Featured Emotional or Exegetical?

Luke,

You present an excellent understanding of "faith" above.

 

Actual there is nothing good in my flesh, that is why we can't trust it. The word of God the Spirit and life quickens the inner most being the free agency and it gives it a new will. They either follow this new will the will of God and live or continue to follow the flesh and perish.

If we don't eat Christ flesh His word and drink His blood the life He lived while He was with us we have no life in us.

Where can I go Jesus Christ is the only one who has the words of life.

We have to ask ourselves is it our old creation that was chosen before the foundation of the world or the new creation that is in Christ the born again one?

Romans 7 :
18 For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing: for to will is present with me; but how to perform that which is good I find not.

19 For the good that I would I do not: but the evil which I would not, that I do.

20 Now if I do that I would not, it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.

21 I find then a law, that, when I would do good, evil is present with me.

22 For I delight in the law of God after the inward man:

23 But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members.

24 O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death?

25 I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin.

 

It all depends on what you mean by the word "cause". I absolutely believe God caused me to believe the gospel, but when I say the word "caused" I do not mean what you say when you say "caused".

Paul asked how any man could believe unless he has heard of Jesus.

Rom 10:14 How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher?

Notice that three times in this verse Paul asks "How?". Paul is directly addressing ABILITY here. First, he asks how any man can call on Jesus unless he believes on Jesus. This is simple and logical, if a man truly believes the word of God he will call on Jesus to save him. If the man does not believe the gospel, he will not call on Jesus. Therefore it is impossible to sincerely call on Jesus unless you truly believe he is the Son of God who died for our sins and rose from the dead. If you do not believe Jesus rose from the dead and is God, it would be foolish to call on him. Nobody calls on a dead man.

Next, Paul simply asks how any man can believe on Jesus unless he has heard of him. Now here you go, Paul is answering HOW a person comes to believe on Jesus right here. Paul does not mention ONE WORD about the necessity to be supernaturally regenerated to have the ability to believe. If there was any place in all of scripture to answer that question, this verse would be the place to do that. But Paul simply implies that a person must HEAR of Jesus to believe. This is confirmed by his next question when he asks how any man shall hear unless a preacher tells him of Jesus.

If a preacher had not told me about Jesus and that he was the Son of God and died for my sins, it would have been impossible for me to believe on Jesus. No man can possibly believe what he has never heard and does not know.

I also believe that the natural man would never conceive of the gospel on his own. This is obvious when you see people, like tribes in the jungles who have never heard the scriptures. They all conceive of a god of their own making, an idol. And men always believe they are saved by doing good works for this god that pleases him. Thus they give sacrifices and offerings, etc...

So, no man in his natural man would ever conceive of the gospel, and therefore could never believe on Jesus.

It is because God has sent prophets and preachers into the world to reveal his word that I (and you) came to know the gospel. By this God ENABLED me to believe. He did not force me, I had to decide for myself if God's word was true and make that decision to trust Jesus.

Nevertheless, I could not have believed unless God revealed the gospel to me. In this sense God caused me to believe.

Paul shows how we believe in Romans 10:14, we believe by HEARING the gospel. Hearing the gospel enables us to believe, and in a sense it causes us to believe, because the word of God convicts and convinces us to believe. But God does not impose faith on us, we must choose to believe the gospel of our own free will.

Paul numerous times said he persuades men. This is how we come to believe.

2 Cor 5:11 Knowing therefore the terror of the Lord, we persuade men; but we are made manifest unto God; and I trust also are made manifest in your consciences.

Acts 19:8 And he went into the synagogue, and spake boldly for the space of three months, disputing and persuading the things concerning the kingdom of God.

Acts 28:23 And when they had appointed him a day, there came many to him into his lodging; to whom he expounded and testified the kingdom of God, persuading them concerning Jesus, both out of the law of Moses, and out of the prophets, from morning till evening.

God uses the foolishness of preaching the word of God to persuade men. God does not force or impose anyone to believe. God convinces men to believe. There is a subtle, but important difference.

 

This post is total nonsense. If man must be regenerated to understand the word of God, then there was no necessity for Jesus to speak in parables to hide the gospel from men, which Skan has been saying to you for months. Your view is nonsensical and absurd, and worse, totally non-scriptural.

Jesus often appealed to men's sense of what is right and wrong and justice. In the parable of the Good Samaritan, Jesus asked his hearers who was neighbor to the injured man.

Luk 10:36 Which now of these three, thinkest thou, was neighbour unto him that fell among the thieves?
37 And he said, He that shewed mercy on him. Then said Jesus unto him, Go, and do thou likewise.

Jesus shows here that men understand what is right and wrong. They have a true sense of justice. Jesus often asked questions like this of unsaved men. He let them answer for themselves, and often confirmed their judgment was correct. In fact, that is shown in this same chapter.

Luk 10:25 And, behold, a certain lawyer stood up, and tempted him, saying, Master, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?
26 He said unto him, What is written in the law? how readest thou?
27 And he answering said, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy strength, and with all thy mind; and thy neighbour as thyself.
28 And he said unto him, Thou hast answered right: this do, and thou shalt live.

Jesus said this unsaved man answered correctly. Unsaved men have the ability to make right judgments.

 

The problem is not that we are not "right" upon occasion, the problem is that God is NEVER wrong. That is a nutshell is where your problem lies.

 

It matters if you believe, as we do, that scripture does NOT teach that all men are born "Totally Depraved" (i.e. so blind from birth that a clear proclamation of the gospel could not and would not convert them UNLESS first effectually regenerated by the Holy Spirit).

We are arguing the validity of Calvinism's claim of Total Depravity here Luke and if a passage appears to suggest that a un-regenerate man might be converted from a parable free proclamation of truth, then the concept of Total Depravity is debunked. That is the real reason you want to dismiss it as 'emotive,' but the truth is that this is a LOGICAL problem, not an emotional one. In fact, let's take ALL the emotion out of it and agree EVERYONE deserves hell, even those with the most faith in Christ, okay?

It's not LOGICAL for God to blind a person from the gospel using a parable to prevent his conversion, if the doctrine of Total Depravity is true. PERIOD.​

If it helps you to stop blaming this on emotions, then let's change it from people to rocks. Would you think it illogical for God to use parables to prevent a rock from being converted since rocks weren't created with that capacity to begin with? Of course you would. That is completely illogical and frankly kind of crazy. Imagine going in your back yard and fearing the rocks are listening to your conversations so you speak in code lest they hear and believe your words. Why would you do such a thing? They are DEAD ROCKS!

Don't Calvinists, including yourself, continue to argue that men are dead like a corpse and thus UNABLE to respond willingly to any effort to persuade them with the gospel appeal? How it is logical to put a blindfold and ear plugs on a corpse? There is NOTHING emotive about that argument.

 

People today do not understand (or do not accept) the true vile nature of sin and thus do not understand their need.

- adapted from http://www.ligonier.org/rym/broadcasts/video/ultimate-spring-break1/

 

One has...Jesus.

 

Excellent post. The heart of the matter is not emotion, but logic. The "T" is completely illogical. A corpse does not need to be encased in concrete, blinded and and muffed to prevent it from either hearing the Gospel or responding.

 

Really?

Name another. One that is not God.

 

There is no other, that is the point. Your question is pointless and proves nothing.

 

No one....and that is not a debated point...see the answer I gave you above....Pelagius knew that too. And his writings have been posted for you to read and learn for yourself. You have been answered. Pelagius's writings have been posted and you have been given links. LEARN...........You staked the farm on Winman's inability to provide further links.....and it worked for a page or two of the thread...but I have now provided them for you....as you demanded. Thus, you have been provided information by which you might educate yourself, to then remain in, and thus argue from ignorance is not valid...You remain unaware of alternatives....and thus you are pretending that alternatives do not exist...that is an "argument from ignorance" and it is fallacious.

 

It proves (along with scripture) that man cannot obey the Law. He is not born without a nature to sin.

 

The utterly godless might not (given the link you provided)...but the informed Arminians do. This is no secret to a lot of informed Christian people of BOTH camps.