Originally posted by Me4Him:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Scott J:
Calvin doctrine about man's attitude toward sin doen't match what the scripture say.
Still stuck on that goodness of man being prerequisite to salvation thing, huh? Basically what you are saying is that only if man is good enough to be discontented with sin will he accept salvation... That definitely does not match scripture.
If the Spirit didn't "CONVICT/CONVINCE" YOU of your sins, and YOU "REPENTED", and "ASK" Jesus to save you,
You've never been saved</font>[/QUOTE] That is NOT a matter of debate. God has prescribed the method used for salvation. We are saved by GRACE
through faith.
The question isn't if repentance and belief are necessary. The question is why do some say yes while others continue on the road to destruction... whether they've ever heard the gospel or not.
I say that those who say yes do so because God elected them then in time freed them through the miracle of spiritual resurrection/regeneration.
You apparently believe that they do so because they are somehow wiser or smarter than those who didn't accept Christ. But again, this view simply doesn't account for scripture. It contradicts the scripturally described condition of man and has no answer for why God rightly condemns those who didn't get their "equal opportunity" to believe.
I'd like to know how a person can be saved and not know how it happened???????????
They can't. Like you said, repentance and saving faith are necessary for salvation and a person never does these things without knowing it.... the question is why do they do it?
Many are called, the "SEED" is sowed "everywhere",
It doesn't say all are calle or that the seed is sowed everywhere. This is speaking of the gospel call IMO. And we know for a fact that the gospel was not heard by many in hell today during their natural lives.
Yes... and you stumble all over that. It doesn't say that "few choose"... it says few are "chosen". This verse very succinctly says what I have been saying. There is a general call... but "few" are chosen or receive the effectual call.
where the seed lands, "Rocks, Thorns, good ground", determine if the seed grows or not,
And the seed controls none of those things nor does it control where it is placed. That is the sower's sovereign domain.
no effectual calling places the blame on the "SEED" being faultly for not growing.
This parable is about people hearing the gospel... it does not address the sinfulness or corruption of the seed.
Why am I not surprised you don't understand the parables???
Quite to the contrary. You read the words then arbitrarily redefine them to mean what you want them to.
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr /> Nope. A pardon is an act of grace. It is not deserved nor is it a "right" either to the person who receives it or the one who doesn't.
God's no respecter of persons, we're all sinners, the pardon is offer to "ALL". (none perish) </font>[/QUOTE] So you are a universalist? If you are, just say so and I'll stop dealing with you altogether.
I won't debate theology with people who don't believe the gospel... and the gospel includes the condemnation of man.
God is not a respector of persons. That's true. However if He waited on that person to demonstrate that the were good and wise enough to believe then that would make Him a respector of persons. Their salvation would be according to their own merit and not according to His grace.
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />
God is entitled to "personal predilection" anytime He so chooses... it is His opinion that matters first and most. It is not YOUR place to judge why He does what He does.
When God gave the law, he become "obligated" to abide by the law, Jesus ask for a "reprieve" from the law of death for sin, but God wouldn't grant it to him.</font>[/QUOTE]There is no law that makes it unrighteous or unjust for God to condemn those who rebel in sin.
It is the law of "ME" that you are trying to apply here... not the Law of God.
You really do have a lot to learn about "law".
Apparently you do since you think it is unjust to condemn the guilty... but you also have something to learn about grace since you think it is something people deserve a shot at.
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />
Stating that God does not have the right to choose according to His own good pleasure is not only unbiblical but blasphemous.
You forgot the third option, man's "ignorant/misinterpretation" of scripture.</font>[/QUOTE] No. That was covered in the fact that your statement was unbiblical and blasphemous.
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />If Jesus died to pay that fine... then that fine would be paid. Period. All go to heaven no matter what.
It doesn't work like that, you have to have "FAITH", "BELIEVE", in Jesus before God will save, </font>[/QUOTE] And you must be elect and regenerated before you will have faith or believe.
"Belief", the fines been paid, "Unbelief", the fine is still owe.
IOW's if YOUR sovereign human choice deserves God's respect then you merit salvation... but if you aren't as good as those and choose poorly then you go to hell.
You have made God's plan and sovereignty the slave to man's goodness.
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr /> You limit it to men who are good enough to make the right decision. I limit it (scripturally) to God's good pleasure.
Yep, that's the Debate in a "Nutshell", being "good" doesn't pay the "wages of sin", only death satisfies the requirements of the "law", being "good", keeping all the commandments, won't save. </font>[/QUOTE] Who is good according to you? I know who is good according to Romans 3.
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />God told man what the "wages of sin" were, then told man how to avoid having to pay those wages himself, "Belief in Jesus".
That isn't what that verse says... It says the wages of sin is death... but the GIFT OF GOD is eternal life.
Get it ME? GIFT. Not opportunity to choose what's behind door 2... Certainly not the "right" to choose.... The GIFT.
Ro 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.
How many were made sinner, how many is the free gift offer too??</font>[/QUOTE] All you have done here is show your willingness to strip scripture out of the context of the whole of scripture. The result is that you make scripture conflict with scripture rather than accepting what both scriptures say and adjusting your beliefs accordingly.
Once again, if your argument has any merit then it teaches universalism. However, if you recognize that the free gift is not applied to "all men" then you still have to answer the question why some do and some don't...
Your answer is man's goodness determines it. My answer is that God's goodness determines it.
Do you have the "option" to believe, not believe what I post here, don't all people, so what makes you think no one has the "option" to believe, not believe the gospel when they hear it???
Yes. Yes. I didn't say that no one has the "option" to believe... and....
All sinful, carnal, dead in sin men reject the gospel when they hear it. That's their nature. The freely do so. God doesn't "force" them to... they want to.
OTOH, choosing the "option" to believe is contingent upon God first changing one's nature from death to life.
Now do you understand why, "Many are called, few are chosen"??
Yes but you apparently don't. Called still means called and chosen still means chosen. All of your blather didn't change the definitions of the words nor the fact that the Holy Spirit gave us those revelations.
in other words, there more information in a verse that just the words you see on paper.
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />
What was the significant of Jesus spending "two days" with the "woman at the well"??
BTW, that's a simple question.
You answer it first... as well as the other questions you have cowardly evaded then I will answer more of your questions.
The funny thing is that you seem to instinctively know that your answers will not hold up to scripture or scrutiny... but rather than change them you attack me, Johnp, Calvin, or evade hard questions or provide arguments that result in interpretations that conflict with direct scriptural statements. Not surprisingly, you also find it necessary to change the meanings of words.
Not using an alternate legitimate meaning as in the fact that "world" or "all" does not always mean every individual specifically. You claim that "chosen" actually means you chose.
My one objective is to conform my interpretations and beliefs to what all of the relevant texts say... not to take a pen knife to those that contradict what I believe as you do.
Heb 5:12 For when for the time ye ought to be teachers, ye have need that one teach you again which be the first principles of the oracles of God;
and are become such as have need of milk, and not of strong meat.
13 For every one that
useth milk is unskilful in the word of righteousness: for he is a babe.
14 But
strong meat belongeth to them that are of full age, even those who by reason of use have their senses exercised to discern both good and evil.
Is it possible that you might still be a "milk drinker", not as "wise" as you profess???
[/QB]</font>
Yes. Is it possible that this could be true of you?
I think the latter is more likely since a) scripture led me away from your position, b) my arguments are consistent with the various relevant scriptures and I am willing to change if shown they are not as opposed to you who creates contradictions between scriptures by your interpretations, c) your use of straw men arguments and persistent attempts to tell us what we believe, d) your misuse of scripture, e) your denial of the meanings of words when convenient, f) your disrespect for the sovereignty of God, and g) your elevation and exaltation of man... even giving him credit for the decisive act that saves him.
