God hardens hearts that He claims would otherwise believe. Is this total depravity?

[Dave...]

@Dave...​

False, Faith coms with quickening by grace. No faith while in nature Eph 2:2-3

Romans 5:1-2 Therefore, having been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom also we have access by faith into this grace in which we stand, and rejoice in hope of the glory of God.

 

[Van]

The Corinthians were Spiritual, the Spirit was in them

Yet another nonsense response, but the reason Paul used spiritual milk to speak to unregenerate people is not even addressed. Pay no attention to those who deceive.

 

[Brightfame52]

Contrast Romans 11:4-5, the remnant, with verse 14. these are not the same people.

Im familiar

 

[Van]

Van when you look at 1Co 1:2 "To the church of God which is at Corinth, to those who have been sanctified in Christ Jesus, saints by calling,..." you see that Paul was writing to the church at Corinth, to believers. He even called them "infants in Christ".

I think you are just confusing them by the term "spiritual milk".

Yes another nonsense response. Why did Paul use spiritual milk to speak to non-regenerates. Answer that question.

 

[Brightfame52]

Romans 5:1-2 Therefore, having been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom also we have access by faith into this grace in which we stand, and rejoice in hope of the glory of God.

Okay Faith comes with quickening by the Spirit, in fact its a fruit of the Spirit Gal 5:22

 

[Silverhair]

What if what they believe is unbelief?

John 12:40 "He has blinded their eyes and hardened their hearts, Lest they should see with their eyes, Lest they should understand with their hearts and turn, So that I should heal them."

Dave that is the problem, unbelief. They knew the OT scriptures, they had seen and heard of the miracles and yet they continued to deny the truth.

God let them strengthen themselves in their unbelief just as He had done with Pharaoh.

Joh 12:28 "Father, glorify Your name." Then a voice came out of heaven: "I have both glorified it, and will glorify it again."
Joh 12:29 So the crowd of people who stood by and heard it were saying that it had thundered; others were saying, "An angel has spoken to Him."

None are so blind as those that will not see or deaf as those that will not hear.

 

[Van]

Snip

There's a bigger picture, that's what I'm trying to find. It's got to fit with all Scripture. I still haven't dismissed the idea that man needs God to come to faith. I just disagree that man must be born again to come to faith. We have the Holy Spirit coming upon a person in the OT. That may parallel the pre faith drawing necessary to bring a person to faith in the NT. We'll see how things play out. Even Jesus , being the Word said this, which I find very revealing. This is still OT. The NT officially began to be declared at Pentecost, the light....

John 12:24-36 The people answered Him, "We have heard from the law that the Christ remains forever; and how can You say, 'The Son of Man must be lifted up'? Who is this Son of Man?" Then Jesus said to them, "A little while longer the light is with you. Walk while you have the light, lest darkness overtake you; he who walks in darkness does not know where he is going. While you have the light, believe in the light, that you may become sons of light." These things Jesus spoke, and departed, and was hidden from them.
SNIP

Yes, of course people need God to provide His revelation of the gospel of Christ before anyone can put their faith in the gospel of Christ. Of course no one can come to Christ unless "drawn" attracted by the lovingkindness of the gospel. That is not the issue, the issue is do lost people need to be supernaturally "enabled" to believe. What is you view.

 

[Brightfame52]

Yet another nonsense response, but the reason Paul used spiritual milk to speak to unregenerate people is not even addressed. Pay no attention to those who deceive.

The Corinthians were spiritual, they had the Spirit. 1 Cor 6:19

19 What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own?

Spiritual milk/food is for spiritual babes, like Peter said 1 Pet 2:1-2

Wherefore laying aside all malice, and all guile, and hypocrisies, and envies, and all evil speakings,

2 As newborn babes, desire the sincere milk of the word, that ye may grow thereby:

Newborn babes still may act carnally, that's why Peter told them to lay aside "
malice, and all guile, and hypocrisies, and envies, and all evil speakings,"

They were already born again from 1:23

23 Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever.

You think a unregenerate can take milk for a spiritual babe ? Thats the most unintelligent thing I ever heard of, it doesnt make sense

 

[Silverhair]

In the past I've always held to the idea that there is a passivity in Gods eternal decree. Not a bare permission, but a positive allowing. That 'predestined' speaks specifically of what He actually positively causes. So I always understood that the term 'ordained' encompasses God's complete sovereignty. And it is under the title of 'ordained', that God providentially governs everything, both positively causing (predestined), and positively allowing (not bare permission).

Dave it seems to me that you are waffling between two views. You want God to determine all things but not those that make Him look bad.
God is sovereign, that is not in question, and in His sovereignty He has given man a free will. Did God cause Christ to be crucified or did man in his free will do it?

Whether you say God cause it or you say He positively allowed it, unless I am misunderstanding what you mean by that term, you still have made Him the author of the greatest sin in history.

One of the main reasons for this is, I maintain, is that God cannot be the Author of sin or evil. Compatibilism gives some insight into the passivity in His eternal decree, all the while He still remains sovereign over everything. The rubber meets the road when dealing with the desires in the hearts of Josephs brothers that spawned the sin of selling him into slavery. That part, God is not responsible for. Yet He is still completely sovereign over it. So, in short, God is constrained by His attributes. Look at the lengths that He had to go to to satisfy His justice on our behalf while not violating who He is, His holiness, His righteousness, etc.. Jesus did it. It was the only way.

I agree God cannot be the author of sin and evil but the C/R view does just that. Both the WCF & LBCF make it clear that God decrees all things that happen. Yes I know they then try to soften that view but it really does not help.

Now you have turned to Compatibilism but I have to ask how does that help? You still have God determine what we want and we cannot do otherwise. That view has even redefined what free will means to "we are free to do what God has determined that we do". That is not free will Dave that is determinism. Which makes God responsible for whatever the man does, both good and bad.

You refer to Joseph's brothers and their evil deeds but say that God is not responsible for those deeds. Both the WCF & LBCF say that He is. That is one of the reasons why I strongly disagree with the C/R view.
Did Joseph's brothers have a real free will or not? Not according to the Compatibilistic view they didn't. In the Compatibilistic view God determines what we desire, and then we do what we desire. But since God has determined what we desire can we really call that free will?

This is why Satan is allowed to harden, then God doesn't need to. This is why children are born innocent in their ignorance, and become accountable as they begin to understand. This is why Adam and Eve were created good, but He knew they would fall. The same with Lucifer, created good, but also created knowing that he would fall. God still determines, but can also determine while being passive. I believe that mainstream reformed thought, even Calvin Himself, where likeminded, though people read meanings into the way that they used their theological terms that they never intended. Just like today, as Spurgeon said, the discussions are more about the terms than anything else. That's the best sense that I could ever make of it. How does it stack up if there is no total depravity? There is still a natural and even a judicial depravity to consider. But, to tell you the truth, I haven't thought that far ahead.

The reason for Satan's sin is his free will. His pride, free will, lead to his fall Isaiah 14:12-14
I will ascend to heaven
I will raise my throne above the stars of God
I will sit on the mount of assembly
I will ascend above the heights of the clouds
I will make myself like the Most High.'

Lucifer [satan] sought to be better than God and was cast down.
Lucifer fell because of sinful actions brought about by his sinful ambitions. Pride was the reason for his fall.

With no free will that God has determined who will, how and when one will sin. There age has nothing to do with it.

It seems you are confusing foreknowledge with determinism. God knowing what man in his free will will do is vastly different from Him determining what man will do.

Man is sinful but that does not preclude him being able to know of God to hear the gospel message and be convicted and thus turn to God in faith.

 

[Silverhair]

when you witness Jesus raise a man from the dead. and still do not believe. is there anything that will convince you?

To deny that was a work of God would take another level of denial.

 

[Silverhair]

Yes another nonsense response. Why did Paul use spiritual milk to speak to non-regenerates. Answer that question.

For the same reason he spoke to those he called "infants in Christ".

You really need to take the time to read a post and not just react.

You have become a very difficult individual to deal with in the last few months. Are you having problems in your personal life?

 

[Van]

The Corinthians were spiritual, they had the Spirit. 1 Cor 6:19

19 What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own?

Spiritual milk/food is for spiritual babes, like Peter said 1 Pet 2:1-2

Wherefore laying aside all malice, and all guile, and hypocrisies, and envies, and all evil speakings,

2 As newborn babes, desire the sincere milk of the word, that ye may grow thereby:

Newborn babes still may act carnally, that's why Peter told them to lay aside "
malice, and all guile, and hypocrisies, and envies, and all evil speakings,"

They were already born again from 1:23

23 Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever.

You think a unregenerate can take milk for a spiritual babe ? Thats the most unintelligent thing I ever heard of, it doesnt make sense

More of the same nonsense, ascribing to me, rather than Paul the idea the unregenerate can understand spiritual milk. This is all they have folks, obfuscation.

 

[Van]

For the same reason he spoke to those he called "infants in Christ".

You really need to take the time to read a post and not just react.

You have become a very difficult individual to deal with in the last few months. Are you having problems in your personal life?

Yet another nonsense post, addressing me and not the topic. This is all they have, folks.

Did you see an answer to the question, why did Paul use spiritual milk to address non-regenerates? Nope. Just the usual side-step.

Total Spiritual Inability is a fiction, a compete fiction, and is defended by deception.

 

[Silverhair]

Yet another nonsense post, addressing me and not the topic. This is all they have, folks.

Did you see an answer to the question, why did Paul use spiritual milk to address non-regenerates? Nope. Just the usual side-step.

Total Spiritual Inability is a fiction, a compete fiction, and is defended by deception.

You sound much like @Brightfame52. You both seem to think everything is about you. And neither of you actually read a post.

What do you think "For the same reason he spoke to those he called "infants in Christ"." means Van.

Read what Paul wrote not what you think he wrote.

 

[Brightfame52]

More of the same nonsense, ascribing to me, rather than Paul the idea the unregenerate can understand spiritual milk. This is all they have folks, obfuscation.

The Corinthians were Spiritual and had been given the capacity to receive Spiritual truth regardless of their carnality, whereas the natural man has no capacity at all for spiritual truth 1 Cor 2:14

 

[Deacon]

“The Lord has made everything for its purpose,
even the wicked for the day of trouble.” (Proverbs 16:4, ESV)

 

[Silverhair]

The Corinthians were Spiritual and had been given the capacity to receive Spiritual truth regardless of their carnality, whereas the natural man has no capacity at all for spiritual truth 1 Cor 2:14

Note the context of this verse. We need to read 1Co_2:6-14
Note the wording of 1Co_2:14 NKJV. It say “the natural man does not receive G1209 the things of the Spirit of God” it does not say that he cannot receive them. While conviction by the Holy Spirit Joh_16:8, and the drawing by Christ Joh_12:32, is extended to every sinner Mar_16:15, 1Ti_2:3-4 this does not overrule their free will. Many, but not all, who hear the gospel message by which they can be saved Rom_1:16 will reject it for reasons only they know.

The natural person can, of course, understand the gospel and experience salvation. If you insist that they cannot then you have to answer why would God judge them for not understanding something it is impossible for them to understand.