Can Someone Persuade Me? I Don't Know...

I suggest you ignore them both, and believe what the scriptures, illuminated by the Holy Spirit, reveal to you! Don't allow yourself to be "indoctrinated" to either persuasion. You will be much happier that way.

 

This is your problem Dallas. You equate faith with the works of the law. The scipture NEVER does that.

I can find plenty of scripture that talks about man's natual inability to live up to God's law.

With the exception of what the bible says about hardening, I can find no scripture that talks about man's inability to have faith.

You use passages that show man is unable to fulfill the law as proof that man is unable to have faith. What is that about? We cannot fulfill the law, but we CAN believe in the one who has fulfilled it for us and it is through those means we are saved.

30 What shall we say then? That Gentiles, who did not pursue righteousness, have attained to righteousness, even the righteousness of faith; 31 but Israel, pursuing the law of righteousness, has not attained to the law of righteousness. 32 Why? Because they did not seek it by faith, but as it were, by the works of the law.

Dallas, read this 3 or 4 times and then tell me do you really think Paul equated our pursuit of God by the Law and our pursuit of God by faith?

Let me say it one more time:
We cannot fulfill the law, but we CAN believe in the one who has fulfilled it for us and it is through those means we are saved.

 

If we cannot do this, then we cannot do that!

As a male I cannot have babies, therefore I cannot drive a car. Huh? That simply does not make sense in light of the how God made man to be.

Because we cannot perform 100% of the law does not make us totally depraved either. We cannot perform 100% of the law because we are sinners, people who sin. However, we can have faith. We can have faith in ourselves, in our neighbors, in our children, etc. but none of those faiths, can save us. Only faith in Jesus Christ, God, can save us, and we certainly can have faith in God.

Even the most vile of sinner can come to have faith in God! It happens quite often, especially among those whom the Gospel is taken to when they are in desparation. Many who were totally lost, completely defeated, in the grips of dispair have found new hope, new restoratation, and are working, with the help of the Holy Spirit to regain some of what had been lost. I see it often when when working with the Rescue mission. Men and women who had lost everything and in desparate situations have come to believe in Jesus and are being miraculously restored to productive citizens. I personally know of 23 former derilicts who are now running their own businesses making a very good living, who give amply of their resources and time to help others who are where they were when they found faith in God. When we are the most vulnerable, God still waits for us to decide to have faith in him, so that through our faith, in his grace, he can help us to recover from whatever self-affliction we find ourselves in. I witness that often. If you are not doing Rescue Mission work, perhaps you should be, you will gain insight into how God works that way better than by reading the theory.

 

Bro. Bill,

How about just a few:
Gal 5:22-23. "And the fruit of the Spirit is: Love, joy, peace, long-suffering, kindness, goodness, faith, meekness, temperance: against such there is no law"

It is clear from this verse that faith is a gift of the Spirit given among with all the other gifts to believers only. Are we to say that these are given to unbelievers as well?

2 Tim 2:24-26. "The Lord's bond-servant must not be quarrelsome, but be kind to all, able to teach, patient when wronged, with gentleness correcting those who are in opposition, if perhaps God may grant them repentance leading to the knowledge of the truth, and they may come to their senses and escape from the snare of the devil, having been held captive by him to do his will." Also see Acts 5:31!

According to this verse, it is God who grants repentance. If repentance is in the grasp of everyone why should God still grant repentance if we already possess that ability?

Acts 13:48. "When the Gentiles heard this, they began rejoicing and glorifying the word of the Lord; and as many as had been appointed to eternal life believed."

Question: What is the purpose of "as many as had been appointed to eternal life"?

Acts 16:14. "A woman named Lydia, from the city of Thyatira, a seller of purple fabrics, a worshiper of God, was listening; and the Lord opened her heart to respond to the things spoken by Paul."

Why did God 'open her heart' when this action can be done by her without any outside help ...according to arminians?

But let me finish with a question; I am still unclear on this; according to the arminian view :
1. What is the definition of 'being born again'?
2. What is repentance?
3. What is faith?

Thank you

Serving Him together

Felix

 

Nope, won't work. Nothing about man's inability to have faith. Of course once the Spirit indwells us our faith increases and thus we become "faithful" to God as a result, but in no way can you conclude that man doesn't have the ability to believe.

Plus, who is the one who brought us the gospel? The Spirit. Thus you could truly say faith, which comes from hearing the words of the gospel, is a fruit of the Spirit. Sorry, keep trying.

Wrong. I never said everone has the ability to repent. I said they had the ability to believe once they heard the gospel's call. But, they don't have the ability to do either until they hear the gospel. You must remember that the gospel was just being presented to the Gentiles for the first time EVER.

At the time this passage was written, it was not known that repentance was granted to everyone. In fact, most people at this time believed that repentance was only granted to the Jews. Repentance is only granted to those the message of redemption is offered. We must remember that the big issue of this day is not Calvinism versus Arminianism but God's granting repentance to the Gentiles, something unheard of a this time and highly contraversal.

Who is it talking about? The Gentiles. A group of people who most believed were not appointed to eternal life. You try to apply Lukes words individually, but he is speaking nationally.

You read this, "as many individual Gentiles as had been appointed to eternal life believed."

It should be understood, "as many groups of people as had been appointed to eternal life believed." Thus emphasizing the fact that the gospel was being presented to the entire world (which is the theme of Acts) and not that God selected a few out of the Gentiles to believe.

You assume the means that God opened her heart was unique and separate from the means by which he has established in the doctrinal texts of scripture. The gospel message, which is from the Lord, is the means by which faith comes according to Romans 10. Therefore, why do you assume that Lydia's heart wasn't opened by the means of hearing the gospel? Isn't the gospel from the Lord? Isn't that the means he has established for opening hearts?

Plus, it already says she was a worshipper of God. Is this verse even about her salvation? Or could it be about her accepting Paul as being from God too. Just as we must decern wether certain preachers are from God or not so too Lydia had to determine that about Paul. It sound's like your reading to much doctrine into an historical account.

Again, none of these verses say anything about man's inability to believe the gospel message.

 

Question: How come an unregenerate, worldly minded man can have faith, but after regeneration, a born again, washed, cleansed believer needs his 'faith increased'?

I never concluded that 'man doesn't have the ability to believe'. That is not the issue and you should know better. A lot of people can believe in a lot of things! One would not sit in a chair if he would not 'believe' that the chair would hold him up. However, the crucial issue - and you seem to keep missing this point - most calvinists believe that the Scripture teaches that: "THERE IS NONE WHO UNDERSTANDS, THERE IS NONE WHO SEEKS FOR GOD", in other words when it comes to understanding God's ways, dealings with man, or when it comes to seeking Him with our hearts --> there is NOONE out there who is capable, 'able' to do this and this ALONE on his own.

Not only there is no Scriptural support for your statement (that people believed that repentance was only granted to the Jews: the people of Ninive seemed to miss this little detail), but here is where your reasoning leads: you say that 'repantance was only granted to the Jews'. If this was known
to everyone, read this verse: "He is the one whom God exalted to His right hand as a Prince and a Savior, to grant repentance to Israel. Acts 5:31, and forgiveness of sins." What happened to the Gentiles in this verse? If repentance was already granted to Israel in the OT why was it granted to them again after the Cross?

I just couldn't believe my eyes as I read this. It was for the first time when I see you insert a qualifier 'groups of people' for the word 'many'. This is a biggy now. How come it is ok for you to understand 'many' to mean 'groups of people' but when calvinists do the same thing for example in "God wants ALL people to be saved" to mean "God wants all groups of people to be saved", then this is not ok. You really need to work on this.

If the 'doctrinal texts of scripture' are so clear in indicating that God opens hearts by the means of the gospel alone (and not by His Holy Spirit), why did God record it 'uniqely' and 'separately' in this instance. You say we assume this 'opening' was unique. And we do, because scripture recorded it. At the same time you 'assume' exactly the opposite. What you wrote was an assumption wasn't it?

The Gospel is the means by which we all can hear God's salvation plan for mankind. Opening hearts exclusively belongs to the ministry of the Holy Spirit (or to the individual, as you might say) Where do you find in Scripture that the Gospel is 'the means he has established for opening hearts'????

Your response was not very convincing. You need to work on them a little more.

God bless

Felix

 

I never said he "needed" it. This verse not about needing something in order to be saved, its about the effect of the Spirit indwelling following salvation.

Read back through this thread and notice what we are debating. My argument is that scripture never teaches man is unable to believe, you then list verses in which you try to contradict that and I show that those verses don't prove anything. So then you say "unbelief" is not the issue and that man can't seek God or understand the things of God on their own.

1. Proof that man doesn't seek God on his own initiative is not proof that man cannot respond when God seeks him through the presentation of the gospel.

2. The Bible never says that man cannot understand the gospel message.

In fact, Romans 1 specfically says that the lost can clearly see and understand the things of God.

Now, before the gospel was presented they didn't understand because it hadn't all been explained by Christ (the Word) up to that point, I'll grant you that. But Romans 3:10-11 say nothing about man's inability to have faith as Paul speaks of in verse 21 and following.

Don't you remember the whole story about Peter in Acts who has a dream about the big sheet. Do you remember the whole point of that dream? Peter came to realize that the Gentiles were chosen by God too.

Remember the Jersusalem counsel in Acts 15? What were they discussing? Allowing Gentiles entrance into the covenant.

This is pretty basic stuff.

I've never made that argument against Calvinists use of the word "All". In fact, I have said that is a possible interpretation, just not likely given the context and the whole counsel of the word. I'm glad you brought this up because it proves that my interpretation of 'many' is just as likely as Calvinists interpretation of "all," except I have context to support my views. You are going to have to do some more work on this.

Wait one second. You think the gospel is not work of the Holy Spirit? You must because you seperate the two. Who brought us the gospel? The Holy Spirit. The gospel is the power of God unto salvation because they are the words of the Holy Spirit. The power is in the word, not is some secret, independant, irresistable calling of the Holy Spirit, that the bible never speaks of.

Again, you separate the work of the Holy Spirit and the work of the gospel. "Faith comes through hearing, and hearing through the word of God."

[/q

 

I never said he "needed" it. This verse not about needing something in order to be saved, its about the effect of the Spirit indwelling following salvation.

Read back through this thread and notice what we are debating. My argument is that scripture never teaches man is unable to believe, you then list verses in which you try to contradict that and I show that those verses don't prove anything. So then you say "unbelief" is not the issue and that man can't seek God or understand the things of God on their own.

1. Proof that man doesn't seek God on his own initiative is not proof that man cannot respond when God seeks him through the presentation of the gospel.

2. The Bible never says that man cannot understand the gospel message.

In fact, Romans 1 specfically says that the lost can clearly see and understand the things of God.

Now, before the gospel was presented they didn't understand because it hadn't all been explained by Christ (the Word) up to that point, I'll grant you that. But Romans 3:10-11 say nothing about man's inability to have faith as Paul speaks of in verse 21 and following.

Don't you remember the whole story about Peter in Acts who has a dream about the big sheet. Do you remember the whole point of that dream? Peter came to realize that the Gentiles were chosen by God too.

Remember the Jersusalem counsel in Acts 15? What were they discussing? Allowing Gentiles entrance into the covenant.

This is pretty basic stuff.

I've never made that argument against Calvinists use of the word "All". In fact, I have said that is a possible interpretation, just not likely given the context and the whole counsel of the word. I'm glad you brought this up because it proves that my interpretation of 'many' is just as likely as Calvinists interpretation of "all," except I have context to support my views. You are going to have to do some more work on this.

Wait one second. You think the gospel is not work of the Holy Spirit? You must because you seperate the two. Who brought us the gospel? The Holy Spirit. The gospel is the power of God unto salvation because they are the words of the Holy Spirit. The power is in the word, not is some secret, independant, irresistable calling of the Holy Spirit, that the bible never speaks of.

Again, you separate the work of the Holy Spirit and the work of the gospel. "Faith comes through hearing, and hearing through the word of God."

You're the one who needs to do some more work. You haven't established any evidence that proves man is not able to respond to the powerful Holy Spirit calling through the gospel message.

 

I never said he "needed" it. This verse not about needing something in order to be saved, its about the effect of the Spirit indwelling following salvation.

Read back through this thread and notice what we are debating. My argument is that scripture never teaches man is unable to believe, you then list verses in which you try to contradict that and I show that those verses don't prove anything. So then you say "unbelief" is not the issue and that man can't seek God or understand the things of God on their own.

1. Proof that man doesn't seek God on his own initiative is not proof that man cannot respond when God seeks him through the presentation of the gospel.

2. The Bible never says that man cannot understand the gospel message.

In fact, Romans 1 specfically says that the lost can clearly see and understand the things of God.

Now, before the gospel was presented they didn't understand because it hadn't all been explained by Christ (the Word) up to that point, I'll grant you that. But Romans 3:10-11 say nothing about man's inability to have faith as Paul speaks of in verse 21 and following.

Don't you remember the whole story about Peter in Acts who has a dream about the big sheet. Do you remember the whole point of that dream? Peter came to realize that the Gentiles were chosen by God too.

Remember the Jersusalem counsel in Acts 15? What were they discussing? Allowing Gentiles entrance into the covenant.

This is pretty basic stuff.

I've never made that argument against Calvinists use of the word "All". In fact, I have said that is a possible interpretation, just not likely given the context and the whole counsel of the word. I'm glad you brought this up because it proves that my interpretation of 'many' is just as likely as Calvinists interpretation of "all," except I have context to support my views. You are going to have to do some more work on this.

Wait one second. You think the gospel is not work of the Holy Spirit? You must because you seperate the two. Who brought us the gospel? The Holy Spirit. The gospel is the power of God unto salvation because they are the words of the Holy Spirit. The power is in the word, not is some secret, independant, irresistable calling of the Holy Spirit, that the bible never speaks of.

Again, you separate the work of the Holy Spirit and the work of the gospel. "Faith comes through hearing, and hearing through the word of God."

[/q

 

Same thing: why would one of the Spirit's 'effect' be faith after salvation when one already has faith before salvation?

I believe we have a misunderstanding here. Calvinists do not claim that men in general can not believe at all in anything. The issue is that arminians state that man is free on his own without any outside help to believe in anything and to choose anything at any time. Calvinists claim the same thing EXCEPT ONE THING AND ONE THING ONLY: when it comes to beliving in Christ for salvation, man does not possess that faith on his own. That is the difference and that is what I tried to show from scripture.

I can almost agree with this.

With this, however, I can not agree. Consider for example 1 Cor 2:14 "But a natural man does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually appraised."

Is the gospel message part of 'the things of the Spirit of God'? If it is, a natural man, according to this verse does not accept it? Why? For they (these things of the Spirit, including the Gospel) is foolishness to him; and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually appraised.

Of course the Gospel is INSPIRED by the Holy Spirit but THE GOSPEL is NOT EQUAL to THE HOLY SPIRIT. Of course I separate the two!! You jump to conclusions that I never asserted. You are saying that because I separate the two (and I sure do), therefore I 'think the gospel is not a work of the Holy Spirit'!! I am sure you didn't mean that...

Regardless!! I have a feeling that this thread is running off its course and we need to hear again from CubeX, who started it. Unless we hear from him, I see no reason to continue on here, really. Not that I would not want to discuss these, but because we might have departed from the original intent of the one who started this thread.

God bless you all

In Christ

Felix

 

You didn't catch my point. The Spirit works by bring us the gospel, therefore belief in the message can truly be called a fruit of the Spirit's work. In other words, this verse doesn't prove anything for either side sense we both believe faith comes through hearing the word. The difference is that I believe the gospel is powerful enough as it is and you believe that it must be accompanied or at least preceded by an effectual calling (which the Bible never expounds upon btw).

Never said that they did.

We do obviously have a misunderstanding but I believe its your misunderstanding, not mine.

I don't believe man is free on his own without any outside help to believe in anything! How will they know unless someone tells them? The coming of the gospel is a work of God, without it no one could believe. You just don't believe that work of God was enough, you must add something that the scripture never speaks of--the effectual calling.

The verses that you showed say nothing of man's ability to have faith through the hearing of God's powerful gospel message.

Look at I Cor. one more time and you will see that Paul is speaking of understanding the "deep things of God" after one becomes a believer. Indeed, if he were speaking of understand the gospel for salvation then his Corithian audience would still be lost, look at chapter 3, he specifically says they could not accept it either. He is obviously not speaking of salvific matters in this particular verse.

I was just showing that the gospel is a work of the Spirit, therefore speaking of the fruit of the Gospel could be understood as truly a fruit of the Holy Spirit. Calvinists seem to miss that sometimes.

 

Scripture teaches that man is dead in trespasses and sins, there is nothing dead that has life in itself to which that it could even hope to produce life. This is Scripture plain and simple. This is what I believe. Man is dead in trespasses and sin; apart from the regeneration of the Spirit he can produce nothing but dead works, even his faith is dead when produced from himself.

I believe man is Totally Depraved; I believe election is unconditional, I believe the Atonment is limited to the elect, I believe Grace is irrisistable; I believe all believers will be eternally saved.


Further, I do not believe there is a mysterious age of accountability; This denies the truth of natural man being conceived in sin; this denies the original sin; this teaches that as people "realize" their accountability then they either "accept" or reject the Gospel. I do not believe anyone for whom Christ died will not believe.

Just some of what I believe.

God Bless
Bro. Dallas Eaton

 

My Bible reads: Gal 5:22-23 "But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faith, gentleness, self-control..."

All these fruits are wrought directly from the Spirit into believers' hearts only! It does not say this fruit is given directly, this other one is given through the hearing of the Gospel, etc. You are reading (assuming) something into the text that is not there.

Also, are you asserting (please answer)that this list of fruits are given to unbelievers as well? Or just some of them?

You are free to claim whatever you wish. It is very easy to assert certain things, it is harder to prove; hence, we were not shown any exegesis or such like on this particular issue. What kind of an argument (debate, if you wish) is this: 'the verses that you showed say nothing...'. You need to dig, sweat, study, work hard and to show your results by careful exegesis and not by just dismissing the whole argument with weak statements like this one.

I looked at 1 Cor again. In fact, the Bible never calls a believer a 'natural man'. Paul calls weak believers sometimes 'infants', 'fleshly', or 'men of flash', but never 'natural man'. But suppose a weak believer is called 'natural man' for a moment. Does this mean that a weak believer (those who do not understand the deep things of God) 'does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually appraised.'? What do you think?

If the Gospel alone is enough to bring all those fruits to believers what is the purpose of the indwelling Spirit?

God bless you

Felix

 

I have never said that!

Believe me, I have read the above paragraph several times but I was not able to grasp what you are trying to say. Would you restate these for us please? Who comes when, again?

It might be easier if you would answer us two (set of) questions:

1. According to your definition or understanding, what does it mean to be born again? Why do we need it and what does it accomplish?

2. What is the relationship between the Gospel, Faith, and the Holy Spirit?

I am sure, if you answer these questions, this will shed much more light on the issues at hand.
Thank you in advance for your time in reading and answering!

God bless

Felix

 

The way I see it is that God in His sovereignty gave man the ability to choose. Otherwise why would he give commands and the faith to carry them out. Did He not say in Joshua 24:15, "If it is disagreeable in your sight to serve the Lord, choose for yourselves today whom you will serve: whether the gods which your fathers served which were beyond the River, or the gods of the Amorites in whose land you are living; but as for me and my house, we will serve the Lord."

All the time we see in scripture command that tell us to get off the fence. It is a cop out to say that God will take care of our responsibilty for us.

I see in scripture the sovereignty of God and the choices man must make. Without God and His commands there would be no sin because there would be no opportunity for sin. There would be no disobedience if there were no commands and ooprtunity to choose.

I believe the issue lies not so much in the words that are printed but in the historical context of the message. Words can only have a coorect meaning as we understand the correct historical context.

Some would say that only God gives the choice and it is His. The question I would ask is; Does a Christian ever sin? The answer is of course we do. Does God make us sin one time and not another?

One question I would like to ask is: In Romans 10:8-17 is God dependent upon us? If not then why has He chosen as the only method to deliver the good news is by believers. How can there be salvation for a person if that person has not heard?

Another question I have is: When I look at the verse that says, "Many are called but few are chosen." I ask myself why are so many called and few chosen. Is God stupid that he does not only call those whom He chooses.

In Romans 8:29,30, " For those whom He foreknew, He also predestined to become conformed to the image of His Son, so that He would be the firstborn among many brethren; and these whom He predestined, He also called; and these whom He called, He also justified; and these whom He justified, He also glorified. "

Many are called but few are chosen. But when we look at Romans 8:29,30, do we not see that those whom He called those who are predestined to be conformed to the image of Christ? But, many are called and few are chosen. Could it be that He calls non-believers to be conformed to the image of Christ. Once they have accepted that call of God they are now chosen.

 

I wouldn't ask man to persuade me. I would get down on my knees and ask the Holy Spirit to "help thou my unbelief".