A strict 5-point Calvinist God is not worthy of worship...

[Paul33]

I have heard it preached that in the OT the Holy Spirit came upon believers and that not permanently, but in the NT the Holy Spirit indwells believers and permanently. Is that what your getting at, Dallas?

 

[Ray Berrian]

Brother Dallas,

Not wishing to be argumentative. But, could someone show me definitive scripture that states God the Son was explicitly not known by OT saints?

I believe these saints did not possess the indwelling of the Holy Spirit.

Maybe you mean Hebrews 11:13. I believe the O.T. saints knew the Lord Jehovah, but never thought of the concept of Jesus enfleshed and living on the earth and dying on the Cross and doing miracles, for the most part. The prophets had a fuller idea of the coming Messiah.

I agree with you also that the laity of the former covenant [Hebrews 7:6] were not indwelled by the Holy Spirit. The prophets and priests and kings of Israel experienced this phenomenon and some of the craftsmen who built the Temple in Jerusalem.

In Hebrews chapter seven we learn of the 'better covenant' because of 'better promises.'

 

[Eric B]

The debate is basically between the ontological nature of God vs. the economic nature. "Persons" as used for the ontological distinction, has come to mean "three separate self-conscious individuals", but this is not how it was originally understood. The pre-Nicene fathers thought of the Son as a special manifestation of the Word at either Creation or the incarnation, and likened the prior distinction to that of a single person thinking to himself. While the incarnate Son obviously was a separate (though still divine) self-conscious entity, because He had taken on this new nature that in a sense distinguished Him from God. This was the "mystery" of the Godhead (1 Tim.3:16), rather than an argument of all three, which are often listed together as a matter of fact.
Then, there is the argument about what the OT saints knew of all of this. While some try to identify YHWH as particularly the Father or Son (one revelaed; the other not yet revealed); YHWH was obviously the entire Godhead. But it was those visible theophanies they actually saw that were the "Word" (Logos) only, as that represented God's visible presence in the universe (which could not contain Him in His natural form); including in Creation as John 1 tells us. (The Spirit is His spiritual presence in the heart). So there was no distinction regarding "which Person did they know about".

Now, to get back on topic:

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(If I be lifted up, I will draw all men to myself)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This immediately negates the idea of Christians, or even the church having anything to do with the dispensation of eternal life.

Even if we impose on this a universal structure of atonement this passage is limited to the voice of the Son of God.

First, it is He that stood as the Lamb slain before the foundation of the world.

Second, it is He that stood as the Lamb slain in time, thus having fulfilled His statement here in John 12.32 [note vs. 33: 'This he said, signifying what death he should die.']

But look back to vs. 31: Now is the judgment of this world: now shall the prince of this world be cast out.

Then...vs. 12: And I, if I be lifted up from the earth will draw all men unto me.

We immediately note men is in italics. This is provided in the English to provide for clarity. But is not needed to make the statement clear. There is nothing here making the atonement general nor universal.

lifted up from the earth is a direct reference to the brazen serpent [John 3:14; 8:28]

This is from Strong's #5312--hupsoo

Tense - Aorist
Voice - Passive
Mood - Subjunctive
BLB Tense for the phrase lifted up from the earth

The phrase is in the aorist tense, a tense not having an English equivalent, but indicating no regard for either past, present or future occurrence.

The phrase is passive showing action operated upon the subject I Jesus-the Lamb Slain before the foundation of the world

The phrase is subjunctive, a mood of possibility or potentiality. If I be lifted up

Why is this without regard to past, present, or future?

Who operated the action upon Christ?

What condition is placed upon this? Who places this condition? Is this condition met? Who met this condition?

If this conditional statement is used as many use it today, then this means that man has operated this action upon Christ. This means that man placed this condition upon Christ; this means that man is now meeting this condition; and this means that man meets this condition each time Christ is preached or believed upon among men.

Now, look a little further:

vs. 31 is directing the attention of the hearers to the present.

vs. 32 directs the attention to the future sense-indicates certain occurrence of an event that has not yet happened, active voice-the subject performs the action, indicative mood--a statement of fact, if an event has or will happen.

And I,... will draw

There is a direct correlation to John 6:44.

This leaves man out of the drawing of all men and places the action upon Christ.

The condition has been met--If I be lifted up;
The work is certain to be completed; 'will draw all men unto me.

And John 6:44: 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.

The only action considered by man is in the negative; the action of Christ--I will raise him up at the last day; the action of coming to the Father is limited to those drawn.

Now, to make this [John 12.32] to teach a general atonement requires us to follow to the end that all men will certainly be drawn by Christ; that these same all men must be included [and not excluded] by John 6:44; and thus being drawn to Christ (No man can come to me) except and I will raise him up at the last day. So, by making the atonement of Christ [being lifted up] a general atonement, we force upon it the logical end that it must be a universal atonement.

John 6:44 says nothing about man accepting Christ, believing in Christ, however John 6:29 makes even this to be the work of God.

Bro. Dallas

Nice trip through grammar and putting scripture together, that may stump those who do not have time to absorb all of that right away. I'm still trying to get the connection between "tenses" and universality of drawing or salvation.
But right away, nobody is suggesting that man was "active" in lifting up Christ, drawing men, and let alone; dispensing eternal life; which is what your exegesis there sems to be disproving.
What you have done is to fuse "drawn" with "come to me", and therefore "raised at the last day". But there are four possible sets.
#1 all men
#2 those who are drawn.
#3 Those who come
#4 those raised at the last day.
While #3 and #4 are contigious, you assume #2 to be contigious with both of them. Then basically, there is a set of all men, and subset of those called, coming, and raised. So the argument is whether 2 and 3 are the same. But in this passage, it is not necessarily so. If it is true that some can be called but not come, then still, it stands that all not in set 2 could not be in set 3— none can come except called. But it doesn't preclude set 2 being in the future expanded to be contigious with 1 (as we see promised in 12:32); leaving a set of all men called, with a subset of those who come and are raised.

 

[Frogman]

Bro. Don and Bro. Ray,
Yes, you each understood my post. I believe the Holy Spirit came upon the OT believers but that He did not indwell them.

I do believe that there was an understanding among believers that the office of priest, king and redeemer would be combined by the promised seed [messiah].

I believe this can be seen in statements made by Job as well as others.

Bro. Eric,
I enjoyed your post, even though it is in opposition to my own. I need to study it a little bit more however, I have just come in from work and am tired now, I will get back to you on it...ok?

Bro. Dallas

 

[Matt Black]

Back to the OP and the subsequent debates we've been having: does anyone think that God has NO hand in our (individual) creation?

Yours in Christ

Matt

 

[BobRyan]

Originally posted by Frogman:
Not wishing to be argumentative. But, could someone show me definitive scripture that states God the Son was explicitly not known by OT saints?

I believe these saints did not possess the indwelling of the Holy Spirit.

Bro. Dallas

You can not hold to "total depravity" and come up with that view.

The Heb 11 list of OT sainst shows conclusively the work of the Holy Spirit in the lives of the saints of the OT. (There is only one Gospel).

The statement of Christ in John 3 to Nicodemus about the PRE-cross work of the Holy Spirit in the New Birth - shows conclusively the work of the Holy Spirit in the lives of of the saints of the OT. (There is only one Gospel).

The statement of David in Psalms 51 shows us "Exactly" how the process works even today--

Ps 51
10 Create in me a clean heart, O God, And renew a steadfast spirit within me.
11 Do not cast me away from Your presence And do not take Your Holy Spirit from me.
12 Restore to me the joy of Your salvation And sustain me with a willing spirit.
13 Then I will teach transgressors Your ways, And sinners will be converted to You.

In Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Originally posted by Ray Berrian:

When Jesus performed miracles He merely exercised His attributes and miracle power.'

Your </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr /> was 'He limited His attributes as God when He became flesh.

</font>[/QUOTE]In Matt 4 Christ was told to do something (feed Himself when hungry) by turning a rock into bread - as only God can do.

Now as it turns out - eating when you are very hungry is not a sin. No mention of that anywhere in scripture.

In fact waiting to get a direct command from God to eat when you are hungry - is also not a command in scripture.

The sin in this case - the temptation - was to use His own God-power to create out of non-living matter and show that He really is God (and not some cheap immitation). Christ refuses to use His power as God. Christ later says "I can of My own self do nothing".

His "obedience" was in not using HIS power to perform miracles, but to fully trust in His Father as we must.

In Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Originally posted by Matt Black:
Back to the OP and the subsequent debates we've been having: does anyone think that God has NO hand in our (individual) creation?

Yours in Christ

Matt

Are you talking about "For in SIX days the Lord MADE the heavens and the earth the sea and all that is in them" or are you talking about John 3 and the fact that the Holy Spirit causes the new birth?

In Christ,

Bob

 

[Ray Berrian]

I think early one in the Bible, and I did not check this all out recently, at times God spoke face to face with Adam and Eve and men like Abraham and Moses. That would overcome their tainted depraved spirits wouldn't you say? It sure would be a landmark in my life.

 

[Matt Black]

Bob, I'm referring to the denial much earlier in this thread by some posters that God creates each of us; the implication was that He only created Adam and Eve.

Anyone care to comment?

Yours in Christ

Matt

 

[Pastor Larry]

What are you referring to is traducianism. Adam and EVe were the result of direct or special creation. Subsequent humans are the result of natural procreation, not special creation. Therefore, technically speaking, God did not create us. However, that is not to say that we were created apart from him. He gives life and breath to all things.

 

[Monergist]

Originally posted by Ray Berrian:
I think early one in the Bible, and I did not check this all out recently, at times God spoke face to face with Adam and Eve and men like Abraham and Moses. That would overcome their tainted depraved spirits wouldn't you say? It sure would be a landmark in my life.

He also spoke 'face-to-face' with Satan. If you're trying to make a point with this, it is invalid.

 

[Ray Berrian]

Monergist,

He also spoke 'face-to-face' with Satan. If you're trying to make a point with this, it is invalid.

Jesus never will try to get Satan saved as you know. You missed my point. Because we are created after the likeness of God, He can easily touch the lives of sinners when they hear the Gospel. Under the Old Covenant the Lord spoke face to face with the leadership of the Israelites. This would be an epiphany to those under the former covenant. [Hebrews 8:6] The Covenant of the Law was the inferior covenant, because we now have 'better promises.'

 

[Matt Black]

Originally posted by Pastor Larry:
What are you referring to is traducianism. Adam and EVe were the result of direct or special creation. Subsequent humans are the result of natural procreation, not special creation. Therefore, technically speaking, God did not create us. However, that is not to say that we were created apart from him. He gives life and breath to all things.

I think you'll find Ps 139:13 disagrees

Yours in Christ

Matt

 

[dattgog]

Ray wrote: Jesus never will try to get Satan saved as you know.
-------------------------------------------------
But Ray, certainly (according to your theology) Satan must have free will and the ability to repent. Otherwise (according to your theology) that would make God ... I think you said unjust, unloving, and unmerciful.

Also Ray, I know you don't like to deal with this issue, but seeing God face to face didn't "remove the depravity" of the Pharisees or the Roman officials / soldiers ... unless God first made them alive (Eph. 2:1-5)

 

[Ray Berrian]

dattgog,

Ray wrote: Jesus never will try to get Satan saved as you know.
-------------------------------------------------

But Ray, certainly (according to your theology) Satan must have free will and the ability to repent. Otherwise (according to your theology) that would make God ... I think you said unjust, unloving, and unmerciful.

I thought you knew basic theology, but I guess I should not have taken anything for granted. Angels did have free will until they fell from God's good grace and were cast out of Heaven to the earth. While some fallen angels are free to deceived earthlings, there are also some fallen angels who God already has placed in (Tartarus) until the Great White Throne Judgment. God already has done what He wants to do in the matter of devilish demons. They have already flexed their wills and there is no return to grace for them; they have become, forever, His antagonists. The Cross and atonement was only for all lost sinners. [I John 2:2]

Also Ray, I know you don't like to deal with this issue, but seeing God
face to face didn't "remove the depravity" of the Pharisees or the Roman officials / soldiers ... unless God first made them alive (Eph. 2:1-5)

The Pharisee, Nicodemus, [John 3:1] faced Jesus straight on ' . . . under cover of darkness' [3:2] and later reaffirms that he came at 'night' [19:39] not for salvation but to take his Savior down from the Cross. So here again you are wrong, although God has always allowed for the free will of the sinner. [Revelation 22:17f] Not all will become saved and yet some Jews did turn to Christ. Jesus message of grace was first offered to the Israelites, some of whom responded the call of the Spirit of God. I John 1:8 spells out the fact that Nicodemus as well as you and me have the Adamic nature/Original Sin until the hour of physical death, but we also have the overcoming Spirit in us Who lives and abides with us forever. [John 14:16] Every human sinner has Original Sin.

As to Roman officials and regular citizens, mega thousands were not only won to the faith of Jesus, but carried the Gospel via Roman roads and sea routes to every corner of the then known world. In later years Emperor Constantine legalized Christianity in his Edict of Constantine in 313 ending much of the persecution against our Christian/spiritual fathers and mothers. He also later summoned church leaders to the Council of Nicea. Providentally, God opened the doors of the world by the decisions of the Roman leaders.

Do you really think that no governmental officials or magistrates ever found Christ, or were found of Him? If there were no converts to Christ, why the Book of Romans? It was written to the church in the city of Rome.

'Rufus in Romans 16:13 was a Roman Christian, as suggested by Drs. Packer, Tenney, and White in "The Bible Almanac." Also, Ampias meaning 'large' was a Roman Christian to whom the Apostle Paul sent his greetings. [Romans 16:8] Also, Apelles [16:10] Olympas (meaning unknown) was a Roman Christian along with some others in Romans chapter sixteen.

As to Ephesians 2:1-5 God does not regenerate sinners without His call and their human response to grace which the Bible calls faith in Jesus. [Ephesians 2:8-9] God has not designed all sinners as human automatons.

'For by grace are ye saved, via faith; and that no of yourselves it is the gift of God; not of works lest any person should boast.' Faith is the fallen persons' response to His benevolent and exalted grace. It cannot be a human 'work' because He tells us to believe in the Lord Jesus. [Acts 2:21 & Acts 16:31]

Brother Berrian

 

[dattgog]

Ray wrote: I thought you knew basic theology, but I guess I should not have taken anything for granted.
------------------------------------------------
Excellent statement ... I'm sure everyone was edified. And thanks for the ensuing dissertation on demonology. But you missed my point. But never fear, you helped me make it later.
-------------------------------------------------
Ray: The Pharisee, Nicodemus, [John 3:1] faced Jesus straight on ' . . . under cover of darkness' [3:2] and later reaffirms that he came at 'night' [19:39] not for salvation but to take his Savior down from the Cross. So here again you are wrong,
------------------------------------------------
Ray, where did I say that no Pharisee or Roman official who saw Jesus was born of God and came to believe? That WOULD have been "wrong."

You apparently didn't read carefully. Check the transcript and look for the following word ... "UNLESS."

I appreciate the history lesson, but if you'd read carefully you'd realize that I allowed for the conversion of those God makes alive. What I reject is this statement ... made by you Ray ...

"I think early one in the Bible, and I did not check this all out recently, at times God spoke face to face with Adam and Eve and men like Abraham and Moses. THAT WOULD OVERCOME THEIR TAINTED DEPRAVED SPIRITS WOULDN'T YOU SAY? It sure would be a landmark in my life."

My point, many spoke to Jesus, but not all came to have this landmark which overcame their depraved spirits ... i.e. the Rich Young Ruler.
-------------------------------------------------
Ray: Do you really think that no governmental officials or magistrates ever found Christ, or were found of Him? If there were no converts to Christ, why the Book of Romans? It was written to the church in the city of Rome.
-------------------------------------------------
I find it incredible that you can read what I never wrote.
-------------------------------------------------
Ray: As to Ephesians 2:1-5 God does not regenerate sinners without His call and their human response to grace which the Bible calls faith in Jesus.
-------------------------------------------------
Again, you are claiming that the faith of a spiritual corpse causes spiritual life. All I'm saying is what the Bible says, that God makes a spiritual corpse alive, which ALWAYS causes repentance and ALWAYS causes faith.
-------------------------------------------------
Ray: God has not designed all sinners as human automatons.
-------------------------------------------------
Of course not. Automatons can't be made alive to love their Creator and come to rest their eternity in Him. Hey Ray, would you say that there can be no real love for the Creator without free will?
-------------------------------------------------
Ray: Faith is the fallen persons' response
-------------------------------------------------
Now if you call it a response, then you are admitting that God had to make them alive first. You can't respond if you're dead. Maybe we're getting somewhere.
------------------------------------------------

 

[Ray Berrian]

"I think early on in the Bible, and I did not check this all out recently,
at times God spoke face to face with Adam and Eve and men like
Abraham and Moses. THAT WOULD OVERCOME THEIR TAINTED
DEPRAVED SPIRITS WOULDN'T YOU SAY? It sure would be a landmark in
my life."

My point, many spoke to Jesus, but not all came to have this landmark
which overcame their depraved spirits ... i.e. the Rich Young Ruler.

I too, thought about the Rich Young Ruler while writing the previous post. Great minds run together. Just kidding. This, of course, points to Resistible Grace which is an Arminian doctrinal point.

-------------------------------------------------

Again, you are claiming that the faith of a spiritual corpse causes
spiritual life. All I'm saying is what the Bible says, that God makes a
spiritual corpse alive, which ALWAYS causes repentance and ALWAYS
causes faith.

The only thing God does before conversion/faith is to convict the soul of sin. It would be manipulative if God regenerated a sinner before they had the opportunity to believe in Jesus. Christ does not violate the will of the created being, as in the Rich Young Ruler. You Calvinist's with your corpse analogy--- is very weak, in the light that God convicts and makes the sinner aware of his or her need of Christ. Even with the Rich Young Ruler, he went away sorrowful. [Luke 18:23 a,b] Also, Jesus had feelings of 'sorrow' because this man never would inherit eternal life with God. [vs. 23] In fact, Jesus was ' . . . very sorrowful' suggesting that it was His desire [I Timothy 2:4-Greek-wishes] that this man should have followed Him, and thus would have been eternally saved. Calvinists often portay that the Lord can be heartless in His decree to damn all the lost. This is not found in this Scripture or any other ones.
-------------------------------------------------
Ray: God has not designed all sinners as human automatons.
-------------------------------------------------

Of course not. Automatons can't be made alive to love their Creator
and come to rest their eternity in Him. Hey Ray, would you say that
there can be no real love for the Creator without free will?

Oh, you said that '. . . human authomatons can't be made alive to love their Creator . . . ' but that is exactly what you are saying, when you say that God regenerates sinners first and then they believe later. How much later? And I guess with your analogy He has to make the lost, non-elect alive physically speaking only then to damn them.

Faith is the fallen persons' response to the conviction on the life of the lost sinner.
-------------------------------------------------

Now if you call it a response, then you are admitting that God had to make them alive first. You can't respond if you're dead. Maybe we're getting somewhere.

A sinner can be convicted and sense his need of Christ because he is created after the likeness of God, [James 4:9] in spite of his depravity--the Lord can call the sinner to Himself. After all, that is why He died on the Cross. [John 3:16]

Your brother in faith,
Ray

 

[Ray Berrian]

dattgog,

Hey Ray, would you say that there can be no real love for the Creator without free will?

Yes! God would not manipulate a sinner to be regenerated and then claim that this saved sinner had allegiance to Himself. But, He does prod the sinner, by His Spirit, toward a belief in the only begotten Son and His work on the Cross accomplished for sinners.

What would be the point of a persons' adoration, if he or she did not have an eternal choice to make in his or her heart and life?

 

[Matt Black]

What about the creation/ Ps 139 point?

Yours in Christ

Matt