Y
Yelsew
Guest
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?
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
1 Cor. 2.10-16
- Thread starter Frogman
- Start date
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
Y
Yelsew
Guest
</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.
Y
Yelsew
Guest
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?
Y
Yelsew
Guest
Seems to me, this and 1 John 4 are saying essentially the same thing.
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? </font>[/QUOTE]"A true witness delivereth souls: but a deceitful witness speaketh lies." Proverbs 14.25
I never expect to convince a non-believer of anything, but I do rely on the Holy Spirit to do the convincing. This is because I do not believe man does the convincing any more than the believing.
God Bless
Bro. dallas
Y
Yelsew
Guest
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.
I forgive you, I don't care how harsh you sound. The fact that you know nothing of me is a hedge about me.
I am a landmark missionary baptist Yelsew, I believe strongly in the commission Christ has given to the Church, to the degree that I have been found working on the road with a telephone construction crew, living in motels from Ohio to Mississippi to N.C. to Arkansas and Alabama, being ridiculed because I would not drink, play cards (gamble), visit the bars, on one occassion I was beaten when I returned from a wednsday evening prayer meeting in Jasper IN. to my motel room when my room-mate who was passed out drunk awoke after my return began to feel convicted because of his condition and began to push me around the room. The guys I use to work with use to accuse me of preaching to prevent from having to work, yet I was the first in the ditch, even a flooded ditch and the last to load into a vehicle. Why didn't I go to my employers to complain? I did, but my employer was my dad and though he respected me, he felt that it was necessary for him to hire men with such attitudes because we had to work on the road. I never collected a tithe for any evangelization I did in any of these situations. And I never let anyone curse our God and our Saviour in my presence.
Many times I have been laughed to scorn, but not once have I given up on the fact that my Lord said for me to go into all the world and tell the Gospel. The commission He did not give to me is that of changing the hearts of any of these men, He left that task for HIS own doing. My authority being restricted to the telling of the Christ of God and what He has done, no more, to plant the seed and to let God bring forth. Never once did I offer to these men the easy way out, to offer them the opportunity to 'repeat after me.'
No...brother, you do not know me. I was thrown out of a motel room in Clinton N.C. because I was reading the Bible and refused to stopped when my roomates told me to, not because they were giong to bed either, they just didn't like my reading the Bible every night, and thought I should have left it at home. Church was for Sundays.
So, when you expect me to believe the heart of man is not deceitful, and full of envy and hatred of God before being broken and brought forth to the birth, maybe now you can understand why I cannot.
This thread is not about personalities and personal sacrifices etc. it is about 1 Cor. 2.14 and whether or not it plainly states that the natural man cannot know the things of God, whether deep or rudimentary. I have provided this bit of my background to assure you I have not entered upon my service to Christ in hopes of blessing in this world, nor the one to come. I was bought and paid for as He hung on the Cross. By HIS Grace He has saved me, a poor wretch, and He owes nothing to me.
God Bless.
Bro. Dallas
I am a landmark missionary baptist Yelsew, I believe strongly in the commission Christ has given to the Church, to the degree that I have been found working on the road with a telephone construction crew, living in motels from Ohio to Mississippi to N.C. to Arkansas and Alabama, being ridiculed because I would not drink, play cards (gamble), visit the bars, on one occassion I was beaten when I returned from a wednsday evening prayer meeting in Jasper IN. to my motel room when my room-mate who was passed out drunk awoke after my return began to feel convicted because of his condition and began to push me around the room. The guys I use to work with use to accuse me of preaching to prevent from having to work, yet I was the first in the ditch, even a flooded ditch and the last to load into a vehicle. Why didn't I go to my employers to complain? I did, but my employer was my dad and though he respected me, he felt that it was necessary for him to hire men with such attitudes because we had to work on the road. I never collected a tithe for any evangelization I did in any of these situations. And I never let anyone curse our God and our Saviour in my presence.
Many times I have been laughed to scorn, but not once have I given up on the fact that my Lord said for me to go into all the world and tell the Gospel. The commission He did not give to me is that of changing the hearts of any of these men, He left that task for HIS own doing. My authority being restricted to the telling of the Christ of God and what He has done, no more, to plant the seed and to let God bring forth. Never once did I offer to these men the easy way out, to offer them the opportunity to 'repeat after me.'
No...brother, you do not know me. I was thrown out of a motel room in Clinton N.C. because I was reading the Bible and refused to stopped when my roomates told me to, not because they were giong to bed either, they just didn't like my reading the Bible every night, and thought I should have left it at home. Church was for Sundays.
So, when you expect me to believe the heart of man is not deceitful, and full of envy and hatred of God before being broken and brought forth to the birth, maybe now you can understand why I cannot.
This thread is not about personalities and personal sacrifices etc. it is about 1 Cor. 2.14 and whether or not it plainly states that the natural man cannot know the things of God, whether deep or rudimentary. I have provided this bit of my background to assure you I have not entered upon my service to Christ in hopes of blessing in this world, nor the one to come. I was bought and paid for as He hung on the Cross. By HIS Grace He has saved me, a poor wretch, and He owes nothing to me.
God Bless.
Bro. Dallas
Y
Yelsew
Guest
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.
I do not persuade, nor convince, I proclaim, I preach, I teach what Christ has come into the world to do, the Holy Spirit must persuade and convince. Convince is a derivative of convict, am I as a man able to convict any other, myself also the dust of the earth and liable to sin, of his sinfulness? No. This requires the miracle of God the Holy Spirit being sent to them as God went to Adam.
Bro. Dallas
Bro. Dallas
Y
Yelsew
Guest
GOOD ANSWER!
Bible-belted
New Member
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.
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.
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.
And of course, there are carnal Christians who don't understand as much as they should as well, as Paul continues.
EricB,
You know the argument is that the lost are able to choose Christ and that regeneration occurs only after this choice.
What I believe scripture teaches is the opposite. The necessity of regeneration prior to repentance.
That Arminians agree the Gospel is taught by the Spirit is not the question, that this 'teaching' must occur prior to an individual being enabled to choose Christ is.
Bro. Dallas
You know the argument is that the lost are able to choose Christ and that regeneration occurs only after this choice.
What I believe scripture teaches is the opposite. The necessity of regeneration prior to repentance.
That Arminians agree the Gospel is taught by the Spirit is not the question, that this 'teaching' must occur prior to an individual being enabled to choose Christ is.
Bro. Dallas
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:
Now, to the text:
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).
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).