Christ just a pill to take ?

[convicted1]

Bbingo..........

second baptism/filling with HS??

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

See, your perspective of our view is that we think God owes us forgiveness simply because we are willing to beg for it, but that is NOT TRUE. OUR DESTINY rests fully in the hands of a merciful father, who has every right to condemn us to hell EVEN if we humbly believe and beg for forgiveness. Our faith and confession doesn't earn our salvation. We still could be sent to hell and it would be perfectly just of God to do so....and if that is true, then our destinies are completely UP TO HIM.

See, I DONT have a prospective of your view simply because I focus my attentions on my particular prospective, but I agree that the destiny of both Elect & non elect rests in Gods hands.... something we call Sovereignty. And yes all humans do deserve hell ..... not heaven. So the important word here is "deserve"we are not talking about whether people actually end up in hell, or whether only some end up in hell and some in heaven. We are talking about what all deserve, and what all deserve is condemnation. Thats justice. The justice of God, if it were to operate apart from any other factor, could do nothing other than send every human being to hell. In fact, apart from the electing grace of God and the gracious death of Christ, thats exactly what would happen.

where I disagree with you is in 1 COR. 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.

And also if we examine Romans 3, no one unaided by God (1) has any righteousness by which to lay claim upon God (2) has any true understanding of God & (3) Seeks God

But if you want to understand my prospective, read "The Bondage of the Will" by Martin Luther. In short, per the bible we are "dead in.....transgressions & sins (Eph. 2:1) & No one can come to me unless the Father.....draws him (John 6:44). I rest confidently in that.

 

[preacher4truth]

See, I DONT have a prospective of your view simply because I focus my attentions on my particular prospective, but I agree that the destiny of both Elect & non elect rests in Gods hands.... something we call Sovereignty. And yes all humans do deserve hell ..... not heaven. So the important word here is "deserve"we are not talking about whether people actually end up in hell, or whether only some end up in hell and some in heaven. We are talking about what all deserve, and what all deserve is condemnation. Thats justice. The justice of God, if it were to operate apart from any other factor, could do nothing other than send every human being to hell. In fact, apart from the electing grace of God and the gracious death of Christ, thats exactly what would happen.

where I disagree with you is in 1 COR. 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.

And also if we examine Romans 3, no one unaided by God (1) has any righteousness by which to lay claim upon God (2) has any true understanding of God & (3) Seeks God

But if you want to understand my prospective, read "The Bondage of the Will" by Martin Luther. In short, per the bible we are "dead in.....transgressions & sins (Eph. 2:1) & No one can come to me unless the Father.....draws him (John 6:44). I rest confidently in that.

Some will never understand 'not of yourselves' and its depth of meaning, thus their battle against it.

 

[convicted1]

One banana said to another lets split...........

punch line? :type:

 

[Skandelon]

See, I DONT have a prospective of your view simply because I focus my attentions on my particular prospective

Clearly...enough said.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Some will never understand 'not of yourselves' and its depth of meaning, thus their battle against it.

Yes but there is quite a revelation here if what he is saying is that God still makes the selection if or if not a person is saved. Then, if this is true, God requires you to jump through hoops then he can still pull the rug out under you & relegate you to hell. Doesn't seem fair (if that is the case).

I had always thought that the arminian position is that the sovereignty of Gods grace is limited by the freedom of human choice. What am I missing?

 

[Skandelon]

Some will never understand 'not of yourselves' and its depth of meaning, thus their battle against it.

Some will never understand that since the coming of Christ, the pouring out of the Spirit at Pentecost, and the commissioning of the church to spread the powerful, gracious message of reconciliation to the world that God doesn't leave us to 'ourselves.'

 

[quantumfaith]

Some will never understand that since the coming of Christ, the pouring out of the Spirit at Pentecost, and the commissioning of the church to spread the powerful, gracious message of reconciliation to the world that God doesn't leave us to 'ourselves.'

Kudos :thumbs::thumbs::thumbs:

 

[quantumfaith]

Does the Scripture teach that, outside of God’s individual election, a person is incapable of responding positively to the Gospel? This is the Calvinist position. It requires the supporting position that regeneration comes before faith.

Ephesians 2:8-9 is often used to support the claim. This familiar passage says, “For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; not as a result of works, so that no one may boast” (Ephesians 2:8–9, NASB95). Grammatically, the “that” which is “not of yourselves” must belong to salvation, not faith. Regardless, even a non-Calvinist would acknowledge faith as God’s gift for anyone who has it. The blessing of being made in God’s image with the spiritual ability to respond to the Gospel is a gift, and even the Gospel itself. The staunch Calvinist, however, would say that faith is only given by God to the elect.

Scripture teaches the source of faith when it teaches, “faith comes from hearing, and hearing by the word of Christ” (Romans 10:17) and that the Gospel itself has “the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes” (Romans 1:16 ). The Gospel, as the word of God, has within it all that is necessary for response.

- See more at: http://www.randywhiteministries.org...otal-depravity-biblical/#sthash.riyi1bst.dpuf

 

[preacher4truth]

Yes but there is quite a revelation here if what he is saying is that God still makes the selection if or if not a person is saved. Then, if this is true, God requires you to jump through hoops then he can still pull the rug out under you & relegate you to hell. Doesn't seem fair (if that is the case).

Many have a problem with this 'fair' thing. Fair and just are synonymous, surely you realize this. Who is man to declare to God what is fair with His dealings with man? But yet we can see replying against God is alive and active today.

What hoops does God require man to jump through? What is that all about? He will save no more and no less than those He has chosen and He is just in doing that. If He didn't do that none would be saved. Do we understand it all? Absolutely not, but as Job, I totally trust Him in it.

I had always thought that the arminian position is that the sovereignty of Gods grace is limited by the freedom of human choice. What am I missing?

Free will also teaches that God cannot do a thing until allowed to do so by man. Who's in charge there? We see the same thing in arminian error, unless man allows God cannot save him, man has to allow it, decide &c. We know that salvation is not a decision, it is a supernatural act all of God. But that's where the error of free will has led to, God incapable without man allowing. Then couple that with their argument concerning what to them is 'fair' concerning God's dealings with man. But the truth is God does not succumb to mans ideologies or conclusions on these things.

And as said, some will never get 'not of yourselves' nor its depth of meaning.

 

[Skandelon]

Free will also teaches that God cannot do a thing until allowed to do so by man. Who's in charge there?

You say this as if we believe that our having free will wasn't God's will.

Suppose a father tells his 5 year old daughter to sit down and eat her dinner and she refused. If the father doesn't choose to manually force her to sit down and force feed her, does that mean she is in charge? Does that necessarily mean the father doesn't have the ability to force her daughter to sit down and eat? Of course not. It is the father CHOICE to allow the daughter to choose, so to suggest that he is no longer in charge or that he cannot do anything until allowed to do so by his daughter is absurd at best.

 

[Iconoclast]

Does the Scripture teach that, outside of God’s individual election, a person is incapable of responding positively to the Gospel? This is the Calvinist position. It requires the supporting position that regeneration comes before faith.


QF,
Randy white does not comment on mans nature here;

Therefore, there are two opposing understanding of Total Depravity-

The Reformed (Calvinist) position: A person’s nature is so radically corrupt that they would never choose to accept the gift of God’s grace under any circumstances outside of the regenerating work of God.

The non-Reformed position: Every individual is a sinner with no capability of producing righteousness unto salvation.

When he speaks of the R view he mentions mans nature...using unbiblical terminology{would never Choose to Accept}

When he contrasts it he speaks of man not producing righteousness??? it is two separate issues.

 

[Skandelon]

Yes but there is quite a revelation here if what he is saying is that God still makes the selection if or if not a person is saved.

God is infinite, not limited by time, and we know by His revelation what He chooses to do with those who humble themselves, but that doesn't mean He is obligated to do so by something outside His own gracious choice. The father of the prodigal wasn't forced to take his son back in and forgive him just because he returned home. That was the father choice based on the father's grace alone. He didn't owe it to the son. The son didn't earn that response. That was ALL OF GRACE.

Then, if this is true, God requires you to jump through hoops then he can still pull the rug out under you & relegate you to hell. Doesn't seem fair (if that is the case).

Of course God will honor his promises, but my point is that he is not obligated to based on your merit, as explained above. If their is any obligation on God it is self imposed.

I had always thought that the arminian position is that the sovereignty of Gods grace is limited by the freedom of human choice. What am I missing?

Maybe Tozer can explain it better:

"God sovereignly decreed that man should be free to exercise moral choice, and man from the beginning has fulfilled that decree by making his choice between good and evil. When he chooses to do evil, he does not thereby countervail the sovereign will of God but fulfills it, inasmuch as the eternal decree decided not which choice the man should make but that he should be free to make it. If in His absolute freedom God has willed to give man limited freedom, who is there to stay His hand or say, 'What doest thou?' Man’s will is free because God is sovereign. A God less than sovereign could not bestow moral freedom upon His creatures. He would be afraid to do so." - A.W. Tozer, The Knowledge of the Holy: The Attributes of God​

 

[preacher4truth]

Does the Scripture teach that, outside of God’s individual election, a person is incapable of responding positively to the Gospel? This is the Calvinist position. It requires the supporting position that regeneration comes before faith.

QF,
Randy white does not comment on mans nature here;

When he speaks of the R view he mentions mans nature...using unbiblical terminology{would never Choose to Accept} Therefore, there are two opposing understanding of Total Depravity-

The Reformed (Calvinist) position: A person’s nature is so radically corrupt that they would never choose to accept the gift of God’s grace under any circumstances outside of the regenerating work of God.

The non-Reformed position: Every individual is a sinner with no capability of producing righteousness unto salvation.

When he contrasts it he speaks of man not producing righteousness??? it is two separate issues.

Excellent.

Also, it is only by the power of God Himself that we believe.

 

[quantumfaith]

QF,
Randy white does not comment on mans nature here;








Excellent.

Also, it is only by the power of God Himself that we believe.

This is true Preacher.

 

[Skandelon]

Also, it is only by the power of God Himself that we believe.

Yet, somehow God was just not powerful enough to bring us all to believe a like minded theology? Even among Calvinists there are hundreds of theological variants...I guess God just wasn't able make us all believe the same truths? Is that it?

 

[pinoybaptist]

..........
Under the old system, only those wanting to be atoned for came and received the covering of blood, whether by being sprinkled in the crowd or you dipping their finger in the bowl. ........

oh, yeah ? you sure about that, eh ? well, like a brother said, "show us the Scriptures" where God or Moses said ONLY THOSE WANTING TO BE ATONED FOR may come and receive the covering of blood.....

 

[OldRegular]

Lot of folks out there handing out pills!

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Lot of folks out there handing out pills!

Phony religion ....so many Catholics to cultivate and so little time. Then they go the easy believer rout and never transform. Sad really. Then they go to hell with "I never knew you "ringing in their ears.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

God is infinite, not limited by time, and we know by His revelation what He chooses to do with those who humble themselves, but that doesn't mean He is obligated to do so by something outside His own gracious choice. The father of the prodigal wasn't forced to take his son back in and forgive him just because he returned home. That was the father choice based on the father's grace alone. He didn't owe it to the son. The son didn't earn that response. That was ALL OF GRACE.

Of course God will honor his promises, but my point is that he is not obligated to based on your merit, as explained above. If their is any obligation on God it is self imposed.



Maybe Tozer can explain it better:

"God sovereignly decreed that man should be free to exercise moral choice, and man from the beginning has fulfilled that decree by making his choice between good and evil. When he chooses to do evil, he does not thereby countervail the sovereign will of God but fulfills it, inasmuch as the eternal decree decided not which choice the man should make but that he should be free to make it. If in His absolute freedom God has willed to give man limited freedom, who is there to stay His hand or say, 'What doest thou?' Man’s will is free because God is sovereign. A God less than sovereign could not bestow moral freedom upon His creatures. He would be afraid to do so." - A.W. Tozer, The Knowledge of the Holy: The Attributes of God​

Maybe I should ask the Biblicist his interpretation ...oh wait, I keep forgetting :tear: