Is EVEN The Faith To Believe A Gift From/Of God?

I'm going to quote DHK's whole post...the only change I'm making is bolding certain parts:

...Can someone explain this to me?

 

I am not the one that man is regenerated "by magic," or some other mystical means, which not even you can explain. You can't give a coherent explanation of how a person is regenerated from the Bible. When you do you make claims that are unsubstantiated "Calvinistic idioms" that everyone is supposed to take as absolutes, but are not taught in the Bible at all. Why challenged you (or at least some of you) become flustered that someone would dare challenge a long accepted believe of Calvinism! You have no way out. You are backed into a corner. You still can't explain regeneration except by the false teaching of:
1. separating it from salvation, and
2. the presupposition of faith being a gift from God (nowhere taught in the Bible).

It is not the faith that is different it is the object of the faith that is different. If one does not recognize that it is impossible for one to be saved. Who sits on the throne of one's heart? Self or Christ? Who is the object of one's faith? Self or Christ? I'll let you decide the answer to that question? Faith is faith--confidence trust in another or the word of another.

You quoted:
2 Thessalonians 3:2
And that we may be delivered from unreasonable and wicked men: for all men have not faith.
--The context is "in Christ." Of course not all men have faith in Christ. Again, it takes us to the object of faith--Christ. Treating Scripture out of context like that is doing Scripture injustice.

Did Jesus lie, or do you insinuate that he lied?
He is the one that said: Except you have faith as a child you cannot enter into the kingdom of heaven. I will take Jesus word over your word.

Yes, I understand it very clearly. I took away your thumbs up; you get a thumbs down. I have posted again and again on this subject and have never been proven wrong. The unregenerate or unsaved are not given faith by God, or at least what you would call "saving faith," special faith, or the many and varied names Calvinists have for it. They already have "inherent faith" with which they were born with. It is the object of that faith that they must focus upon.

The teaching I gave you is Scriptural. You are the one deny Scriptural teaching; the Scriptural teaching on the doctrine of Soteriology.

1. Scripture is neither hogwash nor fiddlesticks.
2. Scripture is no laughing matter.
3. The Scripture you quoted supports my view more than it does yours.
4. I know more about your views than I do about Van's, so I don't know what you are talking about.

Say what you want but when Jesus our commander gives a command, you answer: "I will!" If you fail in doing so then you have failed Christ. When the Saviour commands: Come unto me, you better answer: "I will!" When the Great Commander commands: Believe on me, the answer better be. "I believe." If you don't answer with "I" and in the affirmative you are a sorry soldier not worth your salt, and if you don't answer the very first command he gives you in the affirmative then you (as in all) spend the rest of eternity in Hell. The Great Commander of the universe commands: Believe on me. The answer must be: "I believe." If the "I" is not there, the "you" will not be there in heaven.

I have never denied the salvation of God. I have stated that your interpretation of soteriology is an errant one.

And you can keep your new age mysticism like an Islamic guru.
But Christ came to save sinners like me. He died on the cross to pay the penalty for my sins. I believed, and I was saved. I have praised God ever since.

 

Salvation is the gift of God. This is what is consistently taught through Scripture. See Romans 6:23; Eph.2:8,9.
"The gift of God is eternal life" (Rom 6:23b).

Unto you it is given...not only:
1. to believe in him,
But also
2 to suffer for his sake.

Believing in Christ is salvation. It is one of the greatest blessings that Christ has given us. Paul is writing to the Philippian believers. Look at what you have. You have the privilege of believing in Christ. You also have the privilege of suffering for his sake. In fact it is the will of God. Inasmuch it was the will of God for you to believe on Christ for salvation, it is now the will of God for you to suffer for his sake. It is not teaching (in context) about faith being a gift. It is speaking about the importance of salvation and suffering.

 

DHK,

I tried to be helpful, but you moved more into a confrontational posture....so we will go from there.

I and others have explained this many times DHK. You have not agreed to it.
While the secret working of God has some element of mystery to it....much of the mystery has already been revealed to the church.

Jesus said it this way DHK;
[QUOTE3Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.

4Nicodemus saith unto him, How can a man be born when he is old? can he enter the second time into his mother's womb, and be born?
][/QUOTE]

Like Nicodemus ...you seem to not understand this,as i read in your post that you refer to new birth as [magic,and mystical]...

Man being dead in sin needs new birth to be regenerated in the biblical gospel....
You on the other hand are suggesting that man is just fine...and needs a little bit more information so he can make a nice decision. He really does not need to be quickened...he just needs someone to suggest what decision to make.

Jesus speaks plainly......Nicodemus is perplexed,and thinks Jesus is speaking about magical mystical things......just like what you are saying,except he said it a little nicer than you...how can these things be???

Sure I can DHK...and as a matter of fact I pray and get to do this several times a day,Lord willing. I am speaking to two workers here on the Indiana toll road,as i take a break...am going to show them sermonaudio in a minute,and we have already discussed biblical headship!
You do not know me...so why do you make this foul claim and false report!

If you believe I do so....show it and see if i can substantiate what I post.
I do not post if I cannot back it up...but you are more then welcome to go for it DHK. If you offer biblical correction ..I will gladly repent of any posted falsehood. But as it stands...this is an empty accusation and shows your opposition to the historic faith. I believe this will be exposed as it has been in the past.:thumbs:

I am not flustered at all. it is God's truth...I just have to faithfully proclaim it..that is my responsibility. I am surprised that many who try to resist this truth do not understand even the basics well enough to try and question it.
There are a few persons who have invested alot of time to know what the issues are and attempt to probe the teaching....

:laugh: actually.....no

No one seperates regeneration from salvation....you say that ..but Inever said that,so I have no idea what you are talking about. Saving faith is the gift of God however...that is true.Just because you do not get it ,does not mean it is not so.

This whole idea which used to be taught in the false tract..the 4 spiritual flaws...does not accurately portray the situation.
But for this discussions sake I will work with it......all men and women are self-centered sinners who do not desire the things of God.They resist until God overcomes their rebellion and regenerates them.

You have had your error exposed many times.....but you do not acknowledge it and repent....you persist in that which is false....sincerely thinking you are correct. You keep the fundementalist blinders on and do not open yourself to the verses that could help you.

Actually no....they are praying that the word of God will have free course,despite the opposition of those who have no faith......wicked ,ungodly men, you said all men have saving faith...this says not all men have faith in context.....you missed it again.

No....I do not even entertain such a wicked thought as this.

So speaking of context let me show you what you just twisted here.Jesus did not say that all men have faith in this passage.The only lying here is your mis-use of the text.
Jesus is speaking of the childlike faith that he saw here.....and He is careful to mention and distinguish those children who believe in me

If a person is not given saving faith by God....they are not saved.

 

Faith

All people have been given the ability to believe to trust to have faith. There is no one who has an excuse not to believe. To believe in faith is a gift of God from birth. We all can believe in something even if it is a wrong faith. We are depraved, does that take away the ability for a person to believe in something?

There is not one person that has an excuse not to believe.

It is a shame to listen to people use the words of Paul as a reason that some just can't come. The main goal of Paul even through election is make an apeal for us to come, not to say some just can't come.

I say no one has an excuse not to come. God through Jesus wants all men to be saved and come to the knowledge of the truth.

There is only one faith that saves it is to trust in Jesus even over our own understanding and beliefs.

 

:applause:

This is the achilles heel of Calvinism. It gives the perfect excuse for unbelief.

 

He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him. (John 3:36)

Jesus never promised to give you that saving faith to believe; He simply said, "He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life..."

You have a choice--the words of Jesus or the words of Calvin.

 

The bolded statement is false, especially the part that says, "until God works His salvation process unto them."

If that were true that would void and nullify such commands in the Scripture as:
"Seek ye the Lord while he yet may be found." No hint here of God having to work first.
The entire story of Cornelius defeats this statement and presupposition.
The story of the rich man coming to Jesus (though he didn't get saved), came with the right intention: "Good Master, what must I do to have eternal life."
The story of Nicodemus coming to Jesus.
The story of the Samaritan woman.
There is no evidence that God had regenerated these persons first; that God had done any work of grace in their lives before they were approached with the Gospel. Your whole approach here is based on a false pre-supposition.

 

The problem here, DHK, is that you're not understanding the general context of each passage.

For instance, when God, through the Prophet Isaiah, address the People of Israel and says "Seek the LORD while he may be found; call upon him while he is near" we have to ask: "To whom is this addressed?"

Was Isaiah addressing us in 2011. Not really. He was addressing the People of Israel and calling them to repentance. Now, an application of the truth of this passage can be made for today, but the passage itself is not addressed to you and I specifically. God had already revealed Himself to Israel so when He says "seek me..." it is not as if the Israelites don't know who He is. This makes a huge and important difference.

In the case of Cornelius, he was already a worshiper of Yahweh. So it isn't like and he only had a vision. It isn't like he just woke up one morning and said, "I think I'll check out this Jesus fellow..." He knew of and worshiped Yahweh already.

With the Rich Man and Nicodemus, Jesus was already a known entity to them. In other words, there had already been some prior revelation of a man from Nazareth named Jesus.

So, when you say:

It is clear that there is a fundamental misunderstanding on part. Your presuppositions are causing you to ignore individual context and confuse the "then" and the "now."

Furthermore, it is obvious that God had done some work of grace in the lives of the Israelites and Cornelius, at the very least. There was, in fact, prior revelation of Himself to them. In the case of Cornelius, we are not told how that happened (and we are given little detail about the others you mention). But, with Israel, we know God reveled Himself to them Personally and, by the time of Isaiah, they had the scriptures and were in open rebellion to the God who had long ago made them His people.

Once again, context is, indeed, king.

The Archangel

 

And there is the perfect excuse for all those who remain unsaved at judgement.

The unsaved could say, "God, you chose to condemn us to a state of unbelief from birth due to a sin committed by someone else and there is nothing we could do about it."

What a perfect excuse!

 

I hate to use such strong words, but if you really believe that all of the aforementioned people were regenerated before they came to faith in Christ then I believe you are deceived.

What did Jesus say to the woman with an issue of blood?
Thy faith hath made you whole (not the faith of Jesus or God)

What about the Roman centurion?
"I have not seen so great faith in all of Israel." The faith was not given by Christ or God. It was his faith--the faith that He put in Christ to heal his child. When his servants met him on the way to tell him that his child had been healed, the account then says: "Then he believed," indicating that that Gentile soldier also put his faith in the Messiah.
He believed Christ had the power to heal.
Then he believed Christ had the power to save.

Thy Faith seems to be a key word in the gospels.
It occurs when people come to Jesus that Jesus have never met previous to that time. And because of a Calvinistic bent, you would still cling to a thread of hope and say they were regenerated before they came! Ludicrous!

 

Accourding to a article that i posted a while back said that even Calvin believed by nature all men know there is a God even atheist. That at some point they denied God.

That Calvin believed it had to be some sort of working of the Holy Spirit in their heart gets them to believe.

I know God himself has hidden the truth from the wise and learning and revealed things to little children. To me that is a child like faith in Jesus like a infant has with His mother.

That only those who listen and learn from the Father come to Jesus.

That Jesus word was not His own but the Father that sent Him. That it is Jesus word that is what we listen and learn from.

That Jesus word is Spirit and life. It is His word that gives us life to take the offer Jesus gives through His word.

It does not just bring life to us, it also brings death.

That when we believe in Jesus and listen and learn from Him we have life eternal or not believe and continue to condemnation, walking away from Him.

That God through Jesus not only sets before us life, but also death, so chose Jesus and live.

I see the elect are those who trust in Jesus not some random choose and in Jesus not apart from Jesus we have been chosen before the foundation of the world, because of him, not anything that we have done, but what He has done.

Trusting in Jesus isn't work.

Remaining in Him through trust isn't work, but rest from work.

 

I never said all the aforementioned people were regenerated. Certain people mentioned were not; some were. Unfortunately, you are mistaking coming to Christ for a physical need with coming to Christ for salvation. These two things are mutually exclusive.

Being healed of a physical infirmity by Christ does not mean that someone was ipso facto saved by Christ.

Yes, she had faith that Jesus from Nazareth could heal her. This is why she sought Him out rather than Fred the Plumber from Jericho.

Yes, the Centurion had great faith. But, contextually, his great faith is not intended to be a pat on his back but a slap in the Jew's face. Here is a gentile (probably a God-fearer, according to Luke 7) who is believing Jesus to be the Messiah when the majority of the non-Gentile Jews do not.

When we see the Centurion telling Jesus that he [the Centurion] is not worthy to have Jesus under his roof, this is a clear indication that the Centurion is already believing Jesus to be the Messiah. No Centurion would defer to a Jew in this way--even a well-renowned healer. No, it must be the case that the Centurion was a believer in Christ before he sought Him out. This, again, is much more easy to establish when it is understood that the Centurion was a God-fearer who was already worshiping Yahweh.

Furthermore, you are making a logical leap that is not supported in the text. The text says the Centurion believed Christ could heal his servant and the servant was healed. Believing Jesus could heal does not salvation make.

It simply cannot be stated from this passage that the Centurion became a believer in this encounter with Jesus. The text does not say it and, as I have already pointed out, the Centurion was likely a believer already.

What is "ludicrous" is that you cannot separate my interpretation from my Calvinism. Your interpretation, in fact, is deeply flawed in many ways as you are reading it without consideration for the historical context.

Faith is a key word in the gospels. But, you are thinking that these people have never heard of Jesus before--which simply isn't the case. The Centurion had to have heard of Jesus in order to seek Him out. It wasn't like he happened to bump into him at a baseball game. The woman with the issue of blood had to know of Jesus in order to seek Him out. How else would she have said to herself "if I can only touch Him?" She knew Him as a healer and she had heard of Him before. Again, it wasn't as if she bumped into Him at the grocery store.

These events do not take place in a vacuum. There is context. The context is that Jesus was known in this area at this time, so people did seek Him out.

Does that mean they were "regenerate?" No, not necessarily. The Rich Young Ruler was certainly not. Cornelius certainly was.

The over all problem with believing that each has an inherent faith and that inherent faith is what saves us is this: It means you have faith in faith, and not faith in Christ.

If we ask the Evangelism Explosion diagnostic question "If you were to die
tonight and stand before God and He were to ask you 'why should I let you into my heaven' what would you say?" what answer would you suggest these people would give?

Do you think the Centurion or the woman with the issue of blood or you yourself would actually say "God, you have to let me in because I have faith?" While I don't think you would answer this way, you are suggesting that this is, in fact, the correct answer.

The only correct answer for the EE question posed above is this: "Well, God, you shouldn't let me into your heaven." And at that point, Christ walks up and says, "It's OK Father, he's one of mine."

We know from other passages of Scripture that God does indeed choose and call those who are not believers with the direct intent of turning them into faithful believers (Abraham and Jacob come to mind). So, your presenting of these passages--especially your including of logical leaps which are facts-not-in-evidence--is unconvincing.

The Archangel

 

I meant to say this.

I know God himself has hidden the truth from the wise and learned and revealed things to little children. To me that is a child like faith in Jesus like a infant has with His mother

That come from this verse

Luke 10:21
At that time Jesus, full of joy through the Holy Spirit, said, “I praise you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because you have hidden these things from the wise and learned, and revealed them to little children. Yes, Father, for this is what you were pleased to do.

 

Perhaps you didn't. But that is the argument many of the Calvinists here make.

Quite true. But faith is not a prerequisite to being healed either. Jesus healed all (on some occasions) whether they had faith or not.

True. It demonstrates that every human has inherent faith.

That may be so. But what is the source of his faith?

No, it shows that he realizes his own sinful condition. Perhaps, by this time, the Holy Spirit had begun to work in his life.

That is not what the account says. He was desperate. He sought out Jesus because he knew that Christ was a great healer.

That is not what the account says. The account specifically says that after his child was healed then he believed!
What he believed here is up for debate as you say. Actually I was confusing two stories. Here is another:

So Jesus came again into Cana of Galilee, where he made the water wine. And there was a certain nobleman, whose son was sick at Capernaum. (John 4:46)
The nobleman saith unto him, Sir, come down ere my child die. (John 4:49)
Jesus saith unto him, Go thy way; thy son liveth. And the man believed the word that Jesus had spoken unto him, and he went his way. (John 4:50)
And as he was now going down, his servants met him, and told him, saying, Thy son liveth. (John 4:51)
So the father knew that it was at the same hour, in the which Jesus said unto him, Thy son liveth: and himself believed, and his whole house. (John 4:53)
--In this account we see that the nobleman believed twice.
It would seem that the first time he believed the words of Jesus that his son would not die. And in verse 53 he believed on Christ as Messiah and was saved.
The nobleman, like the centurion was not a Jew. Here is what Barnes says:

It was by no means any faith given to him by God that saved him. He put his own faith in Christ: once for healing and a second time for salvation.

Jesus healed all. Healing was only one aspect of his ministry. It demonstrated his deity. Some of those, like the nobleman, were saved. They went one step farther and believed "a second time," that Christ could not only heal, but save as well. That is the point I was trying to make. I didn't do a good job first time around because I got two stories confused.

All of that is true.
And all of us (non-Cals) believe that:
Faith comes from hearing and hearing from the Word of God.
We have the ability to believe. The object of our faith must be Christ in order to be saved. But how will they know about him unless they hear about him. Read Romans 10:13-15. The more they heard about him, the more confident they became that he was the one that was able to heal, and eventually able to save.

People sought him out for different reasons:
"never a man spoke as this man spoke"
"for he speaks as one that speaks with authority"
They came to see the works (miracles) that he did.
"Good master what shall I do to have eternal life?" He knew what He could do spiritually, but was not willing to sacrifice, and went away sorrowful.
--They knew who he was. They heard him. They saw his miracles. Some even sought eternal life from him. Some rejected eternal life. Some accepted. Salvation is by faith.

Some believe in Christ and some don't. To make the jump that Cornelius was regenerated long before he was saved is untenable.

It is not inherent faith, per se, that saves. It is that faith that has as its object Christ and his atoning work as the object of its faith that saves. It is the object of our faith that is important. Faith is faith--confidence, trust. But what is the object of your faith? Your faith may be sincere, but sincerely wrong, as is the case of the J.W.'s, Mormons and other cults and religions.

If they have gone through the plan of salvation first so that Christ has been adequately presented then yes, there may be a chance that that person may be saved. Why not? I have used that same question myself. The answers are different, varied, and often very interesting.

I haven't heard that answer yet. It is usually along the lines: "I am not a bad sinner; I am good enough to get there; I am a Christian too, etc.

No, I don't. Faith in Christ and his atoning work is the answer. If Christ is not the object of one's faith then what good is it. As a small child I had faith in my parents. Every child does. When I grew a bit older I started putting faith in my friends and found out quickly that my "friends" often failed me. When I put my faith in Christ, he never failed me, and his promises to me are always true. It is the object of faith that is important.

I can enter on the basis of the shed blood of my Lord Jesus Christ.
Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ: (Romans 5:1)

Then you have only half of a salvation story which also is unconvincing. Half of the story is not good enough.

 

You assume a definition that is not true.
Dead is not a corpse, lifeless.
Dead is separation from God. Everywhere in the Bible dead or death is defined as separation. Reconciliation is the goal. If you purge from your mind this concept of lifelessness you will have a better understanding of how a person who is separated from God can come to God by faith. Faith comes by hearing and hearing by the word of God.