Mistaken views held by Mainstream Believers

[Van]

I would agree that it is a false doctrine.
It is attempts to dissect the process of salvation and ultimately adds in things that are not Scriptural.
When God made man, everything that man needs to communicate with God and understand God was in Adam. When Adam sinned, he still communicated and understood what God told him.
Grace is not something that comes before man’s knowledge. (Sorry if we disagree, I know that this is a hot topic)

Galatians 1:6
I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel:
Grace is in Christ at salvation and not before. In that, prevenient grace is false.
But God is still not willing that any should perish.
But as far as who salvation may be applied to…

1 John 2:2
And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.

Yes, we agree, the natural person, before being born anew, has limited spiritual ability, and does not need to be supernaturally "enabled" to understand spiritual milk. Yes, the natural person, before being born anew (and indwelt with the Spirit of God) cannot understand spiritual solid food, because that knowledge can only be discerned with the help of the spirit. And that is also why immature Christians, are not able to handle spiritual solid food, they have not yet learned enough from their indwelt Helper.

 

[Van]

You are saying the devil taking it away has nothing to do with the situation. You should read the interpretation again. I would put the devil in the category of external. (I should hope)

Yes, I am saying the person initially and innately had the ability to understand spiritual milk, but not spiritual solid food. Later, that ability can be taken away, by the devil (i.e. by the practice of sin) or by God (as in Romans 11). But the innate initial ability has nothing to do with externals, such as the loss of the ability by the hardening of their heart or never having heard the gospel, or after hearing the gospel false teachers derail their understanding, such as Matthew 23:13.

 

[Van]

Sorry but who is "Cathy the devil?"

I see Ben445 has explained the inadvertent reference to "Cathy the devil." I did a search and found that some understand it as a recurrent theme in the writings of John Steinbeck. The "mother" in East of Eden for example. Kind of like the "dark side" of the Star Wars franchise. Anyway, a long long way from scripture.

 

[JesusFan]

Only this,
Galatians 3:6
Even as Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness.

Yes, but God did not see that as a credit as in Abraham was now meriting salvation

 

[Ben1445]

I see Ben445 has explained the inadvertent reference to "Cathy the devil." I did a search and found that some understand it as a recurrent theme in the writings of John Steinbeck. The "mother" in East of Eden for example. Kind of like the "dark side" of the Star Wars franchise. Anyway, a long long way from scripture.

Well apparently autocorrect has a dark side I have never heard of!!
Sorry for the distraction.

 

[Ben1445]

What did God see it as?

 

[Ben1445]

Yes, but God did not see that as a credit as in Abraham was now meriting salvation

Sorry again. There are still some weird technical issues here.
It didn’t quote in the last post.

So I ask again with the quote for clarity,

What did God see it as?

 

[David Lamb]

Sorry, I replied to this one on my phone. The auto correct is extremely active and I have no idea how it got that. I usually read them again before posting because of this. I guess I didn’t for this one.
It should be


You are saying the devil taking it away has nothing to do with the situation. You should read the interpretation again. I would put the devil in the category of external. (I should hope)

Thanks for explaining.