe the truth concerning the Son of God.

 

It remains lifestyle, that which the individual chooses to do. For in all things there is a judgment whereby the deeds or works of man must be tested. Only those that are good come through the test and are placed at the feet of Jesus who then rewards accoring to one's deeds.

Those in hell's torment are there because of their faith condition when their spirit departed their flesh body, and not because of their lifestyle.

Abraham's faith was counted to him as righteousness whereas the rich man's fate of being in the hot place is because he lacked faith while living on this earth.

Everything but one's faith condition is lifestyle!

 

Here is your problem, you are equating eternal salvation as a reward when it is a gift.

God Bless
Bro. Dallas Eaton

 

Here is your problem, you are equating eternal salvation as a reward when it is a gift.

God Bless
Bro. Dallas Eaton </font>[/QUOTE]No, I did not equate eternal salvation with reward. I said that lifestyle efforts do "earn" reward, but salvation is by faith alone!

Faith is not a work that one can do to earn eternal life, it is a belief in the one who gives eternal life. Yes, Jesus does reward those who have faith by giving them eternal life. But eternal life is not something that can be earned, because faith cannot be a work, but is itself what motivates good works by those having faith!

 

Hebrews 11
6 But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.


According to this he that cometh must believe prior to coming.

Previously posted by Yelsew:

If I misunderstood your first statement forgive me; I am only a man. But I did understand that statement to be stating that salvation was determined by "lifestyle" choices.
Then I read that you said that salvation {eternal} is determined only by faith alone; but you previously made the choice in Christ a "lifestyle" choice.

I guess I am too particular.

Bro. Dallas Eaton