If it's not the Gospel, what is it??

[steaver]

Wrong as usual steaver. In my post #4 I said your OP was malarky. I should have called it Bull Dung. Then I showed you Scripture defining the Gospel.

:laugh: You think you making a declaration that it is malarkey is pointing out WHICH PART IS DISHONEST AND WHY???

 

[DHK]

sbm........

In the past Luke 2427 has claimed the same thing.
Most of the Calvinists posting here have referenced Spurgeon who in one of his sermons said the same.

 

[OldRegular]

Does anyone else here find it strange that Calvinist spend so much time and effort avoiding the honest conclusions of their own TULIP?

If TULIP is the Gospel, the Calvinist have no other choice but to believe those who do not believe it is the Gospel are following a false gospel and thus must be unsaved. But they squirm and struggle with accepting the reality of their own belief system.

And if it's not the Gospel, then what is it??

Following is a short definition.

TULIP and Reformed Theology: An Introduction
FROM R.C. Sproul Oct 31, 2012 Category: Articles


Just a few years before the Pilgrims landed on the shores of New England in the Mayflower, a controversy erupted in the Netherlands and spread throughout Europe and then around the world. It began within the theological faculty of a Dutch institution that was committed to Calvinistic teaching. Some of the professors there began to have second thoughts about issues relating to the doctrines of election and predestination. As this theological controversy spread across the country, it upset the church and theologians of the day. Finally, a synod was convened. Issues were squared away and the views of certain people were rejected, including those of a man by the name of Jacobus Arminius.

The group that led the movement against orthodox Reformed theology was called the Remonstrants. They were called the Remonstrants because they were remonstrating or protesting against certain doctrines within their own theological heritage. There were basically five doctrines that were the core of the controversy. As a result of this debate, these five core theological issues became known in subsequent generations as the “five points of Calvinism.” They are now known through the very popular acrostic TULIP, which is a clever way to sum up the five articles that were in dispute. The five points, as they are stated in order to form the acrostic TULIP, are: total depravity, unconditional election, limited atonement, irresistible grace, and perseverance of the saints.

I mention this historical event because it would be a serious mistake to understand the essence of Reformed theology simply in light of these five doctrines—the Reformed faith involves many other elements of theological and ecclesiastical confession. However, these are the five controversial points of Reformed theology, and they are the ones that are popularly seen as distinctive to this particular confession. Over the next five posts, we are going to spend some time looking at these five points of Calvinism as they are spelled out in the acrostic TULIP.

http://www.ligonier.org/blog/tulip-and-reformed-theology-introduction/

Continued in a following post!

 

[OldRegular]

Continued from a previous post!

Does anyone else here find it strange that Calvinist spend so much time and effort avoiding the honest conclusions of their own TULIP?

If TULIP is the Gospel, the Calvinist have no other choice but to believe those who do not believe it is the Gospel are following a false gospel and thus must be unsaved. But they squirm and struggle with accepting the reality of their own belief system.

And if it's not the Gospel, then what is it??

The following discussion may be a little much for you steamer but have a go at it.

The Five Points of Calvinism

R. L. Dabney

Dabney wrote before the familiar TULIP formula was made popular. He and most writers of his era dealt with the five points in a more logical order. But for readers interested in following the TULIP format, here is an index:

Total depravity (Original Sin)
Unconditional election (God's Election)
Limited atonement (Particular Redemption)
Irresistible grace (Effectual Calling)
Perseverance of the Saints
The Five Points of Calvinism

HISTORICALLY, this title is of little accuracy or worth; I use it to denote certain points of doctrine, because custom has made it familiar. Early in the seventeenth century the Presbyterian Church of Holland, whose doctrinal confession is the same in substance with ours, was much troubled by a species of new-school minority, headed by one of its preachers and professors, James Harmensen, in Latin, Arminius (hence, ever since, Arminians). Church and state have always been united in Holland; hence the civil government took up the quarrel. Professor Harmensen (Arminius) and his party were required to appear before the States General (what we would call Federal Congress) and say what their objections were against the doctrines of their own church, which they had freely promised in their ordination vows to teach. Arminius handed in a writing in which he named five points of doctrine concerning which he and his friends either differed or doubted. These points were virtually: Original sin, unconditional predestination, invincible grace in conversion, particular redemption, and perseverance of saints. I may add, the result was: that the Federal legislature ordered the holding of a general council of all the Presbyterian churches then in the world, to discuss anew and settle these five doctrines. This was the famous Synod of Dort, or Dordrecht, where not only Holland ministers, but delegates from the French, German, Swiss, and British churches met in 1618. The Synod adopted the rule that every doctrine should be decided by the sole authority of the Word of God, leaving out all human philosophies and opinions on both sides. The result was a short set of articles which were made a part thenceforward of the Confession of Faith of the Holland Presbyterian Church. They are clear, sound, and moderate, exactly the same in substance with those of our Westminster Confession, enacted twenty-seven years afterward.

I have always considered this paper handed in by Arminius as of little worth or importance. It is neither honest nor clear. On several points it seeks cunningly to insinuate doubts or to confuse the minds of opponents by using the language of pretended orthodoxy. But as the debate went on, the differences of the Arminians disclosed themselves as being, under a pretended new name nothing in the world but the old semi-pelagianism which had been plaguing the churches for a thousand years, the cousin-german of the Socinian or Unitarian creed. Virtually it denied that the fallen Adam had brought man's heart into an entire and decisive alienation from God. It asserted that his election of grace was not sovereign, but founded in his own foresight of the faith, repentance, and perseverance of such as would choose to embrace the gospel. That grace in effectual calling is not efficacious and invincible, but resistible, so that all actual conversions are the joint result of this grace and the sinner's will working abreast. That Christ died equally for the non-elect and the elect, providing an indefinite, universal atonement for all; and that true converts may, and sometimes do, fall away totally and finally from the state of grace and salvation; their perseverance therein depending not on efficacious grace, but on their own free will to continue in gospel duties.

Let any plain mind review these five changes and perversions of Bible truth, and he will see two facts: One, that the debate about them all will hinge mainly upon the first question, whether man's original sin is or is not a complete and decisive enmity to godliness; and the other, that this whole plan is a contrivance to gratify human pride and self-righteousness and to escape that great humbling fact everywhere so prominent in the real gospel, that man's ruin of himself by sin is utter, and the whole credit of his redemption from it is God's.

We Presbyterians care very little about the name Calvinism. We are not ashamed of it; but we are not bound to it. Some opponents seem to harbor the ridiculous notion that this set of doctrines was the new invention of the Frenchman John Calvin. They would represent us as in this thing followers of him instead of followers of the Bible. This is a stupid historical error. John Calvin no more invented these doctrines than he invented this world which God had created six thousand years before. We believe that he was a very gifted, learned, and, in the main, godly man, who still had his faults. He found substantially this system of doctrines just where we find them, in the faithful study of the Bible, Where we see them taught by all the prophets, apostles, and the Messiah himself, from Genesis to Revelation.

Calvin also found the same doctrines handed down by the best, most learned, most godly, uninspired church fathers, as Augustine and Saint Thomas Aquinas, still running through the errors of popery. He wielded a wide influence over the Protestant churches; but the Westminster Assembly and the Presbyterian churches by no means adopted all Calvin's opinions. Like the Synod of Dort, we draw our doctrines, not from any mortal man or human philosophy, but from the Holy Ghost speaking in the Bible. Yet, we do find some inferior comfort in discovering these same doctrines of grace in the most learned and pious of all churches and ages; of the great fathers of Romanism, of Martin Luther, of Blaise Paschal, of the original Protestant churches, German, Swiss, French, Holland, English, and Scotch—and far the largest part of the real scriptural churches of our own day. The object of this tractate is simply to enable all honest inquirers after truth to understand just what those doctrines really are which people style the peculiar "doctrines of Presbyterians," and thus to enable honest minds to answer all objections and perversions. I do not write because of any lack in our church of existing treatises well adapted to our purpose; nor because I think anyone can now add anything really new to the argument. But our pastors and missionaries think that some additional good may come from another short discussion suitable for unprofessional readers. To such I would earnestly recommend two little books, Dr. Mathews's on the Divine Purpose, and Dr. Nathan Rice's God Sovereign and Man Free. For those who wish to investigate these doctrines more extensively there are, in addition to their Bible, the standard works in the English language on doctrinal divinity, such as Calvin's Institutes (translated), Witsius on the Covenants, Dr. William Cunningham's, of Edinburgh, Hill's and Dicks's Theologies, and in the United States those of Hodge, Dabney, and Shedd.

http://www.spurgeon.org/~phil/dabney/5points.htm

The above link provides additional detail in case you are able to absorb that which I have posted.

I don't think a Calvinist could explain what it is apart from believing it is the very Gospel of God, Divine Revelation, when God Himself via the Holy Spirit causes them to see that it is indeed the Gospel.

I have challenged you to provide the name of one Calvinist who believes that TULIP is the Gospel. You have so far failed to do so so I must question your veracity. I have presented the Biblical definition of the Gospel to which I believe most Calvinists would subscribe.

Romans 1:16. For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.

To do so would under-mind the very doctrine they believe in. They have no choice but to believe it is the very Gospel because the teaching of the doctrine itself declares that one cannot believe anything apart from God making them believe it.

Can you name one Calvinist who believes that nonsense.

The Calvinist is stuck is he not? Can a Calvinist declare TULIP is not the Gospel?

TULIP is not the Gospel. The Gospel is defined in Romans 1:16.

Can a Calvinist declare TULIP does not come from any Divine revelation?

TULIP represents a part of the Calvinists understanding of the Biblical Doctrines of Sovereign Election and Grace. I have presented above how the doctrines described by the acroynm TULIP came to be.

Again, if TULIP is not the Gospel, then what is it? According to a Calvinist that is, only a Calvinist can answer this question. Is it the Gospel, or is it something else, and if so what is it?

This has been answered above.

And if it is the Gospel, how can one reject TULIP and still be saved?

By the Sovereign Grace of God through the penal substitutionary atonement provided by Jesus Christ.

 

[OldRegular]

sbm........

From what little I have read of her/his posts I would call sbm a hypercalvinist!

 

[DHK]

Following is a short definition.

Continued in a following post!

Why continue. Sproul is wrong.

As this theological controversy spread across the country, it upset the church and theologians of the day. Finally, a synod was convened. Issues were squared away and the views of certain people were rejected, including those of a man by the name of Jacobus Arminius.

Arminius held to the "Belgic Confession," was a Calvinist, and said under oath that he could without reservation sign Calvin's Confession of faith.
I suggest you take each one: the actual belief's of Arminius and compare them to the actual beliefs of Calvin (not the Westminster CoF, nor the Confession made at Dort). Do some digging. See how much difference there is in each of their beliefs.

 

[OldRegular]

Why continue. Sproul is wrong.

Arminius held to the "Belgic Confession," was a Calvinist, and said under oath that he could without reservation sign Calvin's Confession of faith.
I suggest you take each one: the actual belief's of Arminius and compare them to the actual beliefs of Calvin (not the Westminster CoF, nor the Confession made at Dort). Do some digging. See how much difference there is in each of their beliefs.

I really don't care what either believed. I have never read anything by either and don't intend to do so!

DHK,

How do you know that you are not one of those God chose to Salvation in Jesus Christ before the foundation of the world?

How do you know you were not regenerated before you ever attended that Protestant church and ACCEPTED Jesus Christ as your savior?

How do you know that your Salvation from the beginning was not the work of God the Holy Spirit!

 

[OldRegular]

:laugh::laugh:
Have you got Alzheimer's and can't remember what you said?
Duh!

That is a extremely sorry, sleazy statement for a Christian to make

 

[Yeshua1]

Here is a real controversy found within the Calvinist Camp.

Every Calvinist I ever spoke with claims Divine Revelation from God as why they believe what they believe. However, we have some Calvinist claiming TULIP is the Gospel (by Divine Revelation) and some believing TULIP is not the Gospel.

Why has God given Calvinist Divine Revelation concerning TULIP being truth, but has withheld Divine Revelation concerning TULIP being the Gospel to some Calvinist?

We believe in the surety of the Gospel message of the Cross of Christ, in His birth/death/resurrection for sinners, and THAT is a sure revelation from God, but the Sotierology of calvinism is NOT on same revelation levels, but it is to us the best way to rxplain just how and why God redeemed us!

 

[DHK]

That is a extremely sorry, sleazy statement for a Christian to make

And I am not a slave to SBM to look up what she says in her posts. If she wants something looked up, quoted by herself then she can quote herself. I am not going to do her work for her. If she forgot what she said, why ask me to repeat what she said? Don't rebuke me for it.

 

[DHK]

How do you know that you are not one of those God chose to Salvation in Jesus Christ before the foundation of the world?

How do you know you were not regenerated before you ever attended that Protestant church and ACCEPTED Jesus Christ as your savior?

How do you know that your Salvation from the beginning was not the work of God the Holy Spirit!

I just finished giving my testimony in another thread in the General Baptist Forum. That is something that SBM has never done, and won't do, even though asked many times. It is also something that other Calvinists won't do.
My guess is that the minute they say: "I believe" they consent to the fact that they did indeed believe or had faith. SBM considers faith a work. Therefore her salvation would be by works. She won't give her testimony lest she incriminate herself.

Concerning myself: I know that if I were to die right now that I would go to heaven as surely as if I had already been there. I am sure of my salvation.
You presume "Protestant church." I was never saved in any kind of "church." I came out of the RCC., and was saved on the campus of a university. The only kind of church I attended after that was Baptist. And I didn't start attending a Baptist church until a couple of years after I was saved.

Faith comes by hearing and hearing by the word of God.
I heard the gospel. I was convinced of the truthfulness of its message and how it applied to me. I trusted not only in the message but the author of the message, Jesus Christ. "I know whom I have believed, and am persuaded that he is able to keep that which I have committed unto him against that day."

The work of the Holy Spirit is explained in John 16:
John 16:8 And when he is come, he will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment:

 

[OldRegular]

And I am not a slave to SBM to look up what she says in her posts. If she wants something looked up, quoted by herself then she can quote herself. I am not going to do her work for her. If she forgot what she said, why ask me to repeat what she said? Don't rebuke me for it.

You are void of human emotion if you cannot understand what you said. I don't care what your beef with SBM is or for that matter anyone else but just to show you what a sorry spectacle you make of yourself I repeat the post and emphasize what you said!

Originally Posted by DHK

Have you got Alzheimer's and can't remember what you said? Duh!

That is a extremely sorry, sleazy statement for a Christian to make

 

[OldRegular]

I just finished giving my testimony in another thread in the General Baptist Forum. That is something that SBM has never done, and won't do, even though asked many times. It is also something that other Calvinists won't do.
My guess is that the minute they say: "I believe" they consent to the fact that they did indeed believe or had faith. SBM considers faith a work. Therefore her salvation would be by works. She won't give her testimony lest she incriminate herself.

SBM and Calvinists have nothing to do with the questions I asked.

Concerning myself: I know that if I were to die right now that I would go to heaven as surely as if I had already been there. I am sure of my salvation.

That is great. So am I!

You presume "Protestant church." I was never saved in any kind of "church." I came out of the RCC., and was saved on the campus of a university.

Why then? How do you know it was not all the work of God?

Faith comes by hearing and hearing by the word of God.
I heard the gospel. I was convinced of the truthfulness of its message and how it applied to me. I trusted not only in the message but the author of the message, Jesus Christ. "I know whom I have believed, and am persuaded that he is able to keep that which I have committed unto him against that day."

How do you know that the faith you speak of was not the gift of God?

The work of the Holy Spirit is explained in John 16:
John 16:8 And when he is come, he will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment:

Yes and Jesus Christ describes the work if the Holy Spirit in the New Birth In John 3:3-8!

 

[DHK]

Why then? How do you know it was not all the work of God?

Why??
Because that is my testimony. Your question leads me to believe, that you believe God can only save within the confines of a Baptist Church! Sorry to disappoint you.

How do you know that the faith you speak of was not the gift of God?

It wasn't the gift of God, nor the gift of Calvin, nor the gift of Calvinist theology. Faith, in the Scriptures is a spiritual gift (1Cor.12) and one of the fruits of the Spirit (Gal.5). God does not give faith to the unsaved/unregenerated. That is a ludicrous position to take, and is nowhere taught in scriptures. I have challenged you and others to provide scripture which says God gives faith the unsaved/unregenerate. None of you ever have.

The Bible says:
"Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved..."
It does not say: "Believe (with God's faith) on the Lord Jesus Christ..

Yes and Jesus Christ describes the work if the Holy Spirit in the New Birth In John 3:3-8!

The new birth is the work of regeneration which is simultaneous with salvation. It doesn't happen without the work of the Holy Spirit.
The main work of the Holy Spirit today is described here:

John 16:8 And when he is come, he will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment:

 

[OldRegular]

Why??
Because that is my testimony. Your question leads me to believe, that you believe God can only save within the confines of a Baptist Church! Sorry to disappoint you.

I believe you are paranoid. I never mentioned the Baptist Church. I simply knew that you were a former Roman Catholic and had a quick look at your testimony about conversion. My recollection was faulty but I mentioned Protestant Church and Baptists are not Protestants in case you don't know.

[It wasn't the gift of God, nor the gift of Calvin, nor the gift of Calvinist theology. Faith, in the Scriptures is a spiritual gift (1Cor.12) and one of the fruits of the Spirit (Gal.5). God does not give faith to the unsaved/unregenerated. That is a ludicrous position to take, and is nowhere taught in scriptures. I have challenged you and others to provide scripture which says God gives faith the unsaved/unregenerate. None of you ever have.

You haven't challenged me because I have never said that God gives the gift of Faith to the unsaved/unregenerate. I have said God gives the gift of Faith to those he has "New Birthed", regenerated, made spiritually alive. Of course you deny this Scripture but it is true nevertheless.

Ephesians 2:1-8 [NASB]
1. And you were dead in your trespasses and sins,
2. in which you formerly walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, of the spirit that is now working in the sons of disobedience.
3. Among them we too all formerly lived in the lusts of our flesh, indulging the desires of the flesh and of the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, even as the rest.
4. But God, being rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us,
5. even when we were dead in our transgressions, made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved),
6. and raised us up with Him, and seated us with Him in the heavenly places, in Christ Jesus,
7. in order that in the ages to come He might show the surpassing riches of His grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus.
8. For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God;

Please notice in verses 4 & 5 that God made us spiritually alive when we were dead in trespass and sin through no act on our part. He then gives us the gift of faith by which we are enabled to believe.

The Bible says:
"Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved..."
It does not say: "Believe (with God's faith) on the Lord Jesus Christ..

I never argue with Scripture. I just argue with some peoples interpretation. I have said repeatedly on this forum that Faith is an essential aspect of Salvation.

The new birth is the work of regeneration which is simultaneous with salvation. It doesn't happen without the work of the Holy Spirit.

And it doesn't require that man do anything. It is solely the work of the Holy Spirit as Jesus Christ tells:

John 3:3-8 [NASB]
3. Jesus answered and said to him, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.”
4. Nicodemus *said to Him, “How can a man be born when he is old? He cannot enter a second time into his mother’s womb and be born, can he?”
5. Jesus answered, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.
6. “That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.
7. “Do not marvel that I said to you, ‘You must be born again.’
8. “The wind blows where it wishes and you hear the sound of it, but do not know where it comes from and where it is going; so is everyone who is born of the Spirit.”

Now show me where Jesus Christ says faith is required for the "New Birth". You say you know that you exercised faith and were born again. Jesus Christ says un-equivocally that you are wrong. Please note: “The wind blows where it wishes and you hear the sound of it, but do not know where it comes from and where it is going; so is everyone who is born of the Spirit.”

 

[Jerome]

That is a extremely sorry, sleazy statement for a Christian to make

Does it remind you of this one:

fine by us, or by me.
personally, I've been feeling foolish responding to your musings as well.
might as well talk to the old folks at the alzheimer's clinic back in virginia.
what they say makes more sense.
lol.
bye.

 

[DHK]

You are void of human emotion if you cannot understand what you said. I don't care what your beef with SBM is or for that matter anyone else but just to show you what a sorry spectacle you make of yourself I repeat the post and emphasize what you said!

Yes, on this point you are right. Upon further reflection I should have never made any comparison to any disability at all. I apologize for that and if it were my forum I would edit my own post.

 

[savedbymercy]

I just finished giving my testimony in another thread in the General Baptist Forum. That is something that SBM has never done, and won't do, even though asked many times. It is also something that other Calvinists won't do.
My guess is that the minute they say: "I believe" they consent to the fact that they did indeed believe or had faith. SBM considers faith a work. Therefore her salvation would be by works. She won't give her testimony lest she incriminate herself.

Concerning myself: I know that if I were to die right now that I would go to heaven as surely as if I had already been there. I am sure of my salvation.
You presume "Protestant church." I was never saved in any kind of "church." I came out of the RCC., and was saved on the campus of a university. The only kind of church I attended after that was Baptist. And I didn't start attending a Baptist church until a couple of years after I was saved.

Faith comes by hearing and hearing by the word of God.
I heard the gospel. I was convinced of the truthfulness of its message and how it applied to me. I trusted not only in the message but the author of the message, Jesus Christ. "I know whom I have believed, and am persuaded that he is able to keep that which I have committed unto him against that day."

The work of the Holy Spirit is explained in John 16:
John 16:8 And when he is come, he will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment:

There you go lying on me again , I gave a testimony here a couple of years ago in a post and not going to give it again, you should have saved it ! JUST continue with your false accusations , it reveals to me your true character !

 

[DHK]

I believe you are paranoid. I never mentioned the Baptist Church. I simply knew that you were a former Roman Catholic and had a quick look at your testimony about conversion. My recollection was faulty but I mentioned Protestant Church and Baptists are not Protestants in case you don't know.

Concerning my salvation, you asked: "Why, How do know it was not all the work of God?"

My response was:
Why??
Because that is my testimony. Your question leads me to believe, that you believe God can only save within the confines of a Baptist Church! Sorry to disappoint you.
--I had explained to you how I had trusted Christ, not in a church but at a university campus; that I didn't start attending a Baptist church until two years later.
Then you say why? As if to say salvation must be in the Baptist church, at least that is the impression I get.
--So I am not sure what you were asking.
Why? Why what?
Why?
1 John 5:11 And this is the record, that God hath given to us eternal life, and this life is in his Son.
12 He that hath the Son hath life; and he that hath not the Son of God hath not life.
--That is why! I know I have the Son. It is not a mystical experience.

You haven't challenged me because I have never said that God gives the gift of Faith to the unsaved/unregenerate. I have said God gives the gift of Faith to those he has "New Birthed", regenerated, made spiritually alive. Of course you deny this Scripture but it is true nevertheless.

First, this is your exact statement (albeit in question form)

How do you know that the faith you speak of was not the gift of God?

My assumption here is that you are saying that faith must be the gift of God.
The faith I was speaking of was the faith needed to be saved. The subject was salvation. I was giving my testimony, remember?

Regeneration and salvation take place at the same time, as does justification. It is not a process but an event. The gospel and faith in the gospel must precede all of the above. God does not give faith to the: unregenerate/unsaved/ unjustified. The gospel and faith in the gospel must precede all.

Ephesians 2:1-8
1. And you were dead in your trespasses and sins,
2. in which you formerly walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, of the spirit that is now working in the sons of disobedience.
3. Among them we too all formerly lived in the lusts of our flesh, indulging the desires of the flesh and of the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, even as the rest.
4. But God, being rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us,
5. even when we were dead in our transgressions, made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved),
6. and raised us up with Him, and seated us with Him in the heavenly places, in Christ Jesus,
7. in order that in the ages to come He might show the surpassing riches of His grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus.
8. For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God;

Please notice in verses 4 & 5 that God made us spiritually alive when we were dead in trespass and sin through no act on our part. He then gives us the gift of faith by which we are enabled to believe.
--So what does that mean?
The Calvinist redefines "death," to make it mean lifeless as a corpse.
But it doesn't mean that. A corpse is dead. If it is dead to God; it is dead to sin. The same analogy can be used with the believer who is told to be dead to sin. If he is to be dead to sin then he can be dead to God. Does it make sense? How do you be a "corpse" to God, or without life, lifeless. Is that possible for the believer?

The word "dead" means "separated"
You, were "separated" from God, has the Spirit made "alive" or brought back to God (reconciled).

I never argue with Scripture. I just argue with some peoples interpretation. I have said repeatedly on this forum that Faith is an essential aspect of Salvation.

Which happens at the same time as regeneration.

And it doesn't require that man do anything. It is solely the work of the Holy Spirit as Jesus Christ tells:

Faith is not a work; agreed?

John 3:3-8 [NASB]

3. Jesus answered and said to him, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.”
4. Nicodemus *said to Him, “How can a man be born when he is old? He cannot enter a second time into his mother’s womb and be born, can he?”
5. Jesus answered, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.
6. “That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.
7. “Do not marvel that I said to you, ‘You must be born again.’
8. “The wind blows where it wishes and you hear the sound of it, but do not know where it comes from and where it is going; so is everyone who is born of the Spirit.”

Now show me where Jesus Christ says faith is required for the "New Birth". You say you know that you exercised faith and were born again. Jesus Christ says un-equivocally that you are wrong. Please note: “The wind blows where it wishes and you hear the sound of it, but do not know where it comes from and where it is going; so is everyone who is born of the Spirit.”[/QUOTE]
John 1:12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:

John 3:15 That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life.
16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

 

[savedbymercy]

I just finished giving my testimony in another thread in the General Baptist Forum. That is something that SBM has never done, and won't do, even though asked many times. It is also something that other Calvinists won't do.
My guess is that the minute they say: "I believe" they consent to the fact that they did indeed believe or had faith. SBM considers faith a work. Therefore her salvation would be by works. She won't give her testimony lest she incriminate herself.

Concerning myself: I know that if I were to die right now that I would go to heaven as surely as if I had already been there. I am sure of my salvation.
You presume "Protestant church." I was never saved in any kind of "church." I came out of the RCC., and was saved on the campus of a university. The only kind of church I attended after that was Baptist. And I didn't start attending a Baptist church until a couple of years after I was saved.

Faith comes by hearing and hearing by the word of God.
I heard the gospel. I was convinced of the truthfulness of its message and how it applied to me. I trusted not only in the message but the author of the message, Jesus Christ. "I know whom I have believed, and am persuaded that he is able to keep that which I have committed unto him against that day."

The work of the Holy Spirit is explained in John 16:
John 16:8 And when he is come, he will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment:

Faith does come from hearing the Word of God, but one must be of God to Hear God's words John 8:47 ! That is what Jesus stated !