Faith received part deux

[preacher4truth]

"Gifts of grace". That is exactly what the Catholics believe in, except they call them "sacraments."

I wouldn't know, I don't follow them. The gifts of Gods Spirit, and you're aligning them with paganistic ritualism via Catholicism, and saying my belief is the same? OK. This isn't the first time you've had things like this to say about God's grace, in the negative.

All I can say is bless you.

 

[preacher4truth]

I was being honest.

Nebulous? when did I say that?

Personally I'll accept what Jesus says at face value and admit I don't understand how to integrate it with God's absolute sovereignty or resolve perceived conflicts with other theological venues.

I don't think Jesus was putting on an act when He was amazed or marveled at people's faith or when He scolded some for little faith and others for great faith.

We are not created as automatons and God does not treat us as robots but calls us to reason with Him:

Isaiah 1:18 Come now, and let us reason together, saith the LORD: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool.

Everything about Himself makes sense to God.

If we don't understand, it is our problem not God's.

Ecclesiastes 3:11 He has made everything beautiful in its time. Also He has put eternity in their hearts, except that no one can find out the work that God does from beginning to end.​

So, I admit and agree with God's word that there are many things I can not find out that God does in eternity.​

However, I repeat what I said with one little addendum - what webdog said makes sense to me.​

HankD​

No, you took that wrong, I never said you said nebulous bro.

 

[DHK]

I wouldn't know, I don't follow them. The gifts of Gods Spirit, and you're aligning them with paganistic ritualism via Catholicism, and saying my belief is the same? OK. This isn't the first time you've had things like this to say about God's grace, in the negative.

All I can say is bless you.

Be honest with yourself. The context was originally concerning salvation. In the RCC such "sacraments" as baptism have salvic value. In fact salvation cannot be obtained without baptism. It is a means of grace.

However, you speak of "gifts of grace". At least you did in your previous post. What "gifts of grace"? And what such "gifts of grace" are given to the unregenerate. God does not give faith to the unregenerate/unsaved. I have been declaring this over and over again, and you have never come forth with one Scripture to refute. God does not give spiritual gifts to the unsaved. It is against his nature to do so. If I am wrong or I was wrong, then on all these threads that I have been posting this truth, surely someone by now would have shown up with some Scripture to demonstrate my error, but that is not the case.

Where does faith come from? Regarding salvation it comes from the Word of God, not from God himself. It is not a gift. "Faith comes from hearing and hearing from the Word of God." If you want a stronger faith then study the Bible more thoroughly. Better yet memorize it and meditate upon it. Faith comes from the Word of God. It is not a gift.

 

[Gershom]

Where does faith come from? Regarding salvation it comes from the Word of God, not from God himself. It is not a gift. "Faith comes from hearing and hearing from the Word of God." If you want a stronger faith then study the Bible more thoroughly. Better yet memorize it and meditate upon it. Faith comes from the Word of God. It is not a gift.

I also have asked a similar question in regards to the gift of faith being discussed and held by some. How and when do we receive this gift if not by hearing the Word of God? Is it something that God has miraculously enabled us with? P4T mentioned 2 Peter 1:1, pointing to the word "obtained." Is this "obtaining" a miraculous/supernatural event that took place, minus the means of hearing the Word which brings faith?

 

[HankD]

No, you took that wrong, I never said you said nebulous bro.

oops, sorry...

HankD

 

[Skandelon]

Yea, and apparently skandelon did too.

You wrote, "If God loves everybody then that verse means that EVERYBODY (in a salvific way) will love God."

You have just argued that if God loves everyone then everyone would be saved, unless you meant the parenthetical "in a salvific way" to be referring to God's love and man's love...in which case you need to state yourself more clearly because that is very unclear. And you went on to say, "His loving us is what CAUSED us to love him."

Can you explain the difference in God's love for someone "salvifically" and non-salvifically?

 

[DHK]

"Gifts of grace". That is exactly what the Catholics believe in, except they call them "sacraments."

To P4T,
There is no personal attack or insult here.
The Catholics believe in "gifts of grace," "means of grace," etc.
You may call them what you wish.

Usually you refer to faith, which when speaking of the unsaved, is never a gift. The title of this thread is "Faith Received part deux: It is the third thread on faith received. It is the third thread on where faith comes from; is it a gift of God. No, it isn't. God does not give gifts to the unregenerate. Scripture after scripture makes this clear. The only gift God will give to the unregenerate/unsaved is salvation, and that comes via faith.

But not as the offence, so also is the free gift. For if through the offence of one many be dead, much more the grace of God, and the gift by grace, which is by one man, Jesus Christ, hath abounded unto many. (Romans 5:15)
--This is the closest one comes in the Bible to a gift by grace. It is a free gift. But what is the gift?

And not as it was by one that sinned, so is the gift: for the judgment was by one to condemnation, but the free gift is of many offences unto justification. For if by one man's offence death reigned by one; much more they which receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ.) (Romans 5:16-17)
--The gift being spoken of throughout the chapter is righteousness, that gift which is bestowed upon a person when they, by faith, believe on the Lord Jesus Christ. They are given "a right standing in Christ," a standing of righteousness.

In Romans 6:23 the gift of God is eternal life.
In Eph.2:8,9 the gift of God is salvation.

The gift of God always has to do with salvation; it never has to do with faith. The Catholics believe that way. Others believe that way. But the Bible does not teach that. If it does, I am sure that someone might be able to show me from the Bible that God gives faith as a gift to the unregenerate. But God does not give spiritual gifts to the unregenerate.

 

[Winman]

Mat 8:10 When Jesus heard it, he *marvelled,* and said to them that followed, Verily I say unto you, I have not found so great faith, no, not in Israel.

Mk 6:6 And he *marvelled* because of their unbelief. And he went round about the villages, teaching.

Neither of these verses make sense if faith is a gift from God. Why would Jesus marvel at the centurion's great faith if he gave that great faith to him? Did Jesus forget he gave faith to this man?

And why did Jesus marvel at the people's unbelief in Mk 6:6? Did he forget that he had failed to give them faith?

So, these verses clearly refute that faith is a gift from God. All men have the ability to believe, and are by duty expected to do so when God reveals himself to men.

 

[Luke2427]

You wrote, "If God loves everybody then that verse means that EVERYBODY (in a salvific way) will love God."

You have just argued that if God loves everyone then everyone would be saved, unless you meant the parenthetical "in a salvific way" to be referring to God's love and man's love...in which case you need to state yourself more clearly because that is very unclear. And you went on to say, "His loving us is what CAUSED us to love him."

Can you explain the difference in God's love for someone "salvifically" and non-salvifically?

It's very simple. If God loves all men salvifically then all men would be saved.

He loves all men but he has a special love for his elect. This is saving love.

God does not love all men the same.

If we love him BECAUSE he first loved us then his loving us is the very thing that CAUSED us to love him.

If he loves every single person the same and if that love CAUSES men to love him then EVERY SINGLE person would love him.

So OBVIOUSLY the love in that verse is special love. It is love that CAUSES men to love Him back.

Since not all men DO love Him then that special love that causes men to love God must not be universal.

 

[Skandelon]

It's very simple. If God loves all men salvifically then all men would be saved.

He loves all men but he has a special love for his elect. This is saving love.

God does not love all men the same.

If we love him BECAUSE he first loved us then his loving us is the very thing that CAUSED us to love him.

If he loves every single person the same and if that love CAUSES men to love him then EVERY SINGLE person would love him.

So OBVIOUSLY the love in that verse is special love. It is love that CAUSES men to love Him back.

Since not all men DO love Him then that special love that causes men to love God must not be universal.

Ok, now I understand you point. But you do realize you are begging the question, right? I mean that you are presuming that God's love spoken of in this passage is effectually salvific, which is a point up for debate.

Something can be a "cause" while not being an effectual one.

- Why are you going to the baseball game?
- BECAUSE my wife found me free tickets.

Is that "cause" effectual, in that you didn't have any options once your wife found free tickets? Of course not. In the same way, you might say I love my mom because she loves me, but no one would simply presume her love to be effectual by that statement, would they? Of course not. This shows you are reading something into the text that is not necessarily there.

Now, if the text said, "The elect will certainly love God because God has chosen to love them," then you might have a case.

 

[preacher4truth]

To P4T,
There is no personal attack or insult here.
The Catholics believe in "gifts of grace," "means of grace," etc.
You may call them what you wish.

Usually you refer to faith, which when speaking of the unsaved, is never a gift. The title of this thread is "Faith Received part deux: It is the third thread on faith received. It is the third thread on where faith comes from; is it a gift of God. No, it isn't. God does not give gifts to the unregenerate. Scripture after scripture makes this clear. The only gift God will give to the unregenerate/unsaved is salvation, and that comes via faith.

But not as the offence, so also is the free gift. For if through the offence of one many be dead, much more the grace of God, and the gift by grace, which is by one man, Jesus Christ, hath abounded unto many. (Romans 5:15)
--This is the closest one comes in the Bible to a gift by grace. It is a free gift. But what is the gift?

And not as it was by one that sinned, so is the gift: for the judgment was by one to condemnation, but the free gift is of many offences unto justification. For if by one man's offence death reigned by one; much more they which receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ.) (Romans 5:16-17)
--The gift being spoken of throughout the chapter is righteousness, that gift which is bestowed upon a person when they, by faith, believe on the Lord Jesus Christ. They are given "a right standing in Christ," a standing of righteousness.

In Romans 6:23 the gift of God is eternal life.
In Eph.2:8,9 the gift of God is salvation.

The gift of God always has to do with salvation; it never has to do with faith. The Catholics believe that way. Others believe that way. But the Bible does not teach that. If it does, I am sure that someone might be able to show me from the Bible that God gives faith as a gift to the unregenerate. But God does not give spiritual gifts to the unregenerate.

Dear DHK,

Brother, if I would've said that to you, I would have received an infraction, or worse.

So, you are saying that I have the freedom to speak like that, or could we just say, that it's perhaps just not necessarry, and that we should treat each other with respect, and love as brothers?

- Peace

 

[Winman]

It's very simple. If God loves all men salvifically then all men would be saved.

He loves all men but he has a special love for his elect. This is saving love.

God does not love all men the same.

If we love him BECAUSE he first loved us then his loving us is the very thing that CAUSED us to love him.

If he loves every single person the same and if that love CAUSES men to love him then EVERY SINGLE person would love him.

So OBVIOUSLY the love in that verse is special love. It is love that CAUSES men to love Him back.

Since not all men DO love Him then that special love that causes men to love God must not be universal.

If God passes over the majority of mankind and allows them to go to hell and the lake of fire I could hardly see how he loves them.

If you saw someone drowning and just sat back and watched when you could jump in and save them or throw a life preserver to them, would you call that love? I would call that callous neglect.

Or, if you had ten children who caught a serious and fatal disease, but only took two to the hospital and allowed the other eight to die, would you call that love? I wouldn't.

Calvinism falsely teaches that God has no personal responsibility to save sinners, but Jesus himself showed that God cares about all his creation.

Mat 6:26 Behold the fowls of the air: for they sow not, neither do they reap, nor gather into barns; yet your heavenly Father feedeth them. Are ye not much better than they?

Mat 12:11 And he said unto them, What man shall there be among you, that shall have one sheep, and if it fall into a pit on the sabbath day, will he not lay hold on it, and lift it out?
12 How much then is a man better than a sheep? Wherefore it is lawful to do well on the sabbath days.

Luk 12:24 Consider the ravens: for they neither sow nor reap; which neither have storehouse nor barn; and God feedeth them: how much more are ye better than the fowls?

Calvinism teaches that God has no personal responsibility toward his own creation, but Jesus taught that God cares about all men, and that men have value.

Mat 10:31 Fear ye not therefore, ye are of more value than many sparrows.

We are all sinners, we all come short of the glory of God, but God does not consider man worthless trash that he casts into the fire for his pleasure. Jesus taught that we are valuable to God. God loves and cares about all men and is not willing that any should perish. He has provided a way for all men to be saved if they will submit and trust in his Son Jesus.

 

[DHK]

Dear DHK,

Brother, if I would've said that to you, I would have received an infraction, or worse.

So, you are saying that I have the freedom to speak like that, or could we just say, that it's perhaps just not necessarry, and that we should treat each other with respect, and love as brothers?

- Peace

Speak like what? I defined for you "gift of grace," how grace is used in the Bible, what is a gift in the Bible, and used Scripture to back up my views. Why would you take offense?

 

[preacher4truth]

Speak like what? I defined for you "gift of grace," how grace is used in the Bible, what is a gift in the Bible, and used Scripture to back up my views. Why would you take offense?

I've tried. There's no settling with you. Your initial comment was a personal attack, then you tried to clean it up later.

Your irreverent statements concerning Gods grace are several. And this that I tried to settle with you is another.

One more thing, I noticed you skipped out on what would have happened to me if I stated the same things. We all know the answer to that.

 

[DHK]

Your irreverent statements concerning Gods grace are several. And this that I tried to settle with you is another.

You call them irreverent. I don't see them as that.
You probably have the same reaction as a Catholic, and I am using this as an example that I take from the Other Christian Denom. Forum. In their catechism it is written that the new birth = baptism. Without baptism there is no salvation. I tell them that the belief that water washes away sins is no different than the Hindu belief of baptism in the holy waters of the Ganges river which they believe washes away sin. The belief that water washes away sin is a superstitious belief. They too will believe that I am irreverent toward "baptism," just as you think I am irreverent to God's grace. I am not. I am Biblical, and happen to use good illustrations backed up by the Bible.

One more thing, I noticed you skipped out on what would have happened to me if I stated the same things. We all know the answer to that.

Nothing. I back my views up by the Bible. Do the same.
I have stated a belief, a challenge, that no one has answered except to declare it wrong. Your only answer is that I am being irreverent to the doctrines of grace. That is a lot of hogwash! Faith is not a gift of grace. It is not a gift to the unregenerate. You can't slither out of that truth by saying I am irreverent because I can proclaim a truth from the Bible which you cannot demonstrate is false. Don't hide behind such a facade.

 

[davidoregonJr]

You call them irreverent. I don't see them as that.
You probably have the same reaction as a Catholic, and I am using this as an example that I take from the Other Christian Denom. Forum. In their catechism it is written that the new birth = baptism. Without baptism there is no salvation. I tell them that the belief that water washes away sins is no different than the Hindu belief of baptism in the holy waters of the Ganges river which they believe washes away sin. The belief that water washes away sin is a superstitious belief. They too will believe that I am irreverent toward "baptism," just as you think I am irreverent to God's grace. I am not. I am Biblical, and happen to use good illustrations backed up by the Bible.

Nothing. I back my views up by the Bible. Do the same.
I have stated a belief, a challenge, that no one has answered except to declare it wrong. Your only answer is that I am being irreverent to the doctrines of grace. That is a lot of hogwash! Faith is not a gift of grace. It is not a gift to the unregenerate. You can't slither out of that truth by saying I am irreverent because I can proclaim a truth from the Bible which you cannot demonstrate is false. Don't hide behind such a facade.

The Lord bless you a 1000 times more as much as you have in your life now.
amen

 

[Winman]

I also have asked a similar question in regards to the gift of faith being discussed and held by some. How and when do we receive this gift if not by hearing the Word of God? Is it something that God has miraculously enabled us with? P4T mentioned 2 Peter 1:1, pointing to the word "obtained." Is this "obtaining" a miraculous/supernatural event that took place, minus the means of hearing the Word which brings faith?

The scriptures do not teach that God supernaturally "zaps" us to have faith. The scriptures themselves teach that the scriptures appeal to man's ability to reason.

2 Tim 3:15 And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.

Paul here says the scriptures are able to make us "wise" unto salvation.

Jn 6:45 It is written in the prophets, And they shall be all taught of God. Every man therefore that hath heard, and hath learned of the Father, cometh unto me.

Jesus said those who are taught by God come to him. It is those that have heard and learned that come to him.

Combine this with what Paul said in Romans 10.

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?

Rom 10:17 So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.

Never once do the scriptures ever say God supernaturally zaps a person to have faith. Repeatedly the scriptures say faith comes by hearing the word of God. Jesus said those who have heard and learned come. Paul said the scriptures are able to make a person wise unto salvation.

Paul asks how it is possible for a man to believe unless he has heard of Christ? He asks nothing more, he did not ask how it is possible for a man to believe unless he has been regenerated.

This belief that man is so depraved he must be regenerated to have the ability to believe is foreign to the scriptures and never mentioned even once. You would think that this most important doctrine would have been spoken of repeatedly by Paul, or Jesus, or one of the other apostles or prophets.

Amazing, an entire doctrine built on something never mentioned in all of scripture even once! Incredible.

 

[preacher4truth]

You call them irreverent. I don't see them as that..

Yes I know. Calling God's Grace a catholic school girl, and saving some african somewhere (with condescension insinuated by trivialization), and aligning it to false religious practices (sacraments) is OK with you.

Attaboy!!! :thumbsup:

Not.

But it's all good, it's only His Precious Grace in reference, right?

 

[quantumfaith]

Yes I know. Calling God's Grace a catholic school girl, and saving some african somewhere (with condescension insinuated by trivialization), and aligning it to false religious practices (sacraments) is OK with you.

Attaboy!!! :thumbsup:

Not.

But it's all good, it's only His Precious Grace in reference, right?

Must have missed that one, where in world did DHK or anyone call
God's Grace "a catholic schoolgirl"?

 

[preacher4truth]

Must have missed that one, where in world did DHK or anyone call
God's Grace "a catholic schoolgirl"?

It's simple. Do a search in the forums.