-
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!
Can We Talk?
- Thread starter thatbrian
- Start date
- Status
First, I am only addressing the opening post. I did not read the following pages of post.
Yes, I would love to discuss the subject of the validity or not of the TULIP. I believe once a person is saved, they are saved forever (OSAS) so it does not seem productive to discuss the distinction between OSAS and the "P".
And I also think it would be unproductive to try and discuss the other four all at the same time. Perhaps you could present your view of Total Spiritual Inability due to the Fall. My view is the Fall resulted in Limited Spiritual ability, the fallen are able to understand spiritual milk, but not spiritual meat, 1 Corinthians 2:14-3:3.
Last edited:
A general difficulty of "talking" is that which the Scriptures state is more often added too by those who deny the doctrines of Grace.
For example:
There is no mention or even evidence of "prevenient/preceding grace" yet Wesley invented it and it has become a standard "doctrine" taught. Why? When there is no Scripture support!
Another example is that of "limited atonement." There is no statement of Scripture support, but rather great support for limited redemption. Why is it taught? Because (imo) it is a hold over teaching by the RCC designed to hold people enslaved to that bunch. The reformers followed along (as evidenced by the treatment of Separatists, and others) out of the desire to control, or from the desire not to be excluded or their credentials being removed.
Therefore, ALL discussion must be filled with proofs from Scriptures, and agreement that the Scriptures mean exactly what is stated and not forced into some bias demanded by tradition - be it Wesleyan or Reform.
For example:
There is no mention or even evidence of "prevenient/preceding grace" yet Wesley invented it and it has become a standard "doctrine" taught. Why? When there is no Scripture support!
Another example is that of "limited atonement." There is no statement of Scripture support, but rather great support for limited redemption. Why is it taught? Because (imo) it is a hold over teaching by the RCC designed to hold people enslaved to that bunch. The reformers followed along (as evidenced by the treatment of Separatists, and others) out of the desire to control, or from the desire not to be excluded or their credentials being removed.
Therefore, ALL discussion must be filled with proofs from Scriptures, and agreement that the Scriptures mean exactly what is stated and not forced into some bias demanded by tradition - be it Wesleyan or Reform.
rsr,
Do you remebmer the poster that was seeking to understand Calvinism and Arminianism, and I
treated him shamelessly? (I believe God has forgiven me.)
You said something very enlighteneing to me.
Something about Jesus accepting those who had more or less knowledge than others.
I want to add, "in no wise will He cast out."
Will you please recall and post what you said to me. I think others could really benefit from your exact words.
Do you remebmer the poster that was seeking to understand Calvinism and Arminianism, and I
treated him shamelessly? (I believe God has forgiven me.)
You said something very enlighteneing to me.
Something about Jesus accepting those who had more or less knowledge than others.
I want to add, "in no wise will He cast out."
Will you please recall and post what you said to me. I think others could really benefit from your exact words.
Okay. I'll start.
Total Depravity - all of man is ruined by the fall and no part of him escaped the consequences of the fall.
It does not mean every person is as bad as he/she could possibly be, but rather that no part of a person escaped the consequences of the fall. All of man, body, soul, and spirit (the Totality of man - thus Total depravity) is ruined by the fall and cannot approach God on his/her own merits.
Total Depravity - all of man is ruined by the fall and no part of him escaped the consequences of the fall.
It does not mean every person is as bad as he/she could possibly be, but rather that no part of a person escaped the consequences of the fall. All of man, body, soul, and spirit (the Totality of man - thus Total depravity) is ruined by the fall and cannot approach God on his/her own merits.
Where our friends find a problem with this doctrine is at the point of the ability of man to respond to God's persuasion. They would agree that man is damaged by sin, as you have, but would argue that he is still capable of reaching out for the "life preserver" that God has thrown him in Christ.
How would you respond to that? Your statement even suggests that men are not completely ruined, but only damaged as a result of the sine of Adam.
You said, "cannot approach God on his/her own merits." I agree, but so would most Arminians.
Of course lost people can respond to the Gospel. They won't. They are at enmity with God. They think He is foolish. They refuse to accept him. They can't understand Him. So they reject Him.
Until God gives them a new heart of faith to enable them to believe, they refuse.
Fallen is fallen. There are no degrees of fallen-ness.
Romans 5:12
I like Young's Literal:
Romans 5:12 because of this, even as through one man the sin did enter into the world, and through the sin the death; and thus to all men the death did pass through, for that all did sin;
My view : aorist verbs - IOW We were all there in Adam when he sinned we sinned.
We came into the world dead, sinners.
John 5:24 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.
The issue is pinpointing the passing (in this life) from death to life.
We can't think in God's manner who stepped out of eternity into the time continuum.
HankD
I like Young's Literal:
Romans 5:12 because of this, even as through one man the sin did enter into the world, and through the sin the death; and thus to all men the death did pass through, for that all did sin;
My view : aorist verbs - IOW We were all there in Adam when he sinned we sinned.
We came into the world dead, sinners.
John 5:24 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.
The issue is pinpointing the passing (in this life) from death to life.
We can't think in God's manner who stepped out of eternity into the time continuum.
HankD
If all of man is ruined by the fall, there would be no man left and nothing to save, hence it is ruined and destroyed.
Its not at all like if a person is equated to MURDER. God is not going to SAVE murder.
All people are a value to God so much so that my faith requires me to believe whom I which would call the least important, the least of my brethren to equate that to Jesus Christ.
"It does not mean every person is as bad as he/she could possibly be"
I would say any Good that is not in the service of God or that can't be recognized by God as Good is simply EVIL.
Lets not fall into this hole of where there is people out there in the world who do "GOOD" but its not actual AGAPE.
Isaiah 5
20Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil;
Who substitute darkness for light and light for darkness;
Who substitute bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter!
If we do anything that is not in service to God then indeed they really are as bad as he/she could possibly be.
Fallen is fallen. There are no degrees of fallen-ness.
I was referring to the results of the fall. The degree of damage.
Your initial description covers the width, but not the depth.
John 6:44 suggests that there is no ability in men to do that. "No man can come to Me. . ." I agree that men will not come. Their disability is in their will. They can not because they will not, is the way I think best describes the situation. It sounds like you might agree with that statement. If not, how would you restate it?
Here are some texts I see as important in regard to man's ability to respond to the gospel:
- 1 Corinthians 2:14 - The natural person does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him, and he is not able to understand them because they are spiritually discerned.
- 2 Corinthians 4:3-4 - our gospel is veiled… to those who are perishing. In their case the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelievers, to keep them from seeing the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God.
- 1 Corinthians 1:18,21-24 - For the word of the cross is folly to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. For since, in the wisdom of God, the world did not know God through wisdom, it pleased God through the folly of what we preach to save those who believe. For Jews demand signs and Greeks seek wisdom, but we preach Christ crucified, a stumbling block to Jews and folly to Gentiles
- Matthew 11:27 - “no one knows the Son except the Father, and no one knows the Father except the Son and anyone to whom the Son chooses to reveal him.”
Last edited:
I agree.
This is a difficult view to grasp, initially, for some. God chose a perfect representative for mankind, and Adam rebelled. We would have done so too, only sooner than he did. This idea of a representative should be understood by Christians as Christ also acts as our representative, but many would think God unjust for mankind suffering Adam's consequences. . .
We were with him, and in him, we sinned and died. This is where I was trying (a couple of posts back) to get TCassidy to go, to describe our fallen spiritual state as dead, not wounded.
Brian, I think maybe you misunderstood Tom.
anyway - now we can be one with Christ instead of Adam - Christ lives, I live, he is sinless, God sees me as sinless.
Romans 5
18 Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life.
19 For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.
20 Moreover the law entered, that the offence might abound. But where sin abounded, grace did much more abound:
21 That as sin hath reigned unto death, even so might grace reign through righteousness unto eternal life by Jesus Christ our Lord.
HankD
There is no support in scripture for Total Spiritual Inability. The "T" doctrine asserts fallen people, unless enabled by "irresistible grace" are unable to seek God or trust in Christ.
Here is a snippet from the Reformed Doctrine of Predestination, Chapter 10, Total inability.
However, Matthew 23:13 teaches fallen people were seeking God effectively, for they were in the process of entering the kingdom of heaven, when they were prevented by false teachers and false doctrine. Therefore our fallen inability is not total, but our ability is limited by our fallen nature.
Now many verses are cited to support this doctrine, such as Romans 3:11 which states "There is none that seeks God." What Calvinism does is add "at any time" making the statement total, but that addition is not in scripture, not contextual. The actual idea of the passage is no one seeks God when sinning, therefore we are all under sin because no one seeks God all the time.
Another tactic is to redefine what it means to be dead in sin, claiming that means a spiritual dead person cannot seek God, but again that is not supported by scripture. The people of Matthew 23:13 were spiritually dead, unregenerate, yet were entering heaven.
Last point, 1 Corinthians 2:14 says a "natural man" cannot understand "the things of the Spirit." Again Calvinism rewrites this to say cannot understand "all the things of the Spirit." But that again is not what it says and contrary to that misinterpretation the context (2:14-3:3) indicates "men of flesh" can understand spiritual milk.
Thus, there is no support in scripture for the doctrine of Total Spiritual Inability, but there is support for Limited Spiritual Ability.
John 3:3 Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.
see - Grk. - eido I don't like quoting Strong's but in this case I will.
Strong 1492 eido
Meaning: 1) to see 1a) to perceive with the eyes 1b) to perceive by any of the senses 1c) to perceive, notice, discern, discover 1d) to see 1d1) i.e. to turn the eyes, the mind, the attention to anything 1d2) to pay attention, observe 1d3) to see about something 1d31) i.e. to ascertain what must be done about it 1d4) to inspect, examine 1d5) to look at, behold 1e) to experience any state or condition 1f) to see i.e. have an interview with, to visit 2) to know 2a) to know of anything 2b) to know, i.e. get knowledge of, understand, perceive 2b1) of any fact 2b2) the force and meaning of something which has definite meaning 2b3) to know how, to be skilled in 2c) to have regard for one, cherish, pay attention to (1Th. 5:12)
the word "see" in koine has the same idiomatic range as in English.
e.g. To say to someone "I see" not only says "I see the book" but "I see what you are saying" or "I understand what you are saying".
So in terms of perception of any kind - we cannot understand and/or find the kingdom of God in an unregenerate state.
BUT, I can entertain Van's idea because of the role of the Holy Spirit who convicts/reproves ALL individuals coming into this world - of sin.
ASV John 1:9 There was the true light, even the light which lighteth every man, coming into the world.
John 16
8 And when he is come, he will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment:
9 Of sin, because they believe not on me;
Reproval/conviction of sin is where it seems to begin and that pre-regeneration.
HankD
see - Grk. - eido I don't like quoting Strong's but in this case I will.
Strong 1492 eido
Meaning: 1) to see 1a) to perceive with the eyes 1b) to perceive by any of the senses 1c) to perceive, notice, discern, discover 1d) to see 1d1) i.e. to turn the eyes, the mind, the attention to anything 1d2) to pay attention, observe 1d3) to see about something 1d31) i.e. to ascertain what must be done about it 1d4) to inspect, examine 1d5) to look at, behold 1e) to experience any state or condition 1f) to see i.e. have an interview with, to visit 2) to know 2a) to know of anything 2b) to know, i.e. get knowledge of, understand, perceive 2b1) of any fact 2b2) the force and meaning of something which has definite meaning 2b3) to know how, to be skilled in 2c) to have regard for one, cherish, pay attention to (1Th. 5:12)
the word "see" in koine has the same idiomatic range as in English.
e.g. To say to someone "I see" not only says "I see the book" but "I see what you are saying" or "I understand what you are saying".
So in terms of perception of any kind - we cannot understand and/or find the kingdom of God in an unregenerate state.
BUT, I can entertain Van's idea because of the role of the Holy Spirit who convicts/reproves ALL individuals coming into this world - of sin.
ASV John 1:9 There was the true light, even the light which lighteth every man, coming into the world.
John 16
8 And when he is come, he will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment:
9 Of sin, because they believe not on me;
Reproval/conviction of sin is where it seems to begin and that pre-regeneration.
HankD
Reformed/Calvinists not the same thing.....
BOTh would agree with the doctrines of Grace though!
Everyone knows that already. The real question is, what happens after regeneration? namely does the person who is "Saved" still sin, and sin sometimes knowingly? I say YES
Only sinless perfection second act of grave would disagree!
And those who mix up good works and grace to form a different Gospel.
- Status