Yet, how does that fit with 1 Corinthians 3?
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Invitation or Summons
- Thread starter Luke2427
- Start date
- Status
Rule of the BB = you may not call someone a heretic/teaching heresy, etc unless it is a long-proven actual heresy (example: arminian is not heresy; pelagian is heresy) you cannot use the "h" word
Rule of the BB = you may not call someone/something a "cult". They might be a sect, but again, unless a long-proven actual "cult" (like JW, Mormon, Charismatic) you cannot use the "c" word.
I will jump on anyone using the "h" or "c" word, just like using the "n" word in our culture.
Any discussion will see my .02 added (I post like everyone else) and not pull punches on error or wrong teaching. But no use the "h" or "c" words.
Rule of the BB = you may not call someone/something a "cult". They might be a sect, but again, unless a long-proven actual "cult" (like JW, Mormon, Charismatic) you cannot use the "c" word.
I will jump on anyone using the "h" or "c" word, just like using the "n" word in our culture.
Any discussion will see my .02 added (I post like everyone else) and not pull punches on error or wrong teaching. But no use the "h" or "c" words.
Tom Butler
New Member
Jesus also told us "Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father in Heaven is perfect." (Matt 5:48) Jesus did not add that since we can't be, God will cut us some slack.
Jesus was referring to loving others, not "being" perfect. If we live by the Spirit, it most definitely something that can be done.
I don't think this is the case with that passage but I will let them take that up.
Regardless it does not change the fact that NO MAN can keep the commandments- yet God commands all men to do so.
Why? Paul said, "I had not known sin but by the law" and "the law is a schoolmaster bringing us to Christ" and "that sin might appear exceeding sinful".
God commands men to do what they cannot do. That is plain. It is abundantly clear. To say that God would NOT do that is clearly wrong and against the clear teaching of Scripture.
God absolutely does command men to do what they cannot do.
That they cannot do it is tremendously clear as well. Paul said, "The carnal mind is at enmity with God and is not subject unto the law of God NEITHER CAN IT BE."
The carnal man CANNOT be subject to it but God commands him to any way.
Repentance is also a command. "God commandeth all men everywhere to repent."
To say that God would not command men to repent if they cannot requires support. You cannot offer any support because it is not there.
There is absolutely NO reason to say that God would not command men to repent who cannot, especially when it is abundantly clear that he does that with the commandments.
Perhaps it's a difference in how we're each reading it?
You used 1 Cor 2:14 as a justification for the calvinistic viewpoint; whereas, when I read it in context of both chapters 2 and 3, I see a link to the "carnal man" in chapter 3--the man already saved but still engaged in "natural" behavior.
God commands it, yes; but how many say, "No"?
I agree that God gives commands to men that we are to at least try to obey; but each command has the option of non-obedience, with the result being eternal damnation. In other words, free will (or at least the illusion of free will).
It is not, though. Chapter two verse one speaks of their condition when he found them- they were lost, natural men.
That is the context of 2:14.
Webdog tried to argue that very thing several weeks ago and found that there is not a single reputable commentator on earth who believes that the "natural man" of verse 14 refers to a saved carnal person. The context does not allow it. He even tried to employ the thoughts of a Weslyan Arminian, Adam Clarke, and then found that even HE agreed with me on this.
The natural man in verse 14 refers to a person preregeneration.
Yes...it is man's fault that he was not given the gift of saving faith to use.
What inconsistency. I guess man was sovereign over God when it came to reprobation...
Delusions of grandeur.
Thinkingstuff
Active Member
Just a question. If I am
; then how will I be judged for it. I have no capacity to act otherwise thus how can I be judged fairly? Adam ate the fruit. Eve ate the fruit and gave me this nature. How can I be held accountable for a nature I can't act against? Does God judge a scorpion when it stings? In fact following this through I am only behaving in such a manner as I am created. I am following my creation's mandate. So how then am I to be judged?
thus I act in accordance with my creation. In this case I am no different than how mud operates. By natural chemical reaction if you thow water onto dirt it will be mud. Mud cannot determine itself to stay dry it only does as it is created. Thus is mud judged? How is mud superior in action than I? It cannot be we both are acting naturally to our creation. Mud isn't thown into the lake of fire yet I will be if I'm not doing something I couldn't do anyway? How is this just?
You'll notice that Dr. Bob said, "man, by his fallen nature, is completely and utterly incapable of repenting/believing." He did not say, "man is completely and utterly incapable of repenting/believing." When you see the difference in those two statements, you'll see why God is just in condemning sinners. In other words, there is a reason man is incapable of repenting - his own nature forbids it. Therefore, he is worthy of his judgement.
Thinkingstuff
Active Member
Sounds lofty. Yet when examined I am still left with the question. You must explain the difference. If you are correct
then I am acting in accordance with my creation. There is a reason dirt becomes mud when water is put on it. Dirt cannot remain dry because it's
. What is the difference?
Mud is incapable of sin. It does not have a will. Calvinism does not deny the existence of the will, but the ability of the will. Man guided only by his sinful nature is incapable repairing himself to God. Think about it.
Thinkingstuff
Active Member
I think the only will allow able in Calvinism is the ones Adam and Eve had. If my will is inable/incapable then the will is dead. It does not operate it cannot operate. Therefore I cannot enact its use and thus have an ability to choose. Choice has been taken from me by Adam and Eve thus will cannot act other than the repeated series loop called sin. Its malfunctioning entirely(total depravity). thus I can no more choose God than dirt remain dry when water is thrown on it.
Did you mean chapter 3, verse 1? Chapter 2 verse 1 tells how Paul approached them; doesn't say a thing about their spiritual condition.
Disagree; the context of 2:14 (or rather, chapter 2) is a prelude to chapter 3. Taken together, and within context of the entire book, it is a reproof to them that although Paul identifies them as Christians, they are still behaving and acting like the natural man.
I will endeavor to re-read some commentaries on the subject.
Okay, re-reading and re-thinking about my posts, I have miscommunicated. In attempting to show the link between chapter 2 and chapter 3, I muddied the intent of verse 2:14. Chapter 2 is a prelude to chapter 3; but Paul's intent was to show how the members of the church of Corinth are still acting like "natural" men (i.e., his identification of their carnal-ness).
- Status