Featured Exalting the view of man

You are attempting to prove a point that is not proved by the Scriptures you used.

Cornelius is just the same as many in whom God has selected for salvation. He has already placed in their heart a new will to seek the things of God. They are under Godly conviction, and merely needing to be given the intellectual insight in which their heart has already been prepared by God.

If anything, your use of Cornelius shows all the more how God appoints a person to salvation and moves a believer into the relationship to bring the Word.

It shows all the more the Calvinist thinking is basically correct.

However, YOUR view obliges that this be done for all humankind - or it is unfair.

That is just not the historical way God has conducted business, irregardless of your own desires.

One other point:

You desire to use the evidence of the Holy Spirit falling upon the house of Cornelius as it did in Pentecost as proof. However, Peter accepted this as a sign (not as proof of salvation) to show that for certain the Gentiles were to be saved just as the Jews at Pentecost. Later, this would prove vital when Paul was sent to Jerusalem for discussions as to how Jewish the Gentiles had to be to be saved. Peter was the one who made the final decision, and (in my opinion) it was because he witnessed first hand the events at Cornelius' home.

Do you not see the intention of God that a specific jailor was in charge when Paul and Silas were thrown into the prison?

You make the mistake of assuming that a person is "dead" until they believe on Jesus.

Dead people do not have the ability to believe.

Unless the person is made alive (as was Cornelius, as was the jailor) they remain unresponsive to the claim of God on the life.

Expressions of belief come from a heart that has already believed.

The heart that has already believed is a heart that has already been awakened not only to the need, but has actually been changed. It is made alive in Christ.

BOTH Cornelius and the Jailor's show evidence their heart was already changed, and that the intellect had to be "upgraded."

Do not neglect: "For with the heart man believes ... with the mouth ..."

Just for those who mistake this verse as meaning someone has to proclaim belief to receive belief, I suppose I should clarify one word of the verse.

The "unto" of Roman's 10 is not a statement of "this has to be done in order for this to happen." One does not have to have the mouth moving in order that salvation be attained.

The "unto" is a word of response (movement) to a condition (belief).

The condition of the heart causes the response of the mouth.

Just as at the condition of birth causes the new born to cry out (and all with ears to hear do hear) the birth of the new believer causes them to cry out.

Those who were schooled in the thinking that god/God (as reflected in idol worship, or OT sacrifices in which something had to be done to appease a god or God) would most certainly cry out "What must I DO to be saved." For intellectually that is all they know. And the instructor must guide them into understanding.

The crying out is an expression that salvation is already at work in the heart.

 

That is not the Calvinist premise. It is the call that is effectual (meaning that the call will always result in God's desired result). If the call is not effectual then salvation pivots on mans decision. According to the Reformed view total inability accompanies total depravity. The effectual call, which includes regeneration, nullifies total inability.

Also, the effectual call is not a passive desire on the part of God. The effectual call is a positive command - a decree if you will. Since God decrees it, it will come to be.

I do not see a disconnect between regeneration and the means. The Gospel is the means of salvation. In other words God uses the Gospel as His method of calling sinners to repentance. Regeneration is included in this. The right response to the means (the Gospel) is belief. So, when the biblical author writes that his words are written so that you may believe, it is perfectly acceptable to the Reformed Christian.

But if the initial work of God is enabling, then salvation still rests upon mans decision. Therefore God becomes passive in salvation instead of active. Man can take some of the credit. He can say, "I am saved because I chose to believe."

By the way, not to be lazy, but I have a string of verses I can post that support my view. Sometime tells me you are well acquainted with these passages, so it is really not necessary. What is apparent is that our differences are substantial. That is okay. Better to let our differences stand out then to mollify them.

Have a great rest of the day.

 

That is pure nonsense, the scriptures directly tell us that Cornelius needed to get saved. He also did not have the Holy Spirit, so it is impossible that he was regenerated according to Romans 8:9. Your argument is ridiculous, and you do not have one word of scripture to support that he was regenerated prior to Peter preaching the gospel to him.

Acts 11:17 Forasmuch then as God gave them the like gift as he did unto us, who believed on the Lord Jesus Christ; what was I, that I could withstand God?
18 When they heard these things, they held their peace, and glorified God, saying, Then hath God also to the Gentiles granted repentance unto life.

It was only AFTER Cornelius heard the gospel and believed that the scriptures say he had LIFE. The word "life" here IS regeneration.

Again, nonsense. Acts 11:17-18 shows that Cornelius receiving the Holy Spirit was regeneration. It says THEN God has also granted the Gentiles repentance "unto life". THAT is regeneration, it is being made alive again. The word "then" is speaking of Cornelius receiving the Holy Spirit and speaking in tongues. This was evidence that he was regenerated and had LIFE.

You are begging the question, you are ASSUMING your premise is correct. The scriptures show the spiritually dead CAN believe.

Jhn 5:25 Verily, verily, I say unto you, The hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God: and they that hear shall live.

Jesus said THE DEAD (not the living) shall hear his voice, and those that hear SHALL LIVE. This is speaking of spiritual death, not physical.

This is the whole argument, non-Cals believe the scriptures show unregenerate man has the ability to hear and believe the gospel, and IF they do, they will be made alive. This is exactly what happened to both Cornelius and the Philipian jailer, both were lost (else no need to be saved) and both heard and believed the gospel and were regenerated or made alive.

False, Jesus said the DEAD shall hear his voice, not the living, and those that hear SHALL live.

That's like saying everyone who ate ate. Duh.

No, Hebrews 6 shows a man can be enlightened and taste of the word of God and be brought to the point of repentance and yet fall away in unbelief.

Heb 6:4 For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost,
5 And have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come,
6 If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame.

This passage in Hebrews absolutely refutes Calvinism because it is either teaching a person can lose salvation, or else it refutes Total Inability. There is no way this scripture agrees with Calvinism.

Total Inability is false. Men can hear and understand the gospel, and even be brought to the point of repentance and yet fall away in unbelief and be lost, that is what Hebrews 6:4-6 is teaching. This passage refutes Calvinism no matter how you look at it.

Too many words... You are ASSUMING your doctrine is true. You do not show any scripture to support your view, you simply declare your view and then tell others it is true.

I on the other hand show scripture that utterly refutes your view. I have shown that Jesus himself said the DEAD can hear his voice, and if they will hear they will be made alive. I have shown Hebrews 6 that shows an unregenerate man can be enlightened and brought to the point of repentance and yet fall away in unbelief.

You provide no evidence for your view, I do provide evidence.

 

It is impossible to make these assertions from reading the text. You are making these verses say something that isn't there [attack snipped]

 

Actually, I did make those assertions from reading the context.

That you don't agree is not my problem.

Whom God places a claim upon, will be saved.

Winman's argument (and apparently yours) is that one cannot be saved outside of being indwelt by the Holy Spirit.

That salvation is complete and sealed by the Holy Spirit - of that there is no argument.

However, that does not prevent the Holy Spirit from impressing and quickening the person in whom God has appointed to salvation long before they intellectually understand what is going on.

There are unnumbered testimonies (some given on the BB) that show that God was working through conviction and events to bring one to Christ.

Was this conviction no part of the work of the Holy Spirit?

What was it that Christ said the work of the Holy Spirit was?

BOTH Cornelius and the Jailor expressed the need. Was this not direct evidence of conviction BY the Holy spirit?

Perhaps Winman and you can explain salvation as totally human generated and the result of human intellectual exercise, but that isn't Scripture.

 

Conviction is not proof of regeneration. Unregenerated men can be convicted by the word of God.

Jhn 8:3 And the scribes and Pharisees brought unto him a woman taken in adultery; and when they had set her in the midst,
4 They say unto him, Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act.
5 Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou?
6 This they said, tempting him, that they might have to accuse him. But Jesus stooped down, and with his finger wrote on the ground, as though he heard them not.
7 So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.
8 And again he stooped down, and wrote on the ground.
9 And they which heard it, being convicted by their own conscience, went out one by one, beginning at the eldest, even unto the last: and Jesus was left alone, and the woman standing in the midst.

These men were not regenerated, these were the scribes and Pharisees that Jesus said the devil was their father.

Jhn 8:44 Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.

You don't get any more unregenerated than these guys, they were evil, they were trying to tempt Jesus so that they could accuse him.

Yet, when Jesus spoke to them they were deeply convicted by his words. They went out one by one starting with the eldest.

So, being convicted by the word of God is no proof of regeneration.

 

Paul disputes your thinking.

He told the Corinthians that the heathen can sorrow as the world and die.

However, Godly sorrow leads to salvation.

Paul distinguishes between worldly sorrow and Godly sorrow.

There is only ONE Godly sorrow, and that is brought about by the direct work of the Holy Spirit (John 16:8).

Without this direct work - there is no salvation only intellectual ascent which is without belief.

 

Skan,

I have given our dialog in this thread some thought. It is not inevitable that those of opposing view points need to get nasty and personal. Our dialog is also proof that we do not need to minimize our differences. Debate can get vigorous at times. It really is not for the thin-skinned. But even if debate becomes hard hitting it does not immediately follow that it must be personal. Thank you for helping prove that in this thread.

Blessings!

 

Pretty selective snipping there. But then it was about Calvinism wasn't it.

 

Why is this Calvinism-Arminian thread in this section? Is not there a new section for the nonsense? It has been proven time and again no one is going to change any minds, so please move the babbling the new section.

 

Is this not a vital principle of non-cals: the theoretical doctrine that man has the free will to make his own decision either for or against Christ?
In order for that to be true man must either:

(a) Have the natural ability within himself to do so; or
(b) Have help from God to overcome any lack of innate ability. By God’s assistance man is now able to make a fair and rational choice…..either for or against Christ.

Based on man’s good decision for Christ God now has a legitimate and rational reason to elect that man for salvation while reprobating another who has rejected Christ.

However reasonable this theoretical doctrine may seem to the minds of sensible and rational men, it is exactly contrary to that which is proclaimed in Scripture.

For this non-cal theoretical doctrine equates God’s election with justice. It is just to reward salvation to the man who makes the righteous decision. It is equally just to punish the man who makes the unrighteous decision.

But, in fact, election has nothing to do with justice. It has everything to do with grace.

“Even so then at this present time also there is a remnant according to the election of grace.”

“For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:”

The grace of God saves undeserving sinners who are both unwilling and unable to come to Christ.

The inability of man to come to Christ is taught by analogy through the miracle healings which He performed:

• Only Christ raises the spiritually dead sinner, as He did Lazarus.
• Only Christ gives sight to the spiritually blind from birth who otherwise cannot see the Kingdom of Heaven or the King.
• Only Christ heals the paralysis which hinders men from coming to Him.
• Only Christ opens the deaf ears to hear and transplants a new heart to receive the Gospel.

The unwillingness of man to come to Christ is taught by virtue of his sin nature:

• All men, like sinner Adam, run from the true God.
• None seek after the true God.
• The carnal mind is enmity with God.

In the non-cal view the Gospel is presented as a test to determine man’s ultimate destiny, depending on the choice man makes.

But Scripture tells us the testing was completed in the Garden. Adam failed and brought upon himself and his descendents sin, suffering and death. No more testing is needed. The results are in: F.

With that as His starting point, the Lord has purposed to save many undeserving God-haters. He does this because He has determined within Himself to love many who hate Him. His love is unconditional. His election is unconditional. His purposes never fail. Nor does His love ever fail.

By His omnipotent power He changes the unwilling God-hater into the willing God-lover.

“Thy people shall be willing in the day of thy power.”

“For it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure.”

 

Skan,

Agreed. But this is where we go into a circular argument. I believe the Bible teaches man rejects because he is not called. Those who are called will not reject. You believe differently, thus a merry-go-round discussion.

Technically no one can earn their salvation to begin with, so the matter is moot. When the Reformed make the accusation that Arminian theology tries to earn its salvation by cooperating with God, it is more of a matter of revealing a flaw in Arminian theology. Everyone who is saved received salvation as a free gift. I know you and I agree on that statement.

It is...in a way. The Reformed believe that man does make a decision to believe once his will has been freed to actually do so. Yes. We believe that decision is irresistible, but that has more to do with the will of divine decree more than it has to do with a choice between two options.

Firstly, not those means but the means.

Paul states it forcefully and convincingly, Romans 1:16 "For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek."

The Gospel is also called "the word of the cross" (1 Corinthians 1:18). To those who are being saved (the elect) the word of the cross is "the power of God" (ibid). So, the means (the Gospel; the word of the cross) is the power of God. Later on in that chapter Paul writes, 1 Corinthians 1:24 "but to those who are the called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God." Not only is the word of the cross (the Gospel) called the power of God, Jesus Christ is identified as the power of God. The means of salvation, the Gospel, is nothing less than the power of God - Jesus Christ! When the Gospel is proclaimed it is as though Jesus Christ Himself is being presented. And as 1 Corinthians 1:24 states, "to those who the called...Christ the power of God".

It does. The message is always the same. Believe in the Lord Jesus Christ and you shall be saved (Acts 16:31). The Reformed message is not, "Let us first determine if you are one of the called". Forgive me if that sounds cheeky, it is not meant to be.

Let me put it another way. I know theologically that only the called (the elect) will respond positively to the Gospel. However I do not posses perfect knowledge. Only God knows who is called. I also know theologically that God has ordained the means by which His called are converted. That means is the Gospel. So, I proclaim the Gospel as if all who hear it will be converted. That is why I chose the username "Herald". There is no higher calling than to be the herald of good news.

Quote:

The parable of the prodigal is not really the parable of the prodigal. It actually is the parable of the son who stayed home. It is a parable about ungrateful Israel. That aside, I did not say God is passive in salvation. I was making the point that the free will position makes God passive in salvation. God reaches the point where He effectively says, "Okay. I took you this far. Now it is up to you." I do not believe that is what the Bible teaches.

Skan, feel free to have the final word on this exchange. Be blessed!

 

More accurately, the Bible teaches that man rejects because he is not chosen. Many are called. Few are chosen.

 

In the context of 1 Corinthians 1:18-31 "called" is the correct term (c.f. 1 Cor. 1:18). I was arguing from the passage, but I understand your point.

 

It is impossible to make these assertions from reading the text. You are making these verses say something that isn't there.

Same thing happened to me. But I wasn't regenerated prior to coming to Christ. The Holy Spirit was convicting me of sin, showing me the truth of the gospel, and begging me to repent. I finally relented, repented and believed, and I was saved.

For clarity's sake, are you saying the Phillipian jailer was regenerated prior to bursting into Paul and Silas' jail cell and asking, "What must I do to be saved?"

Hmmm...Mischaracterizing an opponents position. Classic Calvinist tactic.

 

Hmmm... Mischaracterizing an opponents position. Classic Calvinist tactic.