Free choice to choose...

[npetreley]

skypair,

So much of what you post is nonsense I don't know how you manage to have a rational conversation with anyone about anything. So far you've stated such outrageous things as:

1. We are not saved by grace (see Eph 2:8)
2. God tries to save everyone but fails
3. A God who cannot do something is not God (see #2)

You really should take a deep breath, then read PL's and others' posts carefully several times, think it through, consider if anything you are about to say is contradicted by the Bible, and THEN, and ONLY THEN, start to write your post. You're making a fool of yourself otherwise.

 

[skypair]

I don't have them either. They are all online here. That's a handy place to look up all those Calvin quotes anti-Calvinist sites put up. Quite often, when you see the quotes in their whole context, you'll find the quotes have been cherry-picked, and they are sometimes saying something quite different in context than the sites lead us to believe.

Very familiar with the practice. Many here do the same with scripture.

Yes. I gave them to you. Examine yourself to see if you are leaning on Christ's work alone for your salvation. Examine yourself to see if you can see God's work within you, etc.

I am ABSOLUTELY certain, russ. Thanks. My whole thrust is that Calvinists can't know if THEY are "elect."

Mormons don't believe you can be saved by leaning on Christ's work alone. Their delusion is that they need to add their own works to Christ's. Perhaps a Mormon may convince themselves they are saved, but they would not be relying on Calvin's test to do it. They'd have to be relying on the sufficiency of their own works for their salvation.

What is Calvin's "test?"

This is exactly what Calvin is saying. If someone is trusting (believing) in Christ for his salvation, then he can be sure of his election.

But suppose they were truating on "election" and not directly on Christ? Say someone thought they were "elect." They believed Christ died for their sin -- they could "hear" and understand scriptures -- they believed that salvation was "monergistic," that there was nothing they need to. Do they not relinquish theur responsibility to repent and receive Christ in order to get eternal life? Is there not something more personal involved than just knowing that one is "elect?"

No, he doesn't. Read the section. He relies on one's trust in Christ as proof of election and proof of salvation.

Yes, I see that in an indirect way, russ. I see that they believe in Christ without taking any "action" that might even hint that it was up to them to choose. Don't you see that? I mean, it is like those who see the truth and "draw back unto perdition" not having accepted the offer.

Do you see that the Pharisees did the same. This is a cautionary tale, russ. They Pharisees thought God saved them because of who they were, right? They knew all about scripture (they thought, re: Nicodemus). They "lived the life." They were God's "chosen." Were they??

Calvin says that Satan can use inquiry into the reasons why we are ELECT (NOTE: this is not the same thing as inquiring into the reasons why we are SAVED) to cause us to doubt.

Satan can use both! He has even tested me. And he always does so by being our "prosecutor." If the Holy Spirit is going to keep us "in the spirit," Satan is going to keep us looking at our flesh to "evaluate" whether we are saved. This is exactly how I have been tested -- this is exactly what Calvin is saying for us to "test." Not whether we chose but whether we live according to salvation. It is a stern test to trust our faith rather than our works tempered by our flesh.

skypair

 

[russell55]

I am ABSOLUTELY certain, russ.

Me too, because Christ's work is absolutely trustworthy and I trust in Christ's work.

My whole thrust is that Calvinists can't know if THEY are "elect."

Anyone who trusts in Christ's work for salvation can be assured that they are saved. And that they are saved is proof that they are elect. So yes, Calvinists can be sure they are elect. What they can't be sure of is why they are elect. That's Calvin's whole point in the passage you quoted from, BTW. He says someone can be sure they are elect, but they can't be sure why they are elect.

What is Calvin's "test?"

I gave it to you: Whether they trust in Christ alone for salvation.

But suppose they were truating on "election" and not directly on Christ?

No one is saved except they trust directly in Christ. But why in the world would someone trust in their election? It is Christ's work that saves us. Solus Christus (only through Christ's work) is one of the 5 solas of the reformation.

Say someone thought they were "elect." They believed Christ died for their sin -- they could "hear" and understand scriptures -- they believed that salvation was "monergistic," that there was nothing they need to.

Calvinist believe that people must have faith in Christ in order to be saved . Monergistic just mean that all the work is done by God.

Then do they not relinquish theur responsibility to repent and receive Christ in order to get eternal life?

Huh? Calvinist believe it is only through faith in Christ that people are saved. Sole fide (through faith alone) is another of the 5 solas of the reformation.

Is there not something more personal involved than just knowing that one is "elect?"

Huh? Knowing you are elect saves no one. We are saved by grace through faith in Christ's work.

I see that they believe in Christ without taking any "action" that might even hint that it was up to them to choose. Don't you see that?

Huh? If people believe in Christ, then they are saved. Calvinists don't say that people don't choose Christ.

Have you ever read any evanglistic messages by Calvinists? I think it might help you get rid of some of these persistent wrong notions about what Calvinists believe about salvation if you did.

Do you see that the Pharisees did the same. This is a cautionary tale, russ. They Pharisees thought God saved them because of who they were, right?

And Calvinists don't think they are saved because of who they are. They think they are saved by God's grace on the grounds what Christ did, through the instrument of faith. So I think your cautionary tale misses the point by seeing a danger that isn't really there, and at the same time, it insinuates that Calvinists believe something that they don't believe.

Satan can use both! He has even tested me. And he always does so by being our "prosecutor."

But the answer to that is in Romans 8: Satan's charges won't stand because of what Christ has done. Trust in Christ's work, because Christ's work is perfect work, and cannot fail.

If the Holy Spirit is going to keep us "in the spirit," Satan is going to keep us looking at our flesh to "evaluate" whether we are saved. This is exactly how I have been tested -- this is exactly what Calvin is saying for us to "test."

No he isn't. He is telling people to examine whether they trust wholly in Christ's work or not.

Not whether we chose but whether we live according to salvation. It is a stern test to trust our faith rather than our works tempered by our flesh.

Huh? We don't trust in our works, or in our faith, either. It is Christ's work alone that saves, and it is in Christ's work alone that we ought to be trusting.

 

[skypair]

Me too, because Christ's work is absolutely trustworthy and I trust in Christ's work.
Anyone who trusts in Christ's work for salvation can be assured that they are saved. And that they are saved is proof that they are elect.

Thanks, russ. You have allayed my fears somewhat.

But did you read my breakdown of Calvin's quotes that I wrote to pinoy? The very first one speaks about having assurance of "election" by the very best means -- "posterior signs" of sure atestation. Stuff like "holy living" -- not the day I gave my life to Christ.

And what happened to the witness "His Spirit witnesses with our spirit that we are children of God?" Rom 8:18 To me, if anything be sought it would be this Gift" that is evidence that our belief is, indeed, right belief, Heb 11:1. (belief -> regeneration/HS -> faith)

A little later, Calvin seems to have a change of mind and say, "Let our method of inquiry then be, to begin with the calling of God and to end with it." Now it is all about "calling." But it turns out in paragraph #2 that this is just the same as "posterior signs." And reading #2 paragraph, one comes to the distinct conclusion that Calvin is talking about whether we receive the blessings of God helping us determine whether we are elect.

Here. I'm going to repost it for you to read. I've highlighted a few passages that don't sound even similar to what you responded with.

4. Therefore as those are in error who make the power of election dependent on the faith by which we perceive that we are elected [ERROR??], so we shall follow the best order, if, in seeking the certainty of our election, we cleave to those posterior signs which are sure attestations to it. Among the temptations with which Satan assaults believers, none is greater or more perilous, than when disquieting them with doubts as to their election, he at the same time stimulates them with a depraved desire of inquiring after it out of the proper way. (See Luther in Genes. cap. 26). By inquiring out of the proper way, I mean when puny man endeavors to penetrate to the hidden recesses of the divine wisdom[??], and goes back even to the remotest eternity, in order that he may understand what final determination God has made with regard to him. In this way he plunges headlong into an immense abyss, involves himself in numberless inextricable snares, and buries himself in the thickest darkness. For it is right that the stupidity of the human mind should be punished with fearful destruction, whenever it attempts to rise in its own strength to the height of divine wisdom. And this temptation is the more fatal, that it is the temptation to which of all others almost all of us are most prone. For there is scarcely a mind in which the thought does not sometimes rise, Whence your salvation but from the election of God? But what proof have you of your election? When once this thought has taken possession of any individual, it keeps him perpetually miserable, subjects him to dire torment, or throws him into a state of complete stupor. I cannot wish a stronger proof of the depraved ideas, which men of this description form of predestination, than experience itself furnishes, since the mind cannot be infected by a more pestilential error than that which disturbs the conscience, and deprives it of peace and tranquillity in regard to God. Therefore, as we dread shipwreck, we must avoid this rock, which is fatal to every one who strikes upon it. And though the discussion of predestination is regarded as a perilous sea, yet in sailing over it the navigation is calm and safe, nay pleasant, provided we do not voluntarily court danger. For as a fatal abyss engulfs those who, to be assured of their election, pry into the eternal counsel of God without the word, yet those who investigate it rightly, and in the order in which it is exhibited in the word, reap from it rich fruits of consolation.

Let our method of inquiry then be, to begin with the calling of God and to end with it. Although there is nothing in this to prevent believers from feeling that the blessings which they daily receive from the hand of God originate in that secret adoption, as they themselves express it in Isaiah, "Thou hast done wonderful things; thy counsels of old are faithfulness and truth," (Isa. 25:1). For with this as a pledge, God is pleased to assure us of as much of his counsel as can be lawfully known. But lest any should think that testimony weak, let us consider what clearness and certainty it gives us. On this subject there is an apposite passage in Bernard. After speaking of the reprobate, he says, "The purpose of God stands, the sentence of peace on those that fear him also stands, a sentence concealing their bad and recompensing their good qualities; so that, in a wondrous manner, not only their good but their bad qualities work together for good. Who will lay any thing to the charge of God's elect? It is completely sufficient for my justification to have him propitious against whom only I have sinned. Every thing which he has decreed not to impute to me, is as if it had never been." A little after he says, "O the place of true rest, a place which I consider not unworthy of the name of inner-chamber, where God is seen, not as if disturbed with anger, or distracted by care, but where his will is proved to be good, and acceptable, and perfect. That vision does not terrify but soothe, does not excite restless curiosity but calms it, does not fatigue but tranquilizes the senses. Here is true rest. A tranquil God tranquilizes all things; and to see him at rest, is to be at rest,"


skypair

 

[Pastor Larry]

This is getting long and drawn out unfortunately.

You can't even answer without making "believe" the basis for "rebirth!"

I believe that regeneration comes after faith, so of course, for me, believe is the basis for rebirth.

OK, what does one have to believe before one is regenerated? Here's your chance. I won't go any farther without you declaring your belief.

I have declared this many times. They must believe in the truth about God, man, and Christ.

It's the ISSUES you refuse to deal with, not my posts.

I am not aware of any issues I have refused to deal with.

Didn't you just say "for those who believe it." Ostensibly, we could believe in regenration before belief and that would be enough, right?

Yes, the “it” there is regeneration preceding faith.

I'm really having a problem with you not addressing the issues, Lar.

No you’re not. Your problem is that you disagree. I am dealing with the issues just fine. You just don’t like how I deal with them.

Please illuminate this with scripture. I can't even fathom what you are saying. Let's just take the "intelligent design" justification of creation --- it was intelligent. That is, it was thought out -- "engineered" if you will. If not, then creation existed with God and was not a creation, was it?

Not sure what you are questioning. God created all things. That means time is a creation of God. With respect to God’s knowledge being eternal, if God ever did not know something, then he is not eternally omniscient.

So, yeah, Joe didn't have a choice in the course of time. But God's foreknowledge was perfect and He could foresee what Joe's decision would be -- Christ or death. Do you believe God has that ability? Or not and that God designates Joe to heaven or hell sight unseen?

I believe God has that ability to foresee what someone will do. I don’t think that matters in this discussion. The point is that Joe could not change his mind. And therefore you believe that God creates people to send them to hell, since he does not do anything to stop them from going. In fact, he creates them and they have to go to hell because God knows they will.

Explain to me how it couldn't be random. It certainly can't be by "respecting persons." That would also suggest knowledge beforehand which Calvinists deny vehemently.

It is not random because it is rooted in the gracious choice of God, not in the roll of dice.

You don't even know when you are wrong?? Jesus said the Holy Spirit lived WITH them but now shall live IN them, John 14:17. What do you think was the big "hubbub" at Pentecost, Larry? Jer 31:31 said indwelling was for a future day. Ezek 37:14, Larry. For heaven's sake! Have you gone to seminary for nothing??

By going to seminary, I know that there are various positions on OT indwelling. You would know that too if you took time to learn. There are several schools of thought on this. Some believe OT saints were neither indwelled or regenerated; some believe they were regenerated but not indwelled; some believe they were regenerated and indwelled. You can make up your own mind, but realize that good men differ with good reason. The passages you refer to have perfectly valid explanations in line with OT indwelling. Let’s not hijack this thread to discuss it however.

Your education is deficient, Larry.

It may well be. I am planning on starting a doctoral program soon to go along with the education I already have. But if you think it is deficient, then feel free to show where.

As I have noted before, scripture goes way beyond what Calvin allows or knew.

Could be true, but irrelevant. Calvin is not the basis for what I believe.

no distinction between soul and spirit
no distinction between "choosing" belief vs. the gift of faith
no understanding of sin nature and original sin (infants condemned)
no knowledge of why God chooses whom He does to salvation
no comprehension of God's sovereignty thereby making God the cause of sin, etc.
actual perversion of the meaning of "elect," "election," "foreknowledge," etc. -- many other terms.

These lists of defects are, in fact, not defects at all. They are positions that have been held in orthodox Christianity for centuries. Honestly, SP, I don’t think you even understand the issue. I recognize that trichotomy is a valid biblical interpretation. But so is dichotomy. One some of these issues, you are simply in denial of plain Scripture. If you knew what you were talking about, I can’t help but think you would actually interact with the issues

Believing in grace rather than in Christ for salvation, you mean.

No, I don’t mean that at all.

You just also told me that God "passes over" some who "believe" but aren't "elect."

What are you talking about? I never said that.

So there's the basis for saying you believe in something other than belief in Christ.

There is no basis for it. I have, for a very long time, affirmed salvation only through faith in Christ.

Then you say you have confidence that you are "elect" unto salvation.
So where do you think I get the idea that you depend on grace rather than on belief in Christ?

Salvation is by grace through faith in Christ. If you don’t have grace, then there is no salvation. But grace is not the content of saving faith. Christ is. Again, I wonder if you actually read with any thought at all.

Same verses we couldn't agree on before, eh? I said "chosen to salvation ... through faith in the truth" I can see where you are coming from in that it appears say saved by 1)regeneration and 2) then faith. I hadn't seen that before. And it is true! But it leaves out belief and foreknowledge. IOW, the very manner of God's choosing you is on account of foreknowledge/knowledge beforehand of your belief. This verse picks up talking about "election" (you substitute "chosen" I notice this time) saying that knowing that, God gave you 1) regeneration and 2) faith on account of His knowledge of your belief.

First, I didn’t substitute “chosen.” It is what the verse says. Second, this verse is not about regeneration prior to faith or not. Third, this verse does not tell us that the manner of God’s choosing is foreseen faith. It says nothing of the kind. Fourth, this verse is plain: You are chosen to salvation, not ministry.

Here's where justification comes in. You were justified by belief first

I agree. Most Calvinists would, I think. Justification is not the issue here.

Then, by way of sanctification, God gave you the 1) Spirit indwelling and 2) faith (after all, the Spirit IS the evidence of what you "hoped"/believed so faith does follow proof/evidence IAW Heb 11:1!)

So now you are arguing that regeneration and the indwelling of the Spirit precedes faith? But this makes no sense in the passages in question.

But the Bible certainly NEVER says that God's Spirit dwells in a filthy "house" of unbelief.

I agree. I am not aware of any Calvinist who disagrees.

"Chosen" = Jews

You keep saying this but so far you haven’t offered any proof and I have given you clear scriptural evidence that Gentiles are elect to salvation. Why won’t you deal with that?

 

[russell55]

Skypair,

The whole long first paragraph that you quote is about the improper way to examine whether one is elect. Notice the words "out of the proper way."

The second paragraph is about the proper ways to examine it:

• Have you experienced the calling of God? Calvin says you know whether you have experienced the calling by whether you have apprehended Christ by faith.
• Secondly: Do you experience the protection of Christ?

The next sections, 5 and 6, examine these two things more closely.

A little later, Calvin seems to have a change of mind and say, "Let our method of inquiry then be, to begin with the calling of God and to end with it." Now it is all about "calling." But it turns out in paragraph #2 that this is just the same as "posterior signs."

Yes, because for Calvin, the way to determine whether we have been called or not is whether or not we have faith in Christ.

And reading #2 paragraph, one comes to the distinct conclusion that Calvin is talking about whether we receive the blessings of God helping us determine whether we are elect.

Yes, because that's the second assurance of election that Calvin gives: the protection of Christ.

A little trick is to read the larger sections in light of the summaries given at the top. That helps us understand exactly what the larger sections are saying.

But honestly, I don't know why you are spending so much time on this. It tells you what Calvin thought about this issue and that's it. It tells you very little one way or another about what Calvinists in general believe about it, since Calvin's writings are not the basis for what Calvinists believe.

If I were to make a list of ways to know whether I elect or saved, I'd start with asking myself if I was trusting in Christ and his work, and whether I believed his work was sufficient. Then I'd move on to the signs given in 1 John, since, after all, that's John's intent—to give us ways of knowing that we have eternal life.

• Do I walk in the light?
• Do I keep his commandments?
• Do I love the brothers and sisters?
• Do I confess the Son?
• Etc, etc, etc.

 

[skypair]

This is getting long and drawn out unfortunately.

I'll try to make this short..er. :laugh:

OK, "regeneration after faith" -- "belief basis for rebirth" -- must believe in the truth about God, man, and Christ" [before rebirth] -- "'it' [regeneration] precedes faith." These are all your statements.

Would it be fair to say that you believe in this order of those things? Belief -> regeneration -> faith?

Not sure what you are questioning. God created all things. That means time is a creation of God. With respect to God’s knowledge being eternal, if God ever did not know something, then he is not eternally omniscient.

What I am questioning is whether God's knowledge is eternal. Where do you get this?

I believe God has that ability to foresee what someone will do. I don’t think that matters in this discussion. The point is that Joe could not change his mind. And therefore you believe that God creates people to send them to hell,...

It has relevance in deciding how God chooses whom He does to salvation (a question Sproul can't answer). So your admission would allow Joe to have a free choice when the time comes. That is, you admit the first cause of Joe's salvation or condemnation is God's foreknowledge and not God's foreordination.

It is not random because it is rooted in the gracious choice of God, not in the roll of dice.

Are you familiar with "random number generation" programs? They pick random numbers so that every number between 1 and X has an equal chance of being picked. This is what you are proposing. No one has a "leg up" on account of themselves. God's choice is purely random. It is gracious, no doubt. But that doesn't make it non-random. It is His "choice" (according to you) but without respect of persons.

Is there something I am missing that makes you object to how I describe it??

By going to seminary, I know that there are various positions on OT indwelling.

Well, I've heard such claims. Although you are free to present any you think I haven't seen, they are all instances of Holy Spirit FILLING. Filling comes and goes. Were you aware of that, Larry?

There are several schools of thought on this.

There's only ONE scripturally correct answer, though. The OT saints won't be regenerated until "the regeneration," Mt 19:28. We are regenerated "by the washing of regeneration" as we live, Titus 3:5.

It may well be. I am planning on starting a doctoral program soon to go along with the education I already have. [Congrats! :applause: ] But if you think it is deficient, then feel free to show where.

I gave a good list below.

These lists of defects are, in fact, not defects at all. They are positions that have been held in orthodox Christianity for centuries.

Isn't that what I just said ---- that your theology is out of date?? Maybe I could help you with your doctoral thesis. I'd like that. We could move you into the 21st century.

Honestly, SP, I don’t think you even understand the issue. I recognize that trichotomy is a valid biblical interpretation. But so is dichotomy.

But again ---- which is right? You gotta study and go with the truth, don't you? And especially when it falls into line with the way God works out our salvation!

On some of these issues, you are simply in denial of plain Scripture.

Larry, I'm a student of the scriptures just like you. If you think any of these are "off the wall," simply point me to the truth.

Salvation is by grace through faith in Christ. If you don’t have grace, then there is no salvation.

Are you calling "grace" salvation? I do notice Reformers/Calvies using the term grace as if that is what believers get. Perhaps that is the problem is we don't use that word in the same way. Can you get "grace" without Christ? For instance, is grace considered to be regeneration among Calvies?

So now you are arguing that regeneration and the indwelling of the Spirit precedes faith? But this makes no sense in the passages in question.

The sum of our study of that passage is, yes, I am saying that regeneration precedes faith and both are given on account of BELIEF. IOW, there is some cause within man which God responds to when giving the gift of the Holy Spirit. There is a "housecleaning" of sorts that allows the Holy Spirit to come in. That housecleaning" is BELIEF ---- acting belief that repents and receives Christ. THEN grace, regeneration, faith, etc. are given by God. Do you see that?

You keep saying this but so far you haven’t offered any proof and I have given you clear scriptural evidence that Gentiles are elect to salvation. Why won’t you deal with that?

All Gentiles? Is that what you are saying?

skypair

 

[skypair]

The whole long first paragraph that you quote is about the improper way to examine whether one is elect. Notice the words "out of the proper way."

The first line belies what you just said. He says "faith" is the improper way

The second paragraph is about the proper ways to examine it:

• Have you experienced the calling of God? Calvin says you know whether you have experienced the calling by whether you have apprehended Christ by faith.

• Where? Not in this passage he hasn't (so far as I can see).
  
  

  Yes, because for Calvin, the way to determine whether we have been called or not is whether or not we have faith in Christ.

  OK, I am still not seeing that here. But say that was so ---- faith is proof? I say no. I say choice of Christ and turning to God brings proof, the indwelling of the Holy Spirit.
  
  How can you know you have faith in Christ according to Calvin?? Wouldn't you be left with going back to what he just said -- blessing, protection, etc.?
  
  

  But honestly, I don't know why you are spending so much time on this. It tells you what Calvin thought about this issue and that's it. It tells you very little one way or another about what Calvinists in general believe about it, since Calvin's writings are not the basis for what Calvinists believe.

  Really?
  
  

  If I were to make a list of ways to know whether I elect or saved, I'd start with asking myself if I was trusting in Christ and his work, and whether I believed his work was sufficient. Then I'd move on to the signs given in 1 John, since, after all, that's John's intent—to give us ways of knowing that we have eternal life.

  • Do I walk in the light?
  • Do I keep his commandments?
  • Do I love the brothers and sisters?
  • Do I confess the Son?
  • Etc, etc, etc.

  Yeah -- I would say that Calvin knew about these. I would say that maybe these drive the "elect" crazy, too, just like he says.
  
  But there is a better way 1) without inquiring into the hidden counsel and 2) without becoming "shipwrecked." But it is the one Calvin denies from the outset --- "the faith by which we perceive that we are elected." That is, we have proof (faith, Heb 11:1) by reason of 1) choosing Christ and 2) receiving the Holy Spirit indwelling.
  
  Now I know you agree with the latter/(2) but you are not allowed to do the former/(1). Instead it is God who chooses you which is the crux of the crisis of lack of assurance!
  
  Ever give yourself that "Holy Spirit test?" Try it (1Cor 2:6-7). Do you understand the "mysteries?" How about the parables of Jesus? (Mt 13:11) Can you see the kingdom of God? (John 3) The kingdom of heaven? (Mt 13:11) You don't need to answer. It's enough for me that you try it.
  
  skypair

 

[Pastor Larry]

OK, "regeneration after faith" -- "belief basis for rebirth" -- must believe in the truth about God, man, and Christ" [before rebirth] -- "'it' [regeneration] precedes faith." These are all your statements.

And all out of context.

Would it be fair to say that you believe in this order of those things? Belief -> regeneration -> faith?

No. You know that. I have explained that to you before.

What I am questioning is whether God's knowledge is eternal. Where do you get this?

What else would it be? Omniscience is a part of the essence of God. If he did not always have omniscience, he would not be God.

It has relevance in deciding how God chooses whom He does to salvation (a question Sproul can't answer). So your admission would allow Joe to have a free choice when the time comes. That is, you admit the first cause of Joe's salvation or condemnation is God's foreknowledge and not God's foreordination.

No. I have told you before, the first cause of anyone’s belief is God.

Are you familiar with "random number generation" programs? They pick random numbers so that every number between 1 and X has an equal chance of being picked. This is what you are proposing.

No it’s not.

Is there something I am missing that makes you object to how I describe it??

Yes. You are missing the Bible’s teaching that it is not random, but according to God’s purpose to demonstrate the glory of his grace.

Well, I've heard such claims. Although you are free to present any you think I haven't seen, they are all instances of Holy Spirit FILLING. Filling comes and goes. Were you aware of that, Larry?

Filling is different than indwelling theologically. Yes, I am aware that feeling comes and goes. As for presenting something you haven’t seen, that has unfortunately become my life on the BB. It seems that most of this is stuff you haven’t seen.

There's only ONE scripturally correct answer, though. The OT saints won't be regenerated until "the regeneration," Mt 19:28. We are regenerated "by the washing of regeneration" as we live, Titus 3:5.

Matthew 19:28 is not the regeneration of salvation.

I gave a good list below.

Where? The only list I saw was things that you and I have talked about. On none of those issues have you shown me to be wrong. You have shown that you don’t know what you are talking about on some, and on others you have simply shown that we disagree.

Isn't that what I just said ---- that your theology is out of date?? Maybe I could help you with your doctoral thesis. I'd like that. We could move you into the 21st century.

I doubt very seriously that you could help write a high school Bible class paper on this topic. We don’t need up to date theology. We need biblical theology. What you have said here would not pass muster in any class.

But again ---- which is right? You gotta study and go with the truth, don't you? And especially when it falls into line with the way God works out our salvation!

Dichotomy is right. But it has nothing to do with soteriology, really.

Larry, I'm a student of the scriptures just like you. If you think any of these are "off the wall," simply point me to the truth.

I have. Take election for example. You say election is unto ministry. I have pointed to clear statements of Scripture that election is to salvation.

Are you calling "grace" salvation?

No.

I do notice Reformers/Calvies using the term grace as if that is what believers get. Perhaps that is the problem is we don't use that word in the same way. Can you get "grace" without Christ? For instance, is grace considered to be regeneration among Calvies?

Grace is not regeneration. Grace has a number of different nuances. We receive grace; grace is given to us. Grace saves us, etc.

The sum of our study of that passage is, yes, I am saying that regeneration precedes faith and both are given on account of BELIEF.

But biblically, as I have demonstrated previously, belief and faith are the same thing. The same word is used in the Bible. Here is another area where you simply will not listen to Scripture.

Do you see that?

Yes I see it. And it is unbiblical.

All Gentiles? Is that what you are saying?

No of course not. Have you forgotten how much we have talked about already? Seriously. Why do you keep asking me stuff that I have already clarified, or saying stuff about my belief that isn’t true? Not all Gentiles are elect to salvation, but some are. Election to salvation is not simply a Jewish thing.

 

[russell55]

The first line belies what you just said. He says "faith" is the improper way

No, he says " those are in error who make the power of election dependent on the faith by which we perceive that we are elected [ERROR??],"

In other words, elections power does not depend on our faith. However, that we have faith—a sign posterier to election—is proof of election.

Where? Not in this passage he hasn't (so far as I can see).

From Calvin's own statements summarizing this section:

5. Christ the foundation of this calling and election. He who does not lean on him alone cannot be certain of his election. . . .

OK, I am still not seeing that here. But say that was so ---- faith is proof? I say no. I say choice of Christ and turning to God brings proof, the indwelling of the Holy Spirit.

You are contradicting yourself. First you say faith is not proof, and then in the next line you say that choosing Christ and turning to God is proof. What is faith but choosing Christ and turning to God?

How can you know you have faith in Christ according to Calvin?? Wouldn't you be left with going back to what he just said -- blessing, protection, etc.?

How does anyone know they have faith in Christ? You examine yourself to see if you are leaning on him alone.

Really?

Really and truly, and you've been told this before. Calvinists affirm sola scriptura. They don't go to Calvin for their doctrine, but to scripture.

Yeah -- I would say that Calvin knew about these. I would say that maybe these drive the "elect" crazy, too, just like he says.

There are people of all theological stripes who doubt their salvation at times. And there are those of all theological stripes who don't doubt.

Personally, I don't doubt because I know who I continue to trust in.

But there is a better way 1) without inquiring into the hidden counsel and 2) without becoming "shipwrecked." But it is the one Calvin denies from the outset --- "the faith by which we perceive that we are elected." That is, we have proof (faith, Heb 11:1) by reason of 1) choosing Christ and 2) receiving the Holy Spirit indwelling.

You've misread that line, as I've explained above. That particular line is talking about "the power of election" not the certainty of election.

When Calvin gets to the subject of certainty of election, he says leaning on Christ alone gives certainty of election (see above quote.) You've got to read carefully, because this was written 400 years ago then translated a long time ago, too, so it is a difficult slog.

Now I know you agree with the latter/(2) but you are not allowed to do the former/(1). Instead it is God who chooses you which is the crux of the crisis of lack of assurance!

No, we choose because God chooses, but we choose. So our choice is proof of God's choice because it comes from it. Therefore our choice gives us assurance.

Ever give yourself that "Holy Spirit test?" Try it (1Cor 2:6-7). Do you understand the "mysteries?" How about the parables of Jesus? (Mt 13:11) Can you see the kingdom of God? (John 3) The kingdom of heaven? (Mt 13:11) You don't need to answer. It's enough for me that you try it.

I am assured of my salvation because Christ's work is sufficient to save and I trust in Christ's work. The object of my faith saves to the uttermost those who draw near to God through him.

 

[skypair]

No. You know that. I have explained that to you before.

Yes but examine the 4 statements I quote and it appears that you have that order in mind.

Omniscience is a part of the essence of God. If he did not always have omniscience, he would not be God.

Omniscience is "all knowing." Suppose there was knowledge God had not created, therefore, has not known. Does God create knowledge?

No. I have told you before, the first cause of anyone’s belief is God.

You told me in error. Did God create us capable of believing? Sure. Is that what you mean? But that doesn't mean God caused us to believe. Did God send His Holy Spirit to witness to us? Sure. That still doesn't mean God caused us to believe. You say "regeneration" caused you to believe. Not before you believe! I'm having a hard time telling HOW you think God causes belief.

Yes. You are missing the Bible’s teaching that it is not random, but according to God’s purpose to demonstrate the glory of his grace.

OK --- please splain how God chooses only those who will "demonstrate His glory and grace." I obviously missed something (and so did every other free willer I know).

Filling is different than indwelling theologically. Yes, I am aware that feeling comes and goes.

It is NOT feeling. Filling is partly that but if you follow my discussion of the spirit of man, you will see that it is God filling your whole mind, emotions, and will at once.

As for presenting something you haven’t seen, that has unfortunately become my life on the BB. It seems that most of this is stuff you haven’t seen.

Matthew 19:28 is not the regeneration of salvation.

Ta-dah! Wonderful!! Regeneration is NOT unto salvation!!! Regeneration is unto SANCITFICATION, Larry!!! The OT saints are SAVED ALREADY! They do not need to be justified -- they need to be sanctified! And so it will be in "the regeneration." Honestly, Larry -- this is "cutting edge." Even Lahaye just figured this out. But it is NOT 1550 Calvinism!

I doubt very seriously that you could help write a high school Bible class paper on this topic.

May I take this to Latourneau University when I move there as a reference?? :laugh:

We don’t need up to date theology. We need biblical theology. What you have said here would not pass muster in any class.

Grow up, Larry. This is merely you rejecting me. Has NOTHING to do with truth.

Dichotomy is right. But it has nothing to do with soteriology, really.

Says Mary Winkler. But her husband says --- oops, he'd dead. At this point, it is your word against mine.

[quoteI have. Take election for example. You say election is unto ministry. I have pointed to clear statements of Scripture that election is to salvation.[/quote] You have pointed out clear statements that you THINK are unto salvation. Your whole premise is that God elects people "sight unseen" and makes them do whatever is His "good will." Can anyone say "puppet?"

Grace is not regeneration. Grace has a number of different nuances. We receive grace; grace is given to us. Grace saves us, etc.

Oh? Never saw THAT name (grace) in my Bible. Are you talking about CHRIST??

We do receive grace -- but not unconditionally. Grace DOES save us -- but only through Christ. I am trying to understand why Calvinists replace Christ with grace.

But biblically, as I have demonstrated previously, belief and faith are the same thing.[/quote So I guess I didn't make my point.

The same word is used in the Bible. Here is another area where you simply will not listen to Scripture.

Don't tell me -- tell the translators. They seem to have been able to discern the difference even if you can't.

Yes I see it. And it is unbiblical.

I'm hurt! I "cut to the quick!" Faith is not belief substantiated by God, Heb 11:1??? Egads! :tonofbricks: The great "Larry Houdini" has escaped my grasp again!!

skypair

 

[Pastor Larry]

Yes but examine the 4 statements I quote and it appears that you have that order in mind.

If you take what I have said in the context of my saying it, I think it is clear what I believe.

Omniscience is "all knowing." Suppose there was knowledge God had not created, therefore, has not known. Does God create knowledge?

I don’t think knowledge is something created per se. I think these logical and philosophical pursuits are destroying the simplicity that is found in Christ. You are so determined to prove me wrong that you will go to absurd lengths to try.

You say "regeneration" caused you to believe.

I don’t think I have ever said that. What do you have in mind? Link to me saying that and I will take a look at it.

I'm having a hard time telling HOW you think God causes belief.

God brings belief through his gift of faith and through the new nature.

OK --- please splain how God chooses only those who will "demonstrate His glory and grace." I obviously missed something (and so did every other free willer I know).

Why should I explain it? God hasn’t given us much explanation. He does tell us in 1 Cor 1 some of how he chose: For consider your calling, brethren, that there were not many wise according to the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble; 27 but God has chosen the foolish things of the world to shame the wise, and God has chosen the weak things of the world to shame the things which are strong, 28 and the base things of the world and the despised God has chosen, the things that are not, so that He may nullify the things that are, 29 so that no man may boast before God.

I hesitate to go further than that because God hasn’t. It appears that God chooses dumb, weak, low class people so that people will realize that it is about God, not the person.

Ta-dah! Wonderful!! Regeneration is NOT unto salvation!!!

Not in Math 19:28. But regeneration is part of salvation that brings new life.

Regeneration is unto SANCITFICATION, Larry!!! The OT saints are SAVED ALREADY! They do not need to be justified -- they need to be sanctified! And so it will be in "the regeneration." Honestly, Larry -- this is "cutting edge." Even Lahaye just figured this out. But it is NOT 1550 Calvinism!

You are just making stuff up. Regeneration leads to sanctification. But the regeneration in Matt 19:28 is the resurrection.

Grow up, Larry. This is merely you rejecting me. Has NOTHING to do with truth.

I am not rejecting you. I have never accepted you. We chat on the BB. That’s it. I am rejecting your arguments and your positions because they are not consistent with what Scripture says.

Says Mary Winkler. But her husband says --- oops, he'd dead. At this point, it is your word against mine.

If you can find something besides material and immaterial, I will become a trichotomist. You also have to explain why “soul” is used interchangeably. I used to be a trichotomist and then I studied it and changed my mind.

You have pointed out clear statements that you THINK are unto salvation.

It is kind of hard to say that “chose you for salvation” isn’t choosing for salvation. I am not always real good with grammar and words and stuff, but that one seems clear even to me.

Oh? Never saw THAT name (grace) in my Bible. Are you talking about CHRIST??

Grace is all through the Bible. When I say that grace saves us, I am referring to passages like Eph 2:8-9, Titus 2:11, Titus 3:7, etc.

We do receive grace -- but not unconditionally. Grace DOES save us -- but only through Christ. I am trying to understand why Calvinists replace Christ with grace.

I am not aware of any Calvinists who replace Christ with grace. Do you have someone in mind? Or would you like to apologize for saying that?

So I guess I didn't make my point.

No, you made your point. It was simply wrong.

Don't tell me -- tell the translators. They seem to have been able to discern the difference even if you can't.

Yes, the difference is that the verb form is translated as “believe” and the noun form is translated as “faith.” There are very few exceptions to that.

I'm hurt! I "cut to the quick!" Faith is not belief substantiated by God, Heb 11:1???

What does that mean? It makes no sense.

 

[skypair]

No, he says " those are in error who make the power of election dependent on the faith by which we perceive that we are elected [ERROR??],"

In other words, elections power does not depend on our faith. However, that we have faith—a sign posterier to election—is proof of election.

Well, I think I see what you are saying --- that knowledge of our election comes after we receive faith. I agree. I'm not positive that is what Calvin says but if that is what you say, I agree.

From Calvin's own statements summarizing this section:

Ah! But you have gone on th paragraph 5. I need to favorite that website so I can keep up with you.

You are contradicting yourself. First you say faith is not proof, and then in the next line you say that choosing Christ and turning to God is proof. What is faith but choosing Christ and turning to God?

I reread what I said and it does appear as you say. Actually, "choosing Christ and turning to God" is BELIEF. Receiving the Holy Spirit afterward is FAITH/proof. Got it?

How does anyone know they have faith in Christ? You examine yourself to see if you are leaning on him alone.

Not me. I go back to my "day of decision," 2Cor 6:2. I KNOW that I chose to be "reconciled to God." I KNOW the year (April 1962). I haven't always "leaned" on Him. You may come upon days when this is true for you, too. My KNOWledge of being saved is certain! I prayed to receive Christ -- my first desire was to share my salvation (confess with thy mouth) -- I saw scripture in whole different way (Holy Spirit). I had all the proofs that scripture says I would.

Really and truly, and you've been told this before. Calvinists affirm sola scriptura. They don't go to Calvin for their doctrine, but to scripture.

Excellent -- if it is true. Are you willing to have scripture tell you that salvation is a choice YOU make? that there is a distinction between soul and spirit? That sin nature and original sin does NOT condemn infants to hell? That God's sovereignty allows man to have sovereignty over his own destiny? See, these are questions I don't believe you are willing to depart from Calvin on.

You've misread that line, as I've explained above. That particular line is talking about "the power of election" not the certainty of election.

I like that! You know what the "power" of election is? The Holy Spirit. SANCTIFICATION. MINISTRY. God's blessing and purpose for your life. But before the "power of election" comes, you need of JUSTIFICATION -- you need to receive the "righteousness of God."

When Calvin gets to the subject of certainty of election, he says leaning on Christ alone gives certainty of election (see above quote.) You've got to read carefully, because this was written 400 years ago then translated a long time ago, too, so it is a difficult slog.

This is the point I make with Larry. Do you truly believe they understood this stuff as well 400 years ago as we do now? No concordances. No "hyperlink." Only Catholic tradition. No Bible in everyone's hand! To trust Calvin is like "trusting Mohammed" 300 years earlier!!

Russ --- "we've come a long way, baby!" If you need to go back, go back to Jesus, Paul, Peter, etc. -- the NT -- scriptures!

No, we choose because God chooses, but we choose. So our choice is proof of God's choice because it comes from it. Therefore our choice gives us assurance.

Thank you! WE choose. Right on! God chooses all of us but it is those who choose Christ that God saves. That's all I want to hear -- cause Calvin says you can't choose, salvation is monergistic but you reject that!! Hallelujiah!

skypair

 

[psalms109:31]

Saul

psalms.



Jonah couldn't give a fig for man nor beast just plants. What disqualified Jonah, the reluctance of an hyper-Calvinist?

Saul before he became Paul didn't either. It took him being blind, saul in the belly of the fish to be turned. Paul was a man just like us. God had to keep a thorn in his side just to keep him humble.

God desires men to be saved before they have a knowledge of the truth speaks volumes. God wants what He gets according to you. If you are not willing He can go kiss His wants goodbye.

Accourding to God not me.

Matthew 23:37
"O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you who kill the prophets and stone those sent to you, how often I have longed to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, but you were not willing.

Strange that isn't it? Paul wondered why God still blames us, you know more than he did ? What next, the gospel according to psalms? A new gospel just as it ever was.

Just the scripture as God presented it before men. THe good news, not the bad news of men.

Mark 16:15He said to them, "Go into all the world and preach the good news to all creation. 16Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned.

You preach want you want to, I'll preach what God through Jesus told me to preach.

I do not blame God for not choosing me, "He is the LORD; let him do what is good in his eyes." Was good enough for a man that just lost his generations and it's good enough for me.
EPH 1:3 Praise be to the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us in the heavenly realms with every spiritual blessing in Christ. 4 For he chose us in him before the creation of the world to be holy and blameless in his sight. In love 5 he predestined us to be adopted as his sons through Jesus Christ, in accordance with his pleasure and will--

He choose us in Him not apart from Him. God didn't choose you outside of Jesus. As the scripture says'

John 15
The Vine and the Branches
1"I am the true vine, and my Father is the gardener. 2He cuts off every branch in me that bears no fruit, while every branch that does bear fruit he prunes[a] so that it will be even more fruitful. 3You are already clean because of the word I have spoken to you. 4Remain in me, and I will remain in you. No branch can bear fruit by itself; it must remain in the vine. Neither can you bear fruit unless you remain in me.

5"I am the vine; you are the branches. If a man remains in me and I in him, he will bear much fruit; apart from me you can do nothing. 6If anyone does not remain in me, he is like a branch that is thrown away and withers; such branches are picked up, thrown into the fire and burned.

Listen sinner, we are holy and blameless in His sight we are getting off scot-free.

Only believers are scott free who remain in Jesus thier only hope, many people who have chosen themselves are going to be very disappointed before God.

Psalm 22:5
They cried to you and were saved; in you they trusted and were not disappointed.

I'm still in touch with my fallen nature, I know what it thinks of this, we are victims of a Despotic Mad God who needs placating with Blood. A Madness possesses Him, blood! blood! He causes us to sin and then bashes us for it. And what? He owns you He doesn't owe you. It wasn't my fault that Adam took the fruit but I praise God for it. I am because he did.

No he gave all men a way out and we are called us to be His messenger.

Good on them then, "...why does God still blame us? For who resists his will?" Rom 9:19.

It wasn't me guv it was Adam. It had nothing to do with me, "It was like this when I got here." (Homer Simpson.) What's this free will I hear about and see men, women and children dying from thirst or drowning, where is the Good Samaritan? Oh Him? When a scourge brings sudden death, he mocks the despair of the innocent. JOB 9:23.

Matthew 9:36
When he saw the crowds, he had compassion on them, because they were harassed and helpless, like sheep without a shepherd

Matthew 14:14
When Jesus landed and saw a large crowd, he had compassion on them and healed their sick.

That is the lie that leads to Hell, Paul was saved, 1 Th 1:13 Even though I was once a blasphemer and a persecutor and a violent man, I was shown mercy because I acted in ignorance and unbelief.
In unbelief. It is God that saves not your ability to walk in His ways, oh great self-righteous one, you do not need saving for you save yourself. Jesus came for the unrighteous not the righteous ones. My sins have been forgotten yours it seems remain.

Paul repented and no longer lived in unbelief that is why He was saved. You want agree with part of the word of God that agrees with your belief and cast out those those that don't

Galatians 5:7You were running a good race. Who cut in on you and kept you from obeying the truth? 8That kind of persuasion does not come from the one who calls you.

Unless you were saved yesterday a? You bring a message opposed to mine, do not include me in a we will you?

In your opinion

My ministry to you over and above my normal duties is to sound a warning, you are in danger, I have discharged my duty the rest I do is a favour. If Jesus has paid the penalty for your sins psalms you have nothing to fear, 1 John 4:18 There is no fear in love. But perfect love drives out fear, because fear has to do with punishment. The one who fears is not made perfect in love.

I do not live in fear that is your opinion, I just agree with every word that comes from the mouth of God

Sure, and the promise is for me and my children and my children's children,

To those who have been called, who are loved by God the Father and kept by Jesus Christ:

john.

Believers are kept by Jesus Christ.

Hebrews 3:14
We have come to share in Christ if we hold firmly till the end the confidence we had at first.

 

[psalms109:31]

Saul

psalms.



Jonah couldn't give a fig for man nor beast just plants. What disqualified Jonah, the reluctance of an hyper-Calvinist?

Saul before he became Paul didn't either. He took him being blind, saul in the belly of the fish to be turned. Paul was a man just like us. God had to keep a thorn in his side just to keep him humble.

God desires men to be saved before they have a knowledge of the truth speaks volumes. God wants what He gets according to you. If you are not willing He can go kiss His wants goodbye.

Accourding to God not me.

Matthew 23:37
"O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you who kill the prophets and stone those sent to you, how often I have longed to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, but you were not willing.

Strange that isn't it? Paul wondered why God still blames us, you know more than he did ? What next, the gospel according to psalms? A new gospel just as it ever was.

Just the scripture as God presented it before men. The good news, not the bad news of men.

Mark 16:15He said to them, "Go into all the world and preach the good news to all creation. 16Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned.

You preach want you want to, I'll preach what God through Jesus told me to preach.

I do not blame God for not choosing me, "He is the LORD; let him do what is good in his eyes." Was good enough for a man that just lost his generations and it's good enough for me.
EPH 1:3 Praise be to the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us in the heavenly realms with every spiritual blessing in Christ. 4 For he chose us in him before the creation of the world to be holy and blameless in his sight. In love 5 he predestined us to be adopted as his sons through Jesus Christ, in accordance with his pleasure and will--

He choose us in Him not apart from Him. God didn't choose you outside of Jesus. As the scripture says'

John 15
The Vine and the Branches
1"I am the true vine, and my Father is the gardener. 2He cuts off every branch in me that bears no fruit, while every branch that does bear fruit he prunes[a] so that it will be even more fruitful. 3You are already clean because of the word I have spoken to you. 4Remain in me, and I will remain in you. No branch can bear fruit by itself; it must remain in the vine. Neither can you bear fruit unless you remain in me.

5"I am the vine; you are the branches. If a man remains in me and I in him, he will bear much fruit; apart from me you can do nothing. 6If anyone does not remain in me, he is like a branch that is thrown away and withers; such branches are picked up, thrown into the fire and burned.

Listen sinner, we are holy and blameless in His sight we are getting off scot-free.

Only believers are scott free who remain in Jesus thier only hope, many people who have chosen themselves are going to be very disappointed before God.

Psalm 22:5
They cried to you and were saved; in you they trusted and were not disappointed.

I'm still in touch with my fallen nature, I know what it thinks of this, we are victims of a Despotic Mad God who needs placating with Blood. A Madness possesses Him, blood! blood! He causes us to sin and then bashes us for it. And what? He owns you He doesn't owe you. It wasn't my fault that Adam took the fruit but I praise God for it. I am because he did.

No he gave all men a way out and He has called us to be His messenger.

Good on them then, "...why does God still blame us? For who resists his will?" Rom 9:19.

Matthew 23:37
"O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you who kill the prophets and stone those sent to you, how often I have longed to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, but you were not willing.

It wasn't me guv it was Adam. It had nothing to do with me, "It was like this when I got here." (Homer Simpson.) What's this free will I hear about and see men, women and children dying from thirst or drowning, where is the Good Samaritan? Oh Him? When a scourge brings sudden death, he mocks the despair of the innocent. JOB 9:23.

Matthew 9:36
When he saw the crowds, he had compassion on them, because they were harassed and helpless, like sheep without a shepherd

Matthew 14:14
When Jesus landed and saw a large crowd, he had compassion on them and healed their sick.

That is the lie that leads to Hell, Paul was saved, 1 Th 1:13 Even though I was once a blasphemer and a persecutor and a violent man, I was shown mercy because I acted in ignorance and unbelief.
In unbelief. It is God that saves not your ability to walk in His ways, oh great self-righteous one, you do not need saving for you save yourself. Jesus came for the unrighteous not the righteous ones. My sins have been forgotten yours it seems remain.

Paul repented and no longer lived in unbelief that is why He was saved. You want agree with part of the word of God that agrees with your belief and cast out those those that don't

Galatians 5:7You were running a good race. Who cut in on you and kept you from obeying the truth? 8That kind of persuasion does not come from the one who calls you.

Unless you were saved yesterday a? You bring a message opposed to mine, do not include me in a we will you?

In your opinion

My ministry to you over and above my normal duties is to sound a warning, you are in danger, I have discharged my duty the rest I do is a favour. If Jesus has paid the penalty for your sins psalms you have nothing to fear, 1 John 4:18 There is no fear in love. But perfect love drives out fear, because fear has to do with punishment. The one who fears is not made perfect in love.

I do not live in fear that is your opinion, I just agree with every word that comes from the mouth of God

Sure, and the promise is for me and my children and my children's children,

To those who have been called, who are loved by God the Father and kept by Jesus Christ:

john.

Believers are kept by Jesus Christ.

Hebrews 3:14
We have come to share in Christ if we hold firmly till the end the confidence we had at first.

 

[skypair]

Why should I explain it? God hasn’t given us much explanation.

I hesitate to go further than that because God hasn’t. It appears that God chooses dumb, weak, low class people so that people will realize that it is about God, not the person.

Ah! Finally a CONDITION for salvation! :laugh:

OK, not really. You know all those "according to's" and "through's" you kept ignoring? In those verses we are told WHY God chooses whom He chooses to salvation -- 2Thes 2:13 for instance. It wound up being because of belief 2:14 "in our [Paul's] gospel."

Not in Math 19:28. But regeneration is part of salvation that brings new life. You are just making stuff up. Regeneration leads to sanctification. But the regeneration in Matt 19:28 is the resurrection.

Larry -- I'm FINDING stuff that you couldn't possibly believe because Calvin/Reform didn't invent it and it would invalidate much of those theologies. From my side, I have studied this stuff (as have others - what is your opinion of LaHaye's theology?) and the Bible goes far beyond what Calvinism allows you to go. But I can see your motives for rejecting it.

If you can find something besides material and immaterial, I will become a trichotomist. You also have to explain why “soul” is used interchangeably. I used to be a trichotomist and then I studied it and changed my mind.

That might be enlightening -- what made you change your opinon?

It is kind of hard to say that “chose you for salvation” isn’t choosing for salvation.

Again, notice "THROUGH sanctification ... belief ... called to our gospel." Therefore, NOT UNCONDITIONAL -- NOT without REASONS found to come to exist in men.

Grace is all through the Bible. When I say that grace saves us, I am referring to passages like Eph 2:8-9, Titus 2:11, Titus 3:7, etc.

But there's that "through" word again (Eph 2:8) -- "through faith." Are you trying to push grace without Christ? Regeneration indiscriminately "given?"

Larry, I agree that God chooses whom He will but there IS a condition, a reason for choosing whom He does. He wills to choose believers. I'm going to post my thoughts on another thread regarding Psa 33:14-15, 18-19, 21. God looks down from His habitation --- He fashions all hearts alike --- His eye is upon them that fear Him, upon them that hope [believe] in His mercy "to deliver their soul from death..." Again, free will. Conditional election.

And there's what the Bible says about "soul" --- died in sin (Ezek 18:4), justified and delivered through belief. Simple, eh?

No, you made your point. It was simply wrong.

Re: 2Tim 2:10 -- your "elect's" there ARE the Jews. Who was it that caused Paul to "suffer as an evildoer, even unto bonds?" The Jews (2:9, Acts 21:27, 32)! "Therefore I endure all things for the elect's sakes,..." Update your "files" to reflect this "new" wisdom, pls. :thumbs: (Sorry, I could have ended that convo much earlier if I had noticed this.)

skypair

 

[Pastor Larry]

You know all those "according to's" and "through's" you kept ignoring?

No, I am not aware of any that I ignored.

In those verses we are told WHY God chooses whom He chooses to salvation -- 2Thes 2:13 for instance. It wound up being because of belief 2:14 "in our [Paul's] gospel."

No we aren't. Again, go read the verse. The sanctification adn belief is how the choose is worked out and the salvation is brought. It is not hte basis of the choice. This is simple reading the text.

Larry -- I'm FINDING stuff that you couldn't possibly believe because Calvin/Reform didn't invent it and it would invalidate much of those theologies. From my side, I have studied this stuff (as have others - what is your opinion of LaHaye's theology?) and the Bible goes far beyond what Calvinism allows you to go. But I can see your motives for rejecting it.

Huh? I believe what i believe because it is in the Bible. I haven't read anything from LaHaye in years. However, as a dispensationalist, what I have heard about his books make me wish he had never written them.

That might be enlightening -- what made you change your opinon?

The fact taht there is nothing besides material and immaterial, and the fact that the Bible uses "soul" for both material and immaterial.

Again, notice "THROUGH sanctification ... belief ... called to our gospel." Therefore, NOT UNCONDITIONAL -- NOT without REASONS found to come to exist in men.

Yes, the salvation comes through sanctification and belief. The choice of God does not. Again, simply read the verse.

But there's that "through" word again (Eph 2:8) -- "through faith." Are you trying to push grace without Christ?

No of course not.

Regeneration indiscriminately "given?"

No, it is given according to God's choice.

Larry, I agree that God chooses whom He will but there IS a condition, a reason for choosing whom He does. He wills to choose believers.

there is no scriptural support for this though, as you well know by now.

Re: 2Tim 2:10 -- your "elect's" there ARE the Jews. Who was it that caused Paul to "suffer as an evildoer, even unto bonds?" The Jews (2:9, Acts 21:27, 32)! "Therefore I endure all things for the elect's sakes,..." Update your "files" to reflect this "new" wisdom, pls. (Sorry, I could have ended that convo much earlier if I had noticed this.)

Noticed what? The Jews and Romans caused Paul to suffer, but that's not the point of 2 tim 2:10. Paul was a missionary to the Gentiles, among whom were God's elect, as I have shown from Scripture. We could end this convo a lot earlier if you would just go with Scriputre.

 

[russell55]

Well, I think I see what you are saying --- that knowledge of our election comes after we receive faith. I agree. I'm not positive that is what Calvin says but if that is what you say, I agree.

Ah! But you have gone on th paragraph 5. I need to favorite that website so I can keep up with you.

The whole section goes together, and provides the context for the statements you quote. It's particularly useful to read the summary statements first so you understand the entire argument of the section.

I reread what I said and it does appear as you say. Actually, "choosing Christ and turning to God" is BELIEF. Receiving the Holy Spirit afterward is FAITH/proof. Got it?

Faith and belief are the same thing. There is absolutely no difference in the Greek; therefore, it would have been impossible for the original writers and readers of the NT to make the distinction you make. If the original text doesn't make the distinction, neither should we. The English translators use faith to translate the noun form of the word, and believe to translate the verb form, because English doesn't have a verb form of the word faith. We don't say someone "faiths" in Christ, or is "faithing" in him, so the translators are forced to use completely a different word—the verb believe.

Not me. I go back to my "day of decision," 2Cor 6:2. I KNOW that I chose to be "reconciled to God." I KNOW the year (April 1962). I haven't always "leaned" on Him. You may come upon days when this is true for you, too. My KNOWledge of being saved is certain! I prayed to receive Christ -- my first desire was to share my salvation (confess with thy mouth) -- I saw scripture in whole different way (Holy Spirit). I had all the proofs that scripture says I would.

The thing is, I'm not sure you can find scripture that points to going back to your day of decision as a source of assurance of salvation. There is scripture that gives us other sources of assurance—I gave you some—but can you show me any that say to rely on your own decision for your assurance?

As to not always leaning on Christ—I mean leaning on his work as the source of your salvation. If someone is leaning on something else—like their own works, for instance, or their partaking in the sacraments, or their baptism, etc.—as the grounds for their salvation for their salvation, then I think there is reason to doubt their salvation. Those who trust Christ's work alone can be assured of their salvation because his work is perfect and he saves completly those who trust in him.

Excellent -- if it is true. Are you willing to have scripture tell you that salvation is a choice YOU make?

Those who are saved do choose Christ, but salvation isn't a choice we make. Salvation is God's work, and the grounds for it is Christ's work. God saves us. It is "of God's doing" we are in Christ Jesus.

that there is a distinction between soul and spirit?

Scripture doesn't make a consistent distinction between the two things.

That sin nature and original sin does NOT condemn infants to hell?

I don't know the eternal destiny of infants. We aren't told. I do know that that all human beings are by nature objects of God's wrath. Scripture says so.

That God's sovereignty allows man to have sovereignty over his own destiny?

I am not the hightest authority over my own destiny. God is: The mind of man plans his way, But the LORD directs his steps.

See, these are questions I don't believe you are willing to depart from Calvin on.

Calvin has nada to do with it. Those are statements I'm not willing to depart for scripture on, nor am I willing to speak where scripture doesn't.

I like that! You know what the "power" of election is? The Holy Spirit. SANCTIFICATION. MINISTRY. God's blessing and purpose for your life. But before the "power of election" comes, you need of JUSTIFICATION -- you need to receive the "righteousness of God."

The power of election is the power of God. God accomplishes what he plans.

This is the point I make with Larry. Do you truly believe they understood this stuff as well 400 years ago as we do now? No concordances. No "hyperlink." Only Catholic tradition. No Bible in everyone's hand! To trust Calvin is like "trusting Mohammed" 300 years earlier!!

In some cases, yes. They had the same scripture we do, and many of them spent most of their time studying it and writing on it. Most people today could not hold a candle to them in time spent in study of the scripture. Many of them understood the original languages—they did not need a concordance. A concordance, really, is a lay person's tool. It's not something someone who spends their life studying the scriptures in the original languages needs. And the reformers broke with Catholic tradition based on their understanding of scripture.

And no one trusts Calvin. Please stop insinuating that.

Russ --- "we've come a long way, baby!" If you need to go back, go back to Jesus, Paul, Peter, etc. -- the NT -- scriptures!

I answered everything you've thrown at me with scripture. You have, for the most part, have answered with your own philosophical ideas.

Thank you! WE choose. Right on!

Yes, of course. We choose. Why are you surprised? All calvinists believe we choose.

God chooses all of us but it is those who choose Christ that God saves.

It is those God chooses to bring to salvation that he saves. They are the ones that choose to follow Christ. Oh, and please so me scripture that says God chooses everyone.

That's all I want to hear -- cause Calvin says you can't choose,

I doubt that. Show me the quote.

salvation is monergistic but you reject that!!

No, I don't reject that. Salvation is, start to finish, God's work. Therefore, it is monergistic.

 

[skypair]

Faith and belief are the same thing.

Thanks for your explanation, russ. But WE need to make a distinction because what we believe before salvation is without proofs -- we believe without seeing. AND we can actually "believe in vain" (1Cor 15:3). That is, you can believe but fail to act upon your belief by not repenting and not receiving whereat you will still be lost. I think that Calvinism, by teaching monergism, causes people to do this exact thing!

Now what Heb 11:1 tells us is that when we receive faith, we receive proof of what we believed --- both "substance" and "evidence." And what is that "substance" and "evidence?" The Holy Spirit indwelling, russ.

The thing is, I'm not sure you can find scripture that points to going back to your day of decision as a source of assurance of salvation. There is scripture that gives us other sources of assurance—I gave you some—but can you show me any that say to rely on your own decision for your assurance?

Sure, russ -- Rom 10:9-10, John 1:12, etc. Anytime the gospel is offered, salvation and faith can be received. When it is, that decision is for eternity. That decision commits the soul to God instead of self unto eternal "justification" and THIS is why we have assurance -- because we KNOW that we chose to and we know God's promises are sure.

As to not always leaning on Christ—I mean leaning on his work as the source of your salvation. If someone is leaning on something else—like their own works, for instance, or their partaking in the sacraments, or their baptism, etc.—as the grounds for their salvation for their salvation, then I think there is reason to doubt their salvation.

Yet infants in Calvinist and Reform churches still lean on infant baptism, right? And Catholics still on the sacraments. I know what you are saying but there is a certain obedience that IS called for in order to be saved. If you like, don't call it believing -- call it "repentance toward God and receiving Christ." (soul repentance, spirit receiving) Is that "work?" No, work receives "wages" (as with "the WAGES of sin is death"). Gifts are not/cannot be paid for by the recipient -- only received.

Those who are saved do choose Christ, but salvation isn't a choice we make. Salvation is God's work, and the grounds for it is Christ's work. God saves us. It is "of God's doing" we are in Christ Jesus.

You are making a "semantical minefield" out of a very simple concept, russ. What you basically do is take away the necessary step of us being involved in the decision/transaction whereby Christ takes our sin and we assume His life on earth. Did God just give you something unasked for? Was it when you were an infant? No, I'm sure you saw the "Gift" first and received it when He came. Denying this, you have no grounds for believing you are saved or "elect."

Scripture doesn't make a consistent distinction between the two things.

You don't know that. You just don't discern it. You haven't considered either the distinction in scripture between "heart" and (the soul equivalent which term escapes me just now. Well, "conscience" is one.).

I don't know the eternal destiny of infants. We aren't told. I do know that that all human beings are by nature objects of God's wrath. Scripture says so.

Those who have a superficial knowledge of this issue ignore many other scriptures so that they may remain ignorant and protect their theologies (Total Depravity/original sin guilt). David went to see his son after David died. Did David go to hell? Many more could be/have been mentioned on previous threads. The sum of the issue is that 1) infants are "just" according to innocence, 2) will be resurrected ("resurrection of the just" including OT saints who are "just" according to faith in God) into the MK where they will see Christ and CHOOSE for themselves (seen in Isa 49:21 and following)

The power of election is the power of God. God accomplishes what he plans.

EXACTLY!!! But He doesn't use UNbelievers to do His will, does He?! You wouldn't call Pharoah "elect" would you?? So we know thereby that "election" means being used by God -- NOT being saved.

In some cases, yes. They had the same scripture we do, and many of them spent most of their time studying it and writing on it. Most people today could not hold a candle to them in time spent in study of the scripture.

You're sippin' Koolaid, russ! Most today do not study Augustine like Calvin did either. Most were not at first ardent Catholics nor use the Vulgate Bible in their works when they wrote either. Most do not, as a consequence of their own rebellion, come up with a "God" diametrically opposed the the Catholic one -- a "God" that more resembles a Greek "God" of Fate (vs. free will). Most now have the discipline of having knowledgeable Bible scholars critiquing their wayward notions.
And no one trusts Calvin. Please stop insinuating that.

I answered everything you've thrown at me with scripture. You have, for the most part, have answered with your own philosophical ideas.

We have a bloke on another thread who says that scripture doesn't tell us why God chooses whom He chooses to salvation. The ONLY way one can come to that conclusion is by believing Calvin, not scripture. If there is anything the Bible is written for, it is to tell mankind how to be saved (and thus, how God chooses whom He does to salvation)! This bloke is "willfully ignorant" because he accepts Calvin over scripture. And that, my friend, is MOST dangerous to your spiritual health.

The rest of you post is just affirming then denying that salvation is in your hands to receive or not. Very confusing. I'll tackle your answer when you know what it is.

skypair

 

[skypair]

PL,

I basically can't go on with your "profane and vain babbling that lead only to more ungodliness."

Your "God," the "God" of 5 pointers, is a "warmed over" Greek "God" before Whom you are both impotent and ignorant regarding your FATE.

From your testimony, I believe that there was a time when you knew Him just like Dale-c once did. And if you "purge yourself from [profane and vain babblings], you will be a vessel unto honor, sanctified and meet for the Master's [instead of Calvin's] work." 2Tim 2:16, 21

Right now, what I am seeing is one who is "hardening" himself against scriptures. You likely say the same of me but without acknolwedging that I have made several strides to reconciling free will to Calvinism admitting that faith is "given by God" after regeneration (thus, the "new birth" is the proof of belief), among others. Sorry I have been the instrument of your hardening -- and yet, isn't that one of the ministries of your missionaries? to make the lost more guilty of their sin?

skypair