1 Cor. 2.10-16

Then you do not know what Grace is, or what it does! How then can you say that my theology is wrong and your's is right if you cannot define one of the main tenets of theology?

 

Huh? It looks to me like Frogman knows exactly what Grace is.

 

</font>[/QUOTE]The demons knew Jesus from before their being cast down with Lucifer. They not only knew who he was but what he was, and they knew their own fate! Therefore they are not from God! With the exception of perhaps Saddam Hussein, Hitler, Lenin, and others of their ilk, demons do not manifest themselves as humans bringing a different Gospel.

 

How can you say your system resembles theology when you request theological definitions apart from Scriptural understanding.

I know fully what Grace is; it is the Saviour of the elect of God not stepping into His glory on the mount of transfiguration.

God Bless.
bro. dallas </font>[/QUOTE]With that you expect to convince a non-believer to become a believer?

 

Seems to me, this and 1 John 4 are saying essentially the same thing.

 

Jesus commanded his followers to convince (teach) unbelievers, baptizing them, then convincing (teaching) them what Jesus taught them, thus making them disciples.

Based on your statement, It seems you might be one of those who lets someone else do the hard work of evangelizing, while you sit back and collect the tithes. Forgive me if that sounds harsh, but that is how I feel about those who do not, at every opportunity attempt to evangelize whomever will listen.

 

WOW, I'm impressed with your testimony. but you stated that you do not believe in persuading or convincing others, then turn around and give a testimony that contradicts yourself.

 

GOOD ANSWER!

 

In v. 10 Paul says that "God has revealed it to us by His Spirit."

This tells us that whatever "it" is, the means of revelation to the individual is the Spirit.

But what is "it"? Scroll back to v. 9 and the antecedent is from the quotation of Is. 64:14. The "it" is "what God has prepared for those who love him".

What might that be? Well, we know that it is ot understood by the "rulers of this age" (v.8. It has been hidden (v.7) but is now revealed (v.10). It has to d with the crucifixion of Christ in some way, for had it been known by the rulers of this age, they would not have crucified Christ.

This is a clue to the identity of the rulers of this age; they are those who crucified Christ: unbelievers. The crucifixion in this case seems to stand for the message of the gospel unto faith for salvation (v.2).

So the Spirit is the one who reveals the gsopel to unbelievers. This is confirmed by v. 14, where Paul says plainly that those without the Spirit cannot understand the things that come from the Spirit of God, namely what God has prepared for them, namely the aforementioned gospel for salvation.

Now that is if we connect 1Co. 2:14 to what goes before that verse. Others connect itwith what follows, into chapter 3. In that case, Paul is arguing that carnal christians cannot understand the things of God because of their worldlines and immaturity.

But this does not affect the Calvanist application of the verse for total depravity at all. For if a worldly Christian cannot understand the things of God, even though having the Spirit, then how much worse off is the one who is not even a Christian, utterly lacking the Spirit of God?

Personally I see 2:14 as something of a hinge verse, looking both back and forward in its context.

But either way the Calvanist application is just. That of the Arminian (and the one whose theology is arminian even if he eschews the term) is just wrong.

 

I second that. Excellent post, Bible-Belted.

 

Nobody said that it is not the Spirit who reveals the Gospel to unbelievers, nor that they understand "what God has prepared for those who love him". This confuses understanding with realizing you're a sinner and asking for forgiveness.
And of course, there are carnal Christians who don't understand as much as they should as well, as Paul continues.

 

Sorry I've been out a while and I have just skimmed through this thread. Dallas let me first reply to a few of your comments:

This is a good example of the staw man we spoke of earlier. While I do believe some scriptures have particular referents in mind, which your system does as well, I completely reject the notion that this basic hemeneutic logically aligns anyone with such systems as the Jehovah Witnesses. This is absurd and unfounded.

Now, to the text:

Notice the verse you quoted Dallas. It says "the naturaul man doesn't receive the THINGS of the Spirit."

It does not say that the natural man cannot receive the Spirit Himself.

Even as a Calvinist I didn't use this passage to defend Total Depravity because it is so painfully obvious that Paul is speaking about those who already have the Spirit. It doesn't address how the Spirit came to indwell them, it only addresses the point that the ones with the Spirit can understand the THINGS of the Spirit, more specifically, "the deep THINGS of God."

This passage is about obtaining the THINGS of the Spirit, not the Spirit himself, thus it is being completely misapplied.

I agree that a person without faith has not recieved the things of the Spirit and He can't until first he has been indwelled by the Spirit. How is he indwelled by the Spirit? Through faith (Gal. 3:14).