God can only save those who believe

No I don't. I have spoken to a great many of them. But I also realize that among the Calvinists here there are many stripes and colors of them--some more extreme than others.

 

Is a half truth true? Or is it a lie? Or is it half a lie? Is half a lie half a false witness? etc.

 

Because this conversation is with DHK.

 

Nothing can be sadder than to have to read what a brother-in-Christ says of other brethren's beliefs, and the insinuations of such statement.
Calvinists and those who adhere to the Doctrine of Grace have so often been accused of twisting Scriptures and preaching lies, and when they argue back, they are said to be the ones who start the "fight".

Twice, Paul states that previous to their regeneration, or their "coming to belief", if you will, they were "dead", that is to say, "spiritually dead". These are in Ephesians 2:1 and Colossians 2:13.

What else can it be but "spiritually dead" ? The death that God warned Adam about was not physical death, obviously, for he did not die but lived hundreds of years, yet his close fellowship with his Creator was cut off.

Neither was Paul referring to the Ephesians or the Colossians as "resurrectees". They were regenerates. Formerly dead sinners whom the Savior reconciled with their Creator through His own blood.

Once Paul says of natural men (whether one likes to refer to them as "unregenerate", "reprobate", "unconverted", or "unsaved") that the things of God are foolishness and indiscernable to them, much less received as truth.

If the natural man, therefore, is in such spiritual condition, how then can he have a will which is contrary to a dead nature and can be manifested only by a living nature ?

Even the Calvinist-haters of this board will concede that God cannot go against His own nature, which is good. He cannot sin. He cannot contradict Himself. He cannot not do good, even to those that hate Him, which is what Christ demonstrated while on this earth, when he fed people, healed them, ate with them, even though he knew that not all of those who milled about Him and companied with him loved Him.

He loved, because He knew what He said in His own Scriptures. To everything, there is a season.....His having loved them does not mean they will escape judgment. One day He will come back and separate the reprobate from the regenerate.

God is good, because that is His nature, and that is His nature because He is light and not darkness, life and not death. The Scripture refers to Him as the Father of lights.

If God, whose nature is good and who is the giver and source of life, cannot go against and outside of His own nature, how then is it that the natural man, which according to Scripture is dead in sin and trespasses (which I take to mean "deep fried" in sin and trespasses), able to possess more power and prerogative than the Creator, in that he is able to overcome his nature and exercise a free will that pleases His Creator with no help at all ?

Doesn't such a thought raise man higher than his Creator ?
Whereas his Creator is bound by His Holy and Good nature, the creature, on the other hand is not ?

 

What you meant to say was that 'there are Calvinists who say that man has no free will." Remember the double negative rule .

 

You continue to refuse to listen to explanations from the Calvinist side -- you like to remain engaged in myth-making .I have explained why the term I.R. is easily misunderstood as is 'Limited Atonement' .That's why I prefer the term 'Effectual Calling' or even 'Efficacious Grace' .

The following is from Chapter 10 , section 1 of the Westminster Confession of Faith .

All those whom God hath predestined unto life , and those only , he is pleased , in his appointed and accepted time , effectually to call , by his word and Spirit , out of that state of sin and death in which they are by nature , to grace and salvation by Jesus Christ ;enlightening their minds spiritually and savingly to understand the things of God ; taking away their heart of stone , and giving unto them an heart of flesh ; renewing their wills , and by his almighty power determining them to that which is good , and effectually drawing them to Jesus Christ ; yet so as they come most freely , being made willing by his grace .

 

If I can't read one sentence in one breathe I don't bother reading it. Like I said once before, I am not "sola Westminster Confession of Faith," but sola scriptura. In the Other Denominations Forum we used to have a cult, in which the poster could never explain herself without first going to a website and then copying and pasting what was said in the website. She was unable to express her own doctrine in her own words. Your post reminds of that cult member. I am not insinuating that you are a cult member; only your manner of explanation.

 

I don't see anything in my quote to you that is false. You will have to point it out to me.
Now if you are referring to the previous one which Pinoy already commented on, (as well as myself), then yes, the statement was intended to be an exagerration, a literary device known as hyperbole used to get a person's attention. And it worked, didn't it?

 

Arminian

I'm not speaking of aminian, but for non-cals. We non-cals is a doctrine of grace which is more scriptual grace through faith. We are saved by grace through faith.

I know many calvinist who know how much faith is important to, but to say that if we are not calvinist our doctrine is not of grace , that is a lie.

The truth is not grace alone but grace through faith there is no other way. Which are faith did not come from our self ,but from God from His word.

 

I have not taken time to read all of the posts here, but nevertheless, I do not think there are any of the Calvinist brethren here who on this thread who said or intimated that if one is not a Calvinist then one's doctrine is not of grace.

But, you see, what is currently on the table and being discussed, is whether or not God saves only those who are able to believe, and the most current area of discussion pertains to whether one has inherent faith, or whether that faith must come from God.

So, if you are saying that one's faith must necessarily be from God, and has no inherence in its character, then there is nothing to discuss. Right ?

 

So the next time I want to exagerate the truth......... I'll just call it hyperbole.... then it will be ok with God? Thanks for the tip.......... I'm sure God will buy it. Wait........ is that hyperbole?

 

I am not sure if you are referring to me, but I will answer the post anyway. And I don't know what the statement is that you are referring to.

I believe the term "Doctrine of Grace" is thrown around quite loosely. I believe also in the "Doctrine of Grace," though I am not a Calvinist. Grace is the free unmerited favor of God. Christ died for our sins even though we didn't deserve it. It was nothing but love. We deserve eternal separation from God. God in his grace sent his son to die for us and pay the penalty that we deserve. That is grace.

"You hath he 'made alive' who were once dead in sins and trespasses."
Yes, it is speaking of spiritually dead. When the spirit is dead, it is separated from God. It needs to be made alive by the Holy Spirit. That happens at conversion, when a man is born again.

The Ephesians were spiritually dead, in the sense that they were not saved. I agree with that.
But that was not the case with Adam. Adam was a child of God and never lost his salvation. He only lost his fellowship with God. The Scriptures say:
"For by one man sin entered into the world and death by sin, so that all have sinned."
A number of things happened:
1. Adam knew evil. He didn't know evil before that time.
2. The curse upon the world, and Adam and the race entered the world, and thus the effects of degeneration.
3. Man inherited a sin nature that would be passed on from generation to generation.
4. Because of man's sin, physical death entered into the world.
5. Man's sin separated him from God. (as a believer sin would cause separation from God in fellowship. As an unsaved man sin would cause separation from God for all eternity). Either way sin cause separation from God.

In Eph.2:1, Paul refers to the Ephesians as those who were once not saved, and now were saved.

I agree.

Because he is made in the image and likeness of God. God gave him a will, the right to choose between right and wrong. People make choices all the time. It is that characteristic that sets them apart from animals. How can you deny the free will of man, when you think of the many choices that you make every day. There is no one to force you.

Quite true.

Not entirely true. There are two resurrections. One day he will come back and the saved will be raptured or taken up with him, while the unsaved will be left behind to be resurrected at a later time. He is not coming back to separate the saved and unsaved. Rather there are two resurrections: one for the just and one for the unjust.

True

You have twisted logic.
Your second premise which is also your conclusion, is a non sequitor.
It comes out of no where.
No one has claimed it. It makes no sense. It has no logic to anything previous to what you have said.

Who said (or even inferred) that man "is able to possess more power and preogative than the Creator, in that he is able to overcome his nature and exercise a free will that pleases his Creator with no help at all."

If ever there was a "false accusation" it is there, or a misrepresentation of the facts, it is there. Show me where any non-Cal, ever said that. These are your conclusions based on unfounded information. Notice I agreed with most of what you said. Then out of the wild, out of the blue, you come up with this. It just appears! Where is the logic?

BTW, has any non-Cal, ever denied the operation of the Holy Spirit in the salvation of man. No. They deny the concept that the Calvinist unwittingly pushes forward that man is nothing more than a robot with no choice whatsoever. We see this in Calvinism again and again.
But this is an unbiblical concept.
Man does have free will to choose Christ or to reject him, and yet all in the bounds of the sovereignty of God. Here is where you actually deny God's sovereignty and His power. Is not God powerful enough to make man in his own image, give him the power of choice, a free will to choose, and still remain God the Creator at the same time. You have a very limited view of God if you cannot concede that point. Your view of God is limited to Calvin and Augustine, and can procede no further than those two men. At least I can dwell in the glorious teachings and meditate in the revelation of the Bible to further my knowledge of God. I am not confined by a system of one or two men's beliefs when it comes to "theology."

No, unfortunately, it sadly shows how the Calvinist becomes so limited in his view of an all powerful God.

God is not bound. He has given man a free choice. If you free yourself from the shackles of Calvinism, perhaps you will someday see this.

 

Faith

Faith will never be an inherited thing. I never seen anyone wake up with faith.

Faith comes from God's word and just like the young rich ruler you can walk away.

God can save anyone, but His word tells us that He will only save those who believe in His Son.

It isn't that God can only save those who believe, but that God made a covanant with us that He will only save those who believe in His Son.

That is God's choice, who are we to question God and His word.

It isn't that He can save only those who believe, but He will do what His word says.

You say calvinism is a doctrine of grace, our doctrine is a doctrine of grace which we include the whole truth grace through faith.

I am saved by grace, because Jesus paid the price for my sins so I don't have to.

My belief didn't save me and I wouldn't and couldn't boast over my belief, but what Jesus did for me on the cross.

Without Jesus belief or no belief no one could be saved so we boast over Him.

This faith didbn't come from myself it came from God through His word.

 

I guess by 'breathe' you meant breath .

Hmm , if you can't read one sentence in one breath , you don't bother reading it . Well , I guess you haven't spent the needed time and energy to read Ephesians 1:7-12 in your KJV . That is six verses , but only one sentence .So , because you have an inability to read a long sentence I will give you the NIV rendering so you might be able to begin to grasp the content of the passage .It breaks it up into three sentences .

"In him we have redemption through his blood , the forgiveness of sins , in accordance with the riches of God's grace that he lavished on us with all wisdom and understanding . And he made known to us the mystery of his will according to his good pleasure , which he purposed in Christ , to be put into effect when the times will have reached their fulfillment -- to bring all things in heaven and on earth together under one head , even Christ . In him we were also chosen , having been predestined according to the plan of him who works out everything in conformity with the purpose of his will , in order that we , who were the first to hope in Christ , might be for the praise of his glory ."

 

I expected when I wrote that statement that someone like yourself would respond in like manner. Of course, having already said that I was sola scriptura, I wasn't referring to the Scripture at all. If one can't put their own thoughts in their own words without referring to documents other than the Scriptures I feel sorry for them. Perhaps they should go back to school.

 

We have had plenty of interactions on the BB , DHK . I do refer to documents at times , but even though you oppose nearly everything I hold dear -- you have to admit that I have use my own thoughts most of the time . ( If you want to be honest about it .)

I think that the WCoF passage used very scriptural language to express God's effectual grace . It flows with biblical terminology . But maybe you didn't read it carefully enough -- as you said . It was too much for you to absorb in one long sentence .

I do indeed hold to Sola Scriptura . Shame on you to say or suggest otherwise .But I am aware of your MO by now , so I am not surprised .

 

I figured you held to sola scriptura. Why not keep to that method. I prefer the KISS method of dialogue or debate. It works much better then obfiscuted, antiquated paragraphs, and generally using out-moded and garbled syntaxically-challenged and a grammatically problematic method of discussion.

 

But you still like the KJV anyway ?

BTW , 'syntaxically' isn't a word . And it's 'obfuscated' , not 'obfiscuted'. You need to adhere more closely to your KISS method .

 

DHK,

"Doctrine of Grace" is one thing --- "DoctrineS of Grace" is Calvinism/Reform Theology. The "DoctrineS of Grace" are like Calvies "Appendices" and "Glossary" to the Bible so that you can "really" tell what all the parts of the Bible say. Appendix 1 is likely the Westminister Confession, 2 the description of T-U-L-I-P, 3... well, you get the idea.

The "Glossary" might have such hard-to-intepret words as "whosoever," "all," "elect," "foreknow," etc. redefined in more understandable terms. "Whosoever" and "all" might mean "whosoever is elect" and "all the elect" respectively. In the same "Glossary" we might find "foreknow" defined as "predestine."

I can understand you thinking that the term "Doctrine of Grace" is thrown around quite loosely. I think they purposely make these terms more confusing.

skypair

 

Here's how Job explained a "natural man" becoming a "spiritual man."

Job 32:8-10 "But there is a spirit in man [man's CONSCIENCE]:

and the inspiration of the Almighty giveth them understanding [the Holy Spirit INSPIRES the CONSCIENCE of the "natural man"].

Great men are not always wise: neither do the aged understand judgment [There's your Calvinism spoken of by Elihu. Conscience and inspiration don't always keep "great" and "aged" men from being a greater influence than the Holy Spirit unfortunately! :tear: ]."

Therefore I said, Hearken to me;" [Elihu is about to "preach so that Job may be "inspired" and "hear" and be saved! Rom 10:14-15]

skypair