can we agree on this?

[psalms109:31]

wrestle with God

Hello Psalms.



If you have assurance that you will remain in Jesus then you have trust in yourself not Jesus unless you believe you are kept, if you do not believe you are kept Psalms you have assurance of yourself. Does Jesus really lose sheep?

2TI 2:12 if we endure, we will also reign with him. If we disown him, he will also disown us;
John 6:47 I tell you the truth, he who believes has everlasting life.

Can you see the contradiction in this? Can you explain your understanding of John 6:47 please, what's it saying?

At the same time if you look at 2 Tim 2:11 ...If we died with him, we will also live with him;
Seems to promise the same as John 6:47. Have you died with Him? Then you will live with Him. It's a promise I believe.

john.

If you want to wrestle with God then you go ahead and that, but God said you have to endure the end to be saved.

God called Israel a stiff kneck people, hmmm.

 

[skypair]

johnp,

Even if Job was innocent... Children are innocent you say but scripture says even if children are innocent they would still need God's mercy for salvation.

Absolutely! AND we know He gives them "mercy," too, rather than condemn them to hell like the Calvinists do!

I don't know what your problem is with understanding judicial innocence but it certainly doesn't help your witness.

PS 103:17 But from everlasting to everlasting the LORD's love is with those who fear him, and his righteousness with their children's children--

Sorry, bro, but that says CHILDREN'S CHILDREN. Says NOTHING about their own children. Are you trying to say that His righteousness skips a generation?? I'd love to see this play out in real life! "Elect children," indeed! :laugh:

skypair

 

[skypair]

Which is: the belief that all humans are born morally innocent.
You sir cannot prove that to be a fact from the Bible.

Have you read my citations. I thought it was pretty well proven. But further -- do you think that David was going to be with his dead infant son in hell, then?

And if you say they don't go to hell, where do they go and on what premise do you base that opinion??

What I did say was: If, do you understand that small word?

See -- that's just lack of any biblical insight on your part, brutus. Your (Calvin's) insight is an assumption from thin anecdotal evidence. And I hesitate to mention it but Calvinists believe there are "elect" and "non-elect" infants, the latter headed straight for hell. So now, do I call you a Calvinist or not?

skypair

 

[johnp.]

Hello Psalms.

If you want to wrestle with God then you go ahead and that, but God said you have to endure the end to be saved.

Yes I know that Psalms but what I was asking you for was your understanding of the seemingly contradictory verses when compared with each other. How do you see John 6:47 I tell you the truth, he who believes has everlasting life.
And 2TI 2:12 if we endure, we will also reign with him. If we disown him, he will also disown us;

God called Israel a stiff kneck people, hmmm.

That's right, the chosen people are a stiff-necked people. Please answer my points.
Jacob wrestled with God, there is nothing wrong in that. Jacob came out on top didn't he? Mind you, he wasn't the same after.

john.

 

[johnp.]

Hello skypair.

I said Even if Job was innocent... Children are innocent you say but scripture says even if children are innocent they would still need God's mercy for salvation.

Absolutely! AND we know He gives them "mercy," too, rather than condemn them to hell like the Calvinists do!

Absolutely what? He has mercy on all the Christian's Children and He doesn't tell us of the others. You cannot know one way or another. I thought free will demanded no one interfers with the will. Why should babies have salvation thrust down their throats? If you think that babies get a second chance then you fly in the face of scripture - Heb 9:27 Just as man is destined to die once, and after that to face judgment...
We do know He does not extend mercy to those who have not heard the word of God, that much we know. "Let the children come to me." Does not wash, children are to hear the word of God. Faith comes through the word and from nowhere else. If a child is saved in the womb then that child would have heard the word of God.

I don't know what your problem is with understanding judicial innocence but it certainly doesn't help your witness.

I have three children and I know what the law states. A child is not responsible until they are eight in the UK. The problem with this is that I am.
You say my witness is not helped by being non-commital when the bible is non-commital? I preach what I know not what I don't. I am not in the business of making God look good my business is telling it as it is, as I see it, He wants us to see Him warts and all. Love is like that.

I don't know what your problem is with understanding judicial innocence but it certainly doesn't help your witness.

If He wants to damn the little ones what has that to do with you? No judicial innocence is ever spoken of in scripture, no age of responsiblity anywhere you look. You have made that up or you have been listening to fairy stories cause it ain't in the bible. Babies are sinners from the moment of conception as all men are and as all men they face death once and then judgment. If He was interested in the opinions of men He would have told us what He intends doing with reprobate's children, but then again, He might be embarrased.

I don't know what your problem is with understanding judicial innocence but it certainly doesn't help your witness.

What problem?

Sorry, bro, but that says CHILDREN'S CHILDREN. Says NOTHING about their own children.

Look at you? You hate the idea that one group of kids are safe because another group might not be? What has it got to do with you? If God's glory is revealed because He sends men to Hell just because He can then why should I hold out any hope for the children of God's enemies? Shall I take their side against Him? What's it got to do with me? I have heard it said that He takes those kids out to save us trouble. I also know that the number of people saved are beyond our ability to count. When Jesus comes back we will find out.

Are you trying to say that His righteousness skips a generation??

I can't remember the verse I used and I'm not looking back but it doesn't sound as if I'd say a thing like that. What are you trying to ask?

I'd love to see this play out in real life! "Elect children," indeed!

What's your problem with that? Samuel was a child once as was John the Baptist.

Have you read my citations. I thought it was pretty well proven.

Where?

john.

 

[psalms109:31]

Wrestling with God

Hello Psalms.



Yes I know that Psalms but what I was asking you for was your understanding of the seemingly contradictory verses when compared with each other. How do you see John 6:47 I tell you the truth, he who believes has everlasting life.
And 2TI 2:12 if we endure, we will also reign with him. If we disown him, he will also disown us;



That's right, the chosen people are a stiff-necked people. Please answer my points.
Jacob wrestled with God, there is nothing wrong in that. Jacob came out on top didn't he? Mind you, he wasn't the same after.

john.

They do not contradict each other they both are true, those who believe have eternal life and it is also true that we must endure to the end with that.

Scripture does not contradict each other just men's understanding of them.

God will win the war.

 

[johnp.]

They do not contradict each other they both are true, those who believe have eternal life and it is also true that we must endure to the end with that.

So you believe that when a person becomes a Christian they receive everlasting life Psalms?

God will win the war.

God has won the war.

john.

 

[psalms109:31]

scripture

So you believe that when a person becomes a Christian they receive everlasting life Psalms?



God has won the war.

john.

1 John 2:19
They went out from us, but they did not really belong to us. For if they had belonged to us, they would have remained with us; but their going showed that none of them belonged to us.

 

[johnp.]

Hello Psalms.

1 John 2:19
They went out from us, but they did not really belong to us. For if they had belonged to us, they would have remained with us; but their going showed that none of them belonged to us.

Cool? But I did not ask you to resolve 2TI 2:12 but John 6:47. What is John 6:47 saying? Do we get everlasting life when we believe or not please? We can come back to 1 John 2:19 later.

john.

 

[psalms109:31]

circle

Hello Psalms.



Cool? But I did not ask you to resolve 2TI 2:12 but John 6:47. What is John 6:47 saying? Do we get everlasting life when we believe or not please? We can come back to 1 John 2:19 later.

john.

Those who believe and receive everlasting life must endure to the end to be saved according to the word of God.

You can't be blown by every wind and still think you will receive anything from God.

 

[psalms109:31]

In other words

The belief God is speaking about to receive eternal life is an enduring to the end belief.

 

[johnp.]

The belief God is speaking about to receive eternal life is an enduring to the end belief.

Ok Psalms.

john.

 

[Brutus]

can we agree

Skypair: I find it absolutely amazing that you are so consumed with proving that you're right that even when confronted with numerous Scriptures you refuse to acknowledge the Word of God. So let me get this straight, you're calling Scripture "anecdotal evidence"? Also, exactly what Calvinists are you refering to ? And as far as what you should call me, call me anything you like. And I'll still call you Palagian in your belief because you agree with that philosophy of all humans being born morally innocent. I'm still trying to understand your statement concerning infants that die and go to heaven, you say that in the MK they must then accept or reject Christ as Lord ? In other words they can from the time of death be with Christ in heaven and then when Christ establishes His kingdom here on earth the time will come for them to decide whether to come to Christ or to rebel ? What Scripture do you claim as proof of this ?

Brutus

 

[Brutus]

can we agree

Can we agree that the cause or guilt of this unbelief as well as of all other sins is no wise in God, but in man himself; whereas faith in Jesus Christ and salvation through Him is the free gift of God, as it is written: "By grace have ye been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God," Eph.2:8. Likewise: "To you it hath been granted in the behalf of Christ, not only to believe on Him," Phil.1:29.

As there are two kinds of people, unbelievers and believers, so there are two causes for their two conditions. The cause of unbelief is in man, not in God. God doesn't give the gift of unbelief to sinners. Rather, sinners exercise their rebellious wills to resist God and reject His Son. By contrast, God does give the gift of faith. Since all sinners in themselves resist God, He must overcome that resistance and effectively give the gift of faith in His Son. Unbelievers have only themselves to blame for their unbelief. Believers have only God to thank for the wonderful gift of faith.

Brutus :godisgood:

 

[skypair]

Hello skypair.

I said Even if Job was innocent... Children are innocent you say but scripture says even if children are innocent they would still need God's mercy for salvation.

Where? I missed that. I thought you were talking about your Job citations that have to do with even if an ADULT were innocent and the true fact that innocence still isn't the "righeousness of God."

Absolutely what? He has mercy on all the Christian's Children and He doesn't tell us of the others.

Absolutely ALL infants! The Bible excerpts about infants "sanctified" by one parent's faith simply means that they are more apt to hear the gospel and become saved of their own free will.

You cannot know one way or another.

I always love to hear this. I translate it, "I know everything. I don't know that. Therefore, you can't know that. Nobody in the body of Christ knows everything - but some know more than others, right Mr. Humility?

I thought free will demanded no one interfers with the will. Why should babies have salvation thrust down their throats?

You're right -- salvation isn't "thrust down anyone's throats." Not the elect and not babies. Babies are resurrected into Christ's very kingdom on earth and given their "free will" choice.

If you think that babies get a second chance then you fly in the face of scripture - Heb 9:27 Just as man is destined to die once, and after that to face judgment...

But suppose at the judgment, the verdict of "innocent" is given. Now you get another life to make the choice. This is beyond Heb 9:27's application, right?

We do know He does not extend mercy to those who have not heard the word of God, that much we know. "Let the children come to me." Does not wash, children are to hear the word of God. Faith comes through the word and from nowhere else. If a child is saved in the womb then that child would have heard the word of God.

It appears you are FOR the pedobaptism idea that if the Word and infant are present, they can "hear" and be saved though it is quite obvious that they can't comprehend one word of what is said, right? See, that's the same problem that jumps up again in "election." Hearing without comprehending saves.

I have three children and I know what the law states. A child is not responsible until they are eight in the UK. The problem with this is that I am.

Bless you, johnp. Children are a gift from heaven, aren't they?

You say my witness is not helped by being non-commital when the bible is non-commital?

Oh, I think the Bible is VERY commital. David was surely going to see his baby in Abraham's bosom. Ezek 18:20 says babies cannot "inherit" the sins of their predeceesors. Isa 49:20 begins to show children whom the Jews never had being brought by the Gentiles to them in the MK. Other scripture shows that we begin on account of our flesh to sin from our youth. BUT if you let the church be your "savior" through baptism, obviously they're not going to intepret these passages the way that (sad to say) gives them no control over families.

I preach what I know not what I don't. I am not in the business of making God look good my business is telling it as it is, as I see it, He wants us to see Him warts and all. Love is like that.

Actually, God doesn't have any warts. He's ALL good! :godisgood: It's not even Him who damns us but we ourselves for our own decisions!

If He wants to damn the little ones what has that to do with you?

Well, it is a michararterization of God. What is a mischararcterization of God to you? (I hope you would answer "false teaching" -- or Nicolaitanism.)?

No judicial innocence is ever spoken of in scripture, no age of responsiblity anywhere you look.

Wrong. Rom 7:9. Believe scripture or believe your false teachers but it IS there.

If He was interested in the opinions of men He would have told us what He intends doing with reprobate's children, but then again, He might be embarrased.

He WOULD be enbarrassed. And now you "piggyback" yet another damnable heresy, "reprobate children," onto the issue!

skypair

 

[skypair]

Skypair: I find it absolutely amazing that you are so consumed with proving that you're right that even when confronted with numerous Scriptures you refuse to acknowledge the Word of God.

Your intentions are good, brutus. Your theology is bad AND IT MATTERS is why I do. so.

[qute]So let me get this straight, you're calling Scripture "anecdotal evidence"?[/quote] NO. Don't try to slander all that I say based on my interpretation of one passage, pls.

I'm still trying to understand your statement concerning infants that die and go to heaven, you say that in the MK they must then accept or reject Christ as Lord? In other words they can from the time of death be with Christ in heaven and then when Christ establishes His kingdom here on earth the time will come for them to decide whether to come to Christ or to rebel? What Scripture do you claim as proof of this?

That's pretty much it. See, their souls and spirits have NO knowledge of being in heaven. They don't advance in wisdom and knowledge there. They remain in the state they died in spiritually. Isa 65:20 seems to capture the MK scene I'm talking about. A child will grow up to be 100 years old ere he die (if he doesn't receive Christ). Those that receive Christ will live the 1000 years out.

skypair

 

[skypair]

Can we agree that the cause or guilt of this unbelief as well as of all other sins is no wise in God, but in man himself;

Absolutely! It is Calvinism, not free will, that takes the responsibility away from man and deposits it in the "decrees of God!"

whereas faith in Jesus Christ and salvation through Him is the free gift of God, as it is written: "By grace have ye been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God," Eph.2:8. Likewise: "To you it hath been granted in the behalf of Christ, not only to believe on Him," Phil.1:29.

We do already agree on that, too! God gives faith to those who freely choose to believe! The thing I don't want to say which is abominable, is that "election" is unconditional. It is conditioned upon BELIEF.

As there are two kinds of people, unbelievers and believers, so there are two causes for their two conditions. The cause of unbelief is in man, not in God. God doesn't give the gift of unbelief to sinners. Rather, sinners exercise their rebellious wills to resist God and reject His Son. By contrast, God does give the gift of faith.

Precisely. Only thing you left out is WHY God gives the gift of faith.

Since all sinners in themselves resist God, He must overcome that resistance and effectively give the gift of faith in His Son. Unbelievers have only themselves to blame for their unbelief. Believers have only God to thank for the wonderful gift of faith.

Yes! Thank you! That is what I see -- we hear; we believe; we are given faith. After all, if it were only a matter of "overcoming that resistence and effectively giving" faith -- God could easily do that for everyone sitting in any congregation anywhere the Word is preached!

skypair :godisgood:

 

[Brutus]

can we agree

Skypair: Oh my, I do think that you're stretching it quite a bit to get that from Isa.65:20. Also, I'm afraid that I have some bad news for you! What I quoted in my last post that you so willingly agree with, well, it, it's the fifth article of the Synod at Dort. WOW! You're at least part CALVINIST!!! Sorry, but someone had to be the bearer of bad news!

Brutus

 

[johnp.]

Hello skypair.

...that have to do with even if an ADULT were innocent...

That is what I said Job said. Even if I were innocent I would still need mercy. Regardless of righteousness if innocence means anything then it means not guilty but even if I was not guilty I would still need mercy.

Absolutely ALL infants! The Bible excerpts about infants "sanctified" by one parent's faith simply means that they are more apt to hear the gospel and become saved of their own free will.

No it's not. A fine example of God's treatment of His elect. He sets aside the spouse as holy because the spouse is touching an holy thing.

You cannot know one way or another.

I always love to hear this. I translate it, "I know everything. I don't know that. Therefore, you can't know that.

You cannot know one way or another because God has not told us what happens to reprobates children.

Nobody in the body of Christ knows everything - but some know more than others, right Mr. Humility?

That's not right. Some know a lot and some little, it depends on the gift given.

You're right -- salvation isn't "thrust down anyone's throats." Not the elect and not babies. Babies are resurrected into Christ's very kingdom on earth and given their "free will" choice.

I told you. Heb 9:27 Just as man is destined to die once, and after that to face judgment...

But suppose at the judgment, the verdict of "innocent" is given.

Mercy is still required. Innocence and guilt are not relevant in a discussion on condemnation as before the twins were born or had done anything good or bad Esau was assigned Hell.

Now you get another life to make the choice. This is beyond Heb 9:27's application, right?

What you mean, an improvement on Heb 9:27? I told you. Heb 9:27 Just as man is destined to die once, and after that to face judgment...
Condemnation is already the sentence. Judgement Day is there to weigh your sins not to see if you are guilty or not as guilt was established before you did wrong or right.

It appears you are FOR the pedobaptism idea that if the Word and infant are present, they can "hear" and be saved though it is quite obvious that they can't comprehend one word of what is said, right?

Understanding can come later but recognition of one's Saviour is comprehended, Luke 1:44 As soon as the sound of your greeting reached my ears, the baby in my womb leaped for joy.

See, that's the same problem that jumps up again in "election." Hearing without comprehending saves.

Knowledge is not a precondition nor is a belief in God. All one needs is, God, if there's a God save my soul if I have one. That's a good prayer.

Oh, I think the Bible is VERY commital.

I did not say the bible was non-committal but where it is I am.

David was surely going to see his baby in Abraham's bosom. Ezek 18:20 says babies cannot "inherit" the sins of their predeceesors.

Doesn't need to. They are conceived condemned.

Isa 49:20 begins to show children whom the Jews never had being brought by the Gentiles to them in the MK.

I've no idea what you say here. Whose children the Jews never had?

BUT if you let the church be your "savior" through baptism, obviously they're not going to intepret these passages the way that (sad to say) gives them no control over families.

I've no idea.

Actually, God doesn't have any warts. He's ALL good!

You don't mean that do you? I mean He causes wars and starves people to death and drowns the survivors and causes grief to fall upon His chosen just to boast how well we do in adverse situations shall I go on. Are you saying these attributes are good? Good. That's all I meant by 'warts and all'.

It's not even Him who damns us but we ourselves for our own decisions!

Why don't you know your stuff? Rom 8:34 Who is he that condemns? Christ Jesus, who died--more than that, who was raised to life--is at the right hand of God and is also interceding for us.

"I pray for them." He intercedes for us but the world that some say He loves so much, "I am not praying for the world, but for those you have given me, for they are yours." John 17:9.

If He wants to damn the little ones what has that to do with you?

Well, it is a michararterization of God.

What's that got to do with you?

What is a mischararcterization of God to you? (I hope you would answer "false teaching" -- or Nicolaitanism.)?

I don't care what people say or think about God that's His business. I have been told to say what I know not to defend Almighty God's reputation.

No judicial innocence is ever spoken of in scripture, no age of responsiblity anywhere you look.

Wrong. Rom 7:9. Believe scripture or believe your false teachers but it IS there.

Once I was alive apart from law; but when the commandment came, sin sprang to life and I died.

My teachers have become my peers not my betters. The worse of sinners was innocent was he? Cool.

He WOULD be enbarrassed.

Why?

And now you "piggyback" yet another damnable heresy, "reprobate children," onto the issue!

I'm the arch-heretic man. So what? Gives you a platform doesn't it?

WOW! You're at least part CALVINIST!!! Sorry, but someone had to be the bearer of bad news!

No one's perfect Brutus.

john.

 

[J.D.]

Skypair: Oh my, I do think that you're stretching it quite a bit to get that from Isa.65:20. Also, I'm afraid that I have some bad news for you! What I quoted in my last post that you so willingly agree with, well, it, it's the fifth article of the Synod at Dort. WOW! You're at least part CALVINIST!!! Sorry, but someone had to be the bearer of bad news!

Brutus

All true believers are Calvinists. Some of them just don't know it yet.