"passive" in justification; "not passive" in sanctification

[convicted1]

That's exactly what I've been saying. Propitiation for all means salvation for all. To endorse universal atonement would be to endorse (whether knowingly or not) universalism.

 

[Darrell C]

Originally Posted by Darrell C View Post
Hello Van, just thought I would throw in a few thoughts concerning the following.

In regards to the above Scripture I would like to point out that I agree that we have to distinguish from an individual and a corporate context, though in many cases both might be found to be either applicable or irrelevant as to the teaching discussed.

Agreed wholeheartedly, but let's back up a little and talk about something else he is passive in: righteousness.

Agreed, we are made holy and blameless and righteous at our new birth by God alone.

We are accounted righteous by imputation of the righteousness of Christ. Temporally speaking we have just begun the growth process by which we are made holy and conformed to the image of His Son.

So long before we get to regeneration, justification and adoption, we must first deal with the condition man is in from birth, that being separated from God and wholly incapable within himself to discern the spiritual things of God.

Disagree. If you read 1 Cor. 2:14-3:3 you will see men of flesh can understand some spiritual things of God, spiritual milk, but not spiritual meat.

I see no endorsement of the natural man's ability that negates what has previously been said:


1 Corinthians 2:14-3:3

King James Version (KJV)

14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

15 But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man.

16 For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he may instruct him? but we have the mind of Christ.

3 And I, brethren, could not speak unto you as unto spiritual, but as unto carnal, even as unto babes in Christ.

2 I have fed you with milk, and not with meat: for hitherto ye were not able to bear it, neither yet now are ye able.

3 For ye are yet carnal: for whereas there is among you envying, and strife, and divisions, are ye not carnal, and walk as men?


You may be equating "carnal" with natural, which is not the same thing. Basically he is saying, "Brothers...I can't speak to you as born again believers, you are behaving like the world! You are acting like babies."


But the point I am trying to get across is specific to salvation in Christ, which Paul affirms was not revealed to men...


1 Corinthians 2:6-10

King James Version (KJV)

6 Howbeit we speak wisdom among them that are perfect: yet not the wisdom of this world, nor of the princes of this world, that come to nought:

7 But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, even the hidden wisdom, which God ordained before the world unto our glory:

8 Which none of the princes of this world knew: for had they known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.

9 But as it is written, Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him.

10 But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God.


Paul is not speaking about how great Heaven is going to be, as this is usually explained to mean, but that the Gospel was not known by men because it was the Hidden knowledge, and, if men had known...they would not have crucified Christ.

That knowledge was revealed by the Spirit of God. Always has been, always will be. The natural man...

14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.


Consider:


Romans 16:25

King James Version (KJV)

25 Now to him that is of power to stablish you according to my gospel, and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret since the world began,

And also, by way of a question, "Can one be born again and not indwelt of God?"

No, everyone God causes to be born anew is indwelt without delay.

I would just suggest that the indwelling is in fact the cause of regeneration and eternal life. It is because He indwells us in the New Covenant capacity (contrasted with the external coming upon of the Old Testament) that we are changed and made unto spiritual beings.

Agreed, though there is much more to adoption, I feel, than just the redemption of our bodies.

Romans 8:23 defines adoption. To go beyond that is speculation.

Think about it: "now are we the sons of God."

Just saying adoption deals with that aspect of our relationship with God also.

And that is the first point Paul makes:


Romans 8:14-16

King James Version (KJV)

14 For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God.

15 For ye have not received the spirit of bondage again to fear; but ye have received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father.

16 The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God:

Yes, but I believe He also made that faith possible.

We trust in God's revelation, both general revelation and special revelation, and of course primarily in the birth life death and resurrection of Jesus Christ, as given to us through the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. Now if you go beyond that, i.e. Prevenient grace, then we disagree.

Prevenient simply means "coming before," and it is where God's grace is said to come in that separates the views.

I firmly believe that it is unquestionable that the Grace of God precedes salvation. Would you disagree with that? Does the natural man have the ability to seek for God apart from the grace of God? If that is true then we can scratch saved by grace through faith from Scripture.

It is when "prevenient grace" is said to have been bestowed upon man in a general and universal manner that I take issue with the concept. However, we do see God's grace precede salvation in the initiative God has taken to provide the means of salvation to man. He has done that in many ways, first by providing man with an internal knowledge of Himself (which the natural man kicks against), in Creation, and finally through specific revelation. Revelation can be seen to be progressive through Scripture, and it is not until Christ came, died, arose again, ascended into Heaven, and sent the Comforter...that we see the unveiling of the Gospel of Christ.

Our salvation and our efforts within our salvation (ministerial efforts) are all due to the Ministry of the Comforter.


1 Peter 1:11-12

King James Version (KJV)

11 Searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow.

12 Unto whom it was revealed, that not unto themselves, but unto us they did minister the things, which are now reported unto you by them that have preached the gospel unto you with the Holy Ghost sent down from heaven; which things the angels desire to look into.

That His choosing is unconditional is a given, unless we want to impose upon people something Scripture is clear does not exist. Meaning there is nothing achieved by man in his natural condition which causes the Lord to say, "Okay, they qualify."

We disagree. How can you read 2 Thessalonians 2:13, which explicitly says we are chosen for salvation through faith in the truth, and then say we are chosen unconditionally?

Van, I just said the exact opposite.

The point is that there is nothing in man in his natural condition by which he qualifies for salvation. The Lord saves us despite our best efforts.

Only Christ lived a life that qualified.

It is God alone who either credits our faith as righteousness, or not.

Agreed.

But that is not the focus I am trying to bring to the forefront. In view is how man comes to the point of having saving faith. Again, it is the Ministry of the Comforter.

Again, you cannot deny that God credits our faith as righteousness, turning a sows ear into a silk purse. Romans 4:4-5/24.

I didn't, lol.


Continued...

 

[Darrell C]

Irresistible grace? Well, not something I think can be broad-brushed, because there is in fact enough Scripture to present a case that the Lord does at times bring about His will in the lives of men despite their desire for a different course.

Again we disagree. I am talking specifically about trusting in Christ.

So am I. Most are not immediately saved upon hearing the Gospel.

God allows us to make that autonomous choice.

And that is what I would concentrate on: How can it be said to be an autonomous choice by a person that does not have the capacity for knowing or receiving the spiritual things of God?

The Natural man must be enlightened to his condition, to Christ, and it is at that point he can respond to the Gospel.

And that is precisely what Christ said the Comforter would do:


John 16:7-9

King James Version (KJV)

7 Nevertheless I tell you the truth; It is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you.

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

9 Of sin, because they believe not on me;

Here we see the Comforter said to minister to unbelievers. They can be seen to be unbelievers because they do not believe on Christ.

Otherwise, we would not bring glory to God if we repented under compulsion.

If we ascribe negative terms to God's efforts it might seem inglorious, lol, but the truth is that apart from God taking the initiative to bring men to repentance through revelation of truth...no man would decide to seek after God. they might seek after gods, of course, but we both know that a god of one's own choosing is not the same as a truly repentant and sincere heart.

The best the natural man can do is be obedient to the revelation he has been provided with, such as that guy in deepest darkest Africa who has never heard the Gospel.

In other words, men can resist the grace of God and we have numerous passages to verify that. When we look at those who fall under condemnation we see that they themselves have turned from the truth,

We disagree again. We are condemned at conception in our unbelief, John 3:18.

Oh I believe firmly man is born under condemnation, that is not what I am referring to. What I am talking about is his response to the specific revelation of the Gospel to him. His response to God Himself as He ministers to the heart of the individual:

2 Peter 2:20-21

King James Version (KJV)

20 For if after they have escaped the pollutions of the world through the knowledge of the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, they are again entangled therein, and overcome, the latter end is worse with them than the beginning.

21 For it had been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than, after they have known it, to turn from the holy commandment delivered unto them.


These men cannot be said not to know the truth which they turned from. As in this previously posted verse...


2 Thessalonians 1:8

King James Version (KJV)

8 In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ:


...they have refused to obey the Gospel.

The punishment for those who reject Christ is said to be worse than those who rejected the Covenant of Law:


Hebrews 10:26-29

King James Version (KJV)

26 For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins,

27 But a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries.

28 He that despised Moses' law died without mercy under two or three witnesses:

29 Of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace?


While many loss of salvation teachers wrest this passage into saying this has born again believers in view (despite the previous verses making it absolutely clear that remission of sins is eternally complete for those truly saved), that is not the case. In view are those who have rejected the New Covenant which is described as rejection of Christ and the efforts of the Holy Spirit. They are said to have received the knowledge of the truth, even as Peter states in the previous passage.

Their punishment will exceed that of those despising the (Covenant of) Law, and it is just another testimony from Scripture of the difference of economy between the previous Ages and this one.

King James Version (KJV)
13 But we are bound to give thanks always to God for you, brethren beloved of the Lord, because God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth:

2 Thess. 2:13 does not teach all fallen individuals are blind to the revelation of God.

I never said that. In fact, we know that the natural man has the internal testimony of God and the witness of Creation, which are sufficient to allow one to come under obedience to, and by their obedience they will be judged. However, as you say, in view in this discussion is specifically those enlightened to the Gospel of Christ.

No one is saved apart from the ministry of the Holy Spirit

I did say that, lol.

(general and special revelation including the birth, life, death and resurrection of Christ.

Specifically the Gospel.

And it is the Spirit of God that ministers this knowledge to men.

Another abused portion of Scripture to consider:

Hebrews 6

King James Version (KJV)

4 For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost,

5 And have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come,

6 If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame.

Again, loss of salvation teachers use this to paint born again believers losing their salvation, when in fact it refers to God's ministry towards men in bringing them to the point where they can respond. Partaking of the Holy Spirit is nothing new, we see this throughout the Old Testament. The disciples themselves, prior to receiving the eternal indwelling of God, partook of His Spirit in their ministry of the Kingdom Gospel, preaching, healing, casting out demons. Because Hebrews is specific to Israel, "crucifying Christ afresh" deals specifically with those who, like in Ch.10, despise the New Covenant, choosing rather to "offer up Christ again" through Levitical sacrifices, which were meant only as a parable of sorts until He should come and actually offer Himself up.

Again, we have men enlightened through the Ministry of the Holy Spirit yet resisting His grace.

Lets not sidetrack the discussion with what scripture actually teaches concerning the fate of those who die before the age of accountability, such as the mentally challenged and babies.

This is no mystery, really, if we consider that babies that die fall under the same grace David Himself did. David died not having his sins forgiven through Christ, not having received remission of sins. The last sacrifice he offered before his death was that of an animal.

The point was that among the most notable Reformed Theologians there was not one that could properly reconcile the question. There is no "age of accountability" presented in Scripture, therefore we must deal with the topic of what happens to those who die not having opportunity to hear the Gospel. Is that an automatic ticket to Hell, as some teach? Do we hope they were babies from among the Elect, as some teach?

Or do we simply look at an overview of the grace of God and see that even notable theologians such David and Isaiah themselves died still in need of the imputation of the righteousness of Christ and the remission of sins through the offering of Himself?

If we make it a good works versus bad works or even no works (a default position for babies thought to be "innocent") then I think we do an injustice both to the grace of God and the Word of God.

In other words, babies and those not exposed to the Gospel stand on a par with the Old Testament believers. God will judge according to the response of man to the revelation provided to him. That is how God has always judged and that has not changed with the revelation of the Gospel of Christ, knowledge no Old Testament Saint was privy to:

Ephesians 3:8-10

King James Version (KJV)

8 Unto me, who am less than the least of all saints, is this grace given, that I should preach among the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ;

9 And to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ:

10 To the intent that now unto the principalities and powers in heavenly places might be known by the church the manifold wisdom of God,

God bless.

 

[Darrell C]

Originally Posted by Darrell C View Post
I think you overcomplicate what is in view to the point of making propitiation a generality in regards to God's wrath. I don't think anyone has suggested that Christ has appeased and thus precluded God's wrath in totality, but what is in view is appeasement in regards to the issue of sin.

The actual definition of propitiation is the appeasing of God's wrath. So to say that Christ is the propitiation for the whole world is to make his appeasing of God's wrath universal and total.

Not at all. What it means is that His Sacrifice is sufficient for the whole world. That we must make it effective for everyone is what you are imposing in an attempt to negate the simplicity of the statement.

It would be like taking a statement like "A kind word turns away wrath" and saying that the world always speaks a kind word.

The appeasement of wrath is, as I said, specific to remission of sins. For those not involved in regards to remission of sins there is no attachment. However, it remains true that if one is to be forgiven sins, Christ is the means of propitiation, and this is not exclusive to those already forgiven, and John makes that simple truth clear.

We could also put it this way: "If someone is going to be forgiven it will only be through Christ."

Originally Posted by Darrell C View Post
And I have to disagree with that...Christ is the propitiation, not a means of propitiation.

But that's what I'm saying Christ IS the satisfaction of God's wrath...NOT A MEANS to having God's wrath satisfied for everyone.

But He is. John is clear.

Christ is clear.

No man comes to the Father but by Him. That's all that is in view here. It is the debate of theology systems that complicates the simple into something that has been contended for centuries.

Can you tell me that Christ is not the means of satisfying the wrath of God in regards to sin? Who is excluded from that?

Originally Posted by Darrell C View Post
It is, again, specific to the issue of remission of sins which itself is necessary due to sin. That does not mean that all sin has been covered and is no longer dealt with, which is not even true concerning those who have received remission of sin. If a Christian sins, there is the potential for judgment in his life, such as sickness and even physical death.

Anytime the term "propitiation" is being used, it is about God's wrath...not sin. While God's wrath is because of sin, propitiation deals with the wrath...it is justification and sanctification that deals with sin.

On the contrary, Christ's Work centers on remission of sin that relationship with God can be established.

And again, you generalize SIN into sins, of which even Christians are guilty of.

We have to distinguish from the eternal and temporal context when we speak about God's wrath.

Consider:


1 Thessalonians 1:10

King James Version (KJV)

10 And to wait for his Son from heaven, whom he raised from the dead, even Jesus, which delivered us from the wrath to come.



1 Thessalonians 2:16

King James Version (KJV)

16 Forbidding us to speak to the Gentiles that they might be saved, to fill up their sins alway: for the wrath is come upon them to the uttermost.


1 Thessalonians 5:9

King James Version (KJV)

9 For God hath not appointed us to wrath, but to obtain salvation by our Lord Jesus Christ,




Is the same wrath in view in all three verses?

Originally Posted by Darrell C View Post
But...only you are saying that, lol.

Umm...it is Van that brought the whole idea of means into the conversation in post #36. Van says: Jesus is the propitiation or means of salvation for the whole world.

And I cannot for the life of me fathom why anyone would deny that simple truth.

The corollary is...there is no other way. We do not have to impose a universal application as some do, but we certainly do no negate this simple truth.

Again, in view, in regards to salvation, is first and foremost the remission of sins. Prior to remission which is based solely on Christ's death in man's stead...there is just the natural man still in a condemned state.

Originally Posted by Darrell C View Post
In other words propitiation requires faith in Christ in order for it to actually be beneficial. That does not negate the truth that He is propitious for the entire world, yet propitiation is realized through faith in Christ.

His righteousness brings about remission of sins, and that too is specific to the Cross. In other words, Christ died for all, not just the Elect, though it remains true that only the Elect will be saved, just as only Great Whites will be sharks.

The nature of propitiation means that if Christ has appeased the wrath of God for the whole world the whole world is saved.

You are imposing that into the discussion.

I'm not sure I have seen Van imply a universal application, at least what I commented on did not suggest such. He seems to be opposed to a universal view. I think, but could be wrong, that this is common ground for all of us.

As annsni put it in another thread:

Quote:
Originally Posted by annsni View Post
You cannot go to prison if the fine has been paid...they will release you whether you want to or not.

If they must release you then you're already there, lol.

The problem with temporal equations is that they do no justice to the truths of Salvation. We cannot equate going to prison with something as complicated as man's condition of condemnation and the necessity for the penalty to be removed.

Originally Posted by Darrell C View Post
Again, this overcomplicates the matter and implies something that is not seen in the text, nor is taught in such generality in Scripture.

The accusation of overcomplication for something that IS clearly taught in scripture because you disagree with it is an argument from personal incredulity.

Where in my responses do you see only personal incredulity?

The simple truth remains: Christ is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only, but for the sins of the whole world.

Does John the Baptist speak truth here...


John 1:29

King James Version (KJV)

29 The next day John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world.


...? Or does he have his wires crossed?

This does not mean that when Christ died the sins of the world were forgiven, simply that the provision for remission of sins, and that in completion, is made available, not just to the Elect (though again it is a given that only the saved will be saved, lol), but for the whole world, which is the same world God sent His Son to die for, and the same World the Son sent the Comforter to minister to.


Continued...

 

[Darrell C]

Originally Posted by Darrell C View Post
I think a better parallel would be...


2 Peter 3:9

King James Version (KJV)

9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.

I think you are inserting into the above parallel an exclusivity which is denied by many statements concerning God's offer of salvation to all men.

Two questions should be asked here:
1. Is “any” here referring to everyone ever or everyone in context?

The context demands everyone ever:


2 Peter 3:9-10

King James Version (KJV)

9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.

10 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.


God is patient so that men can be saved. It basically states "God is patient that men be saved, but the day is coming when His patience will end."

This includes those who will eventually suffer eternal judgment. There is no exclusivity, it is a general statement that is inclusive.

A brief grammatical study would reveal that it is all IN CONTEXT.

I agree:


2 Peter 3

King James Version (KJV)

3 Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts,

4 And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation.

This is tied to His longsuffering. Written into this is a battle between those that know the truth and those that don't.

2. Is this willing a reference to God’s decretive, preceptive, or dispositional will?

Is not the will of God made clear in John 3:16?

You can complicate matters or simply place this in a Biblical context. The Word of God has as a primary principle the fact that God is concerned for Man and his welfare. If we try to say God is only concerned with those who meet a particular standard then we deny some very basic principles in Scripture.

God saves despite man's depravity. David was a murderer and an adulterer, yet God saved him. Despite rising crime statistics the average person does not transgress to the extent David did, so we are hard pressed to make salvation an issue of qualification, and are forced to agree with that taught in Scripture that God saves men, not for their sakes, not for their quality, but by His grace. The qualification is faith in Christ, however, we can look at God's grace bestowed before the first person could actually place faith in Christ according to a New Covenant standard. David relied on God's grace, really...

...more than we do.

The difference being is that we have the specific Gospel of Christ revealed to us by God, whereas the Old Testament Saint only looked forward with a meager (in comparison) understanding which was primarily temporal and without question incomplete.

Originally Posted by Darrell C View Post
Best to refrain from personal remarks. As one crotchety moderator I used to know was fond of saying, "Address the post, not the poster!" lol

And I am not fond of the terms of psycho-babble. It is easy to charge someone with such terms, but a proper address of the issues negates the necessity to do so.

Obviously you seem intent on defending Van here.

What I am intent on is discussing the Word of God, that's all. In Forum Discussion there is going to be a tendency to become aggravated and lose focus of what we should be intent on.

And the truth is that I am likely to aggravate...everyone, lol. You, Van...whosoever.

Your lack of attention to Van’s babble and unwillingness to address his remarks of evasion shows that you guys must be buddies or something—maybe or maybe not.

You call it babble yet my involvement, prior to today, was simply to question the denial of a fairly straightforward statement.

Buddies? Not really. Brothers in Christ...I think so. But so are you, right? Shall the world look on and see us devour each other? Or will they see genuine desire to work through the issues which cause division in the Body of Christ?

You choose.

What would prove otherwise would be addressing Van and correcting his personal accusations of evasion towards me since you can see by the length at which I went about addressing this subject that there is no evasion on my part.

I am not getting involved in a dispute between you and Van. My interests are strictly doctrinal.

I have noticed that there are a few on here who take pleasure in mocking others, and I would just encourage you not to get caught up in that. There is no justification for mocking a brother in Christ because you disagree with him. The burden is on each of us to, if we disagree about something, to show from the Word of God why we disagree and present the Biblical Basis for what we do believe. If we maintain that focus, I assure you, not only will it be profitable as we all seek to grow in Christ but, who knows, you might actually make a friend or two.

Who among us is intent on making enemies? Is that what Christ would have us do? Don't we already have enough enemies in the world, that we don't have to cultivate more among those who profess Christ as Lord?

And if you are interested in where Van and I disagree, you can take a look at the posts.


God bless.

 

[Darrell C]

Originally Posted by Darrell C View Post
I saw this the other day and didn't comment, but will at this time:

King James Version (KJV)


13 But woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye shut up the kingdom of heaven against men: for ye neither go in yourselves, neither suffer ye them that are entering to go in
I would just point out that Christ has made it clear that no unregenerate man will enter the Kingdom of God, much less Heaven itself (and I do distinguish between the two, finding them completely separate topics). The verse, from my view/position, is a reference to men in a temporal capacity, rather than speaking about entrance to Heaven. in view I believe we see a reference to those who are, in a temporal capacity, seeking to do the will of God, yet the influence of those who do not represent sound teaching inhibit the efforts of those seeking to do the will of God.

We disagree, Matthew 23:13 means what it says - fallen men were entering heaven, thus seeking God effectively.

You seem to change what you are saying as this post progresses...

Matthew 23:13 teaches the unregenerate were in the process of "entering heaven" but does not say or teach they actually entered heaven.

This second statement I agree with, though still hold to the view men could not enter Heaven until their sins were atoned for:


Hebrews 9:6-8

King James Version (KJV)

6 Now when these things were thus ordained, the priests went always into the first tabernacle, accomplishing the service of God.

7 But into the second went the high priest alone once every year, not without blood, which he offered for himself, and for the errors of the people:

8 The Holy Ghost this signifying, that the way into the holiest of all was not yet made manifest, while as the first tabernacle was yet standing:


But that is for another discussion, lol.

I would agree with the Calvinist that Paul makes a certain point that the natural man does not seek after God. And it is not until the unregenerate come under the convicting ministry of the Holy Spirit that they are brought to a place where they can understand, believe, and then respond, whether favorably or unfavorably, to the Gospel. In his natural condition the Gospel means nothing to them.

I already addressed 1 Cor. 2:14-3:3 where Paul teaches the exact opposite of your claim.

And I have addressed that since.

We do not see unregenerate seeking God there, either, but believers behaving in an unspiritual manner, thus provoking rebuke. But Paul does not call them unspiritual, he states only he must address them as such.

2

Thessalonians 2:13

King James Version (KJV)

13 But we are bound to give thanks alway to God for you, brethren beloved of the Lord, because God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth:

Let's consider the opposite of belief in the truth: rejection.

We see those people here:

King James Version (KJV)
8 In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ:
We can't charge someone with failure to obey something they are not aware of.​

To be sure, rejection of the gospel is an additional sin,
​

An "additional sin?"

It is central to the Word of God.

All revelation has had as a focus the Redemptive Plan of God.

and no one who was unable to receive it can be charged with rejection.

And unless we want to charge God with respect of persons or being unjust, then we must conclude that God has given every man an opportunity to come into obedience with whatever revelation He has provided to them. That is why the writer of Hebrews makes the distinction of a more severe judgment upon those who reject the New Covenant contrasted with those who rejected the Covenant of Law.

But, as they are condemned already (John 3:18) your point is moot.

Which point? lol

Unless we ascribe an ability to men to be born again by their own initiative then we still have to wade through our difference of view. Again, my only point has been that all men are incapable of understanding the Gospel apart from the enlightenment of the Spirit of God, specifically the very Ministry of the Comforter.

And when we factor that truth in we see the Calvs/Arms dispute become moot, both sides found to be in error. Both sides being correct in areas, but on this central issue we see a lapse of inclusion of this issue in the debate.

We are in agreement that the provision of Christ was for the world, all inclusive, and yet we also understand it will prove beneficial only to those who receive Christ.

Agreed, Christ's death provides reconciliation to the whole world, but only those who receive the reconciliation are saved.

Very true.

And again, perhaps I am confused, but I thought that was the initial dispute, your antagonists denying that provision for salvation has been made available to all men through Christ, implying that the provision is available only to the Elect.

I have to again disagree with this point, because I do not see the proof-text teaching the unregenerate entering Heaven. When Christ establishes the Millennial Kingdom, not even then, in that temporal Kingdom, will the unregenerate enter. And if we look at Christ's teachings which were specific to Israel and complimented prophecy concerning that Kingdom, we will see that what is in view in the teachings becomes clear.

We disagree again. There is a difference between "entering heaven" i.e. in the process of entering, and having entered heaven, a completed action.

I agree, and when we look carefully at the Gospels we understand that in view is not the completion Christ brought to redemption for the believer, but an Old Testament Economy that restrained men from New Covenant Promises such as complete remission of sins (by which no further sacrifice was necessary, which they offered continually due to the incomplete nature of remission in that/those economies) and the eternal indwelling of God (contrasted with the external ministry He performed in the Old Testament.

For example:


John 7:38-40

King James Version (KJV)

38 He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water.

39 (But this spake he of the Spirit, which they that believe on him should receive: for the Holy Ghost was not yet given; because that Jesus was not yet glorified.)

40 Many of the people therefore, when they heard this saying, said, Of a truth this is the Prophet.


John 14:16-18

King James Version (KJV)

16 And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever;

17 Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you.

18 I will not leave you comfortless: I will come to you.



We cannot impose these conditions into the Old Testament Economies.


Continued...​

 

[Darrell C]

Matthew 23:13 teaches the unregenerate were in the process of "entering heaven" but does not say or teach they actually entered heaven.

It still implies natural men seeking God, which is denied by the Word of God:


Romans 3:9-11

King James Version (KJV)

9 What then? are we better than they? No, in no wise: for we have before proved both Jews and Gentiles, that they are all under sin;

10 As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one:

11 There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God.


Now, the very simple point I am making is that while the natural man does not seek after God, which denies a view that the natural man has within himself an ability to do what Scripture states he cannot (namely to function with a spiritual capacity in relationship to God), we do understand that God can, does, and has always ministered to the hearts of men whereby, dependent upon the Age and revelation provided men, they could respond in either obedience or disobedience, which still leaves the simple truth that God always initiates relationship with fallen man intact.

We see that in the Old Testament here:


Acts 7:51

King James Version (KJV)

51 Ye stiffnecked and uncircumcised in heart and ears, ye do always resist the Holy Ghost: as your fathers did, so do ye.


Hebrews 3:7-12

King James Version (KJV)

7 Wherefore (as the Holy Ghost saith, To day if ye will hear his voice,

8 Harden not your hearts, as in the provocation, in the day of temptation in the wilderness:

9 When your fathers tempted me, proved me, and saw my works forty years.

10 Wherefore I was grieved with that generation, and said, They do alway err in their heart; and they have not known my ways.

11 So I sware in my wrath, They shall not enter into my rest.)

12 Take heed, brethren, lest there be in any of you an evil heart of unbelief, in departing from the living God.


15 While it is said, To day if ye will hear his voice, harden not your hearts, as in the provocation.

16 For some, when they had heard, did provoke: howbeit not all that came out of Egypt by Moses.

17 But with whom was he grieved forty years? was it not with them that had sinned, whose carcases fell in the wilderness?

18 And to whom sware he that they should not enter into his rest, but to them that believed not?

19 So we see that they could not enter in because of unbelief.

They were blocked. Clearly, John 3:5 teaches unregenerates cannot "reach the destination" without being born anew.

I would suggest again that Nicodemus was without knowledge of the Gospel Mystery, the hidden wisdom of God, as all men in that day were.

Again, the Kingdom in view, for Nicodemus, would not have been the Kingdom you and I have had revealed to us, but the one that had been revealed to the Old Testament Saint. That Kingdom was temporal and that is the very Kingdom even the Disciples of Christ had expectation of, amazingly asking the Lord if He was going to finally establish it here:


Acts 1:4-6

King James Version (KJV)

4 And, being assembled together with them, commanded them that they should not depart from Jerusalem, but wait for the promise of the Father, which, saith he, ye have heard of me.

5 For John truly baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence.

6 When they therefore were come together, they asked of him, saying, Lord, wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel?


That Kingdom, not the one we have had revealed to us, is the Kingdom Nicodemus would have immediately thought of, because that was the Kingdom prophesied and promised to Israel. We understand the implications of Old Testament Prophesy, but they did not. If they had, we would not see Peter doing His best to keep Christ from the Cross.

King James Version (KJV)


3 Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.

4 Nicodemus 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?

5 Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.

Quote:
All of this just to bring into the debate amongst Calvs and Arms...the Ministry of the Comforter and the absolute necessity for the Gospel to be revealed to the natural man.

I have addressed this twice before.

Perhaps, but I can't recall this address sin our discussion.

I certainly agree both Calvinists and Arminians hold flawed views that add to scripture.

But neither are completely in error. So we analyze where they might be found to be in agreement with Scripture and go from there.

We are saved by grace through faith, yet the question arises for some whether we are born with that grace already in place and whether it could be attributed as an element of man's existence. I would suggest we are not, but on an individual basis that grace is bestowed upon men through the Comforter's Ministry.

God bless.

The grace in view is the monergistic action of God to put a person spiritually into Christ, to transfer them from the realm of darkness into the kingdom of His Son.

Agreed. So how do we ascribe man with having within himself something that contributes to God's Work?

We never at any time possess that capacity!!

Agreed.

But it is not just a matter, I feel, of saying "God does the saving" when in view is the debate as to man's ability to hear, understand, believe, repent, and turn in faith to Christ.

All of that is the result of the Ministry of the Comforter, Who provides the ability to the natural man to comprehend the spiritual things of God.

Are we born with the grace of being able to understand God's revelation to us? Yes.

And that is the primary point of contention between Calvs and Arms. I disagree, men are born completely dead (without life) and completely incapable of discerning that which is spiritual. Only through the revelation of God can the natural man be brought to the point where he falls under conviction of his sin, the remedy for sin, and that which he is commanded to do, namely...obey the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

But we can loose it, like the first soil of Matthew 13.

We can't lose something we didn't have. The parable of the Soils emphasizes that God initiates obedience because it is the Word of God which is given to men, not a matter of a man in his own understanding processing data and drawing a conclusion.

Again we look at the three means of revelation: internal witness and creation (provided to every man), and specific revelation (the Word of God). Concerning specific revelation we do not ascribe an understanding of the Gospel prior to the revelation of the Gospel, meaning, the revelation men like Abraham, Jacob, David, and any other Old Testament Prophet we might mention should not be equated with the unveiling of the Gospel of Christ. We do not see remission of sins accomplished for the believer until after sin was actually atoned for by Christ.

We can harden ourselves and God can harden individuals for His purpose, i.e. Romans 11.

I agree, this is specifically due to the response of man to the revelation he is provided...by God.

Romans 11 deals with a national context and when we maintain that truth we see that Israel is guilty of hardening their hearts to the specific revelation they were provided with. John states "He came unto His own and His own received Him not." Israel is cut out because of unbelief, the same charge the writer of Hebrews makes concerning Israel in the Wilderness.

But before we get to the hardening of the heart, resistance of the Holy Spirit as Stephen declared...we first see God initiating contact with man.

And that is the single point I am trying to make, and again, if we embrace this great truth we can set aside a dispute that has raged for centuries, due to the lack of recognition both sides give to this great truth.


God bless.

 

[Darrell C]

That's exactly what I've been saying. Propitiation for all means salvation for all. To endorse universal atonement would be to endorse (whether knowingly or not) universalism.

Not at all. It is only when the provision is applied to all that such a view might be considered. That is not what John states, but that the provision has been made available to all, not that it has been applied to all.

Included in who the Atonement is propitious for is every Old Testament Saint who was obedient to God according to the revelation they had been provided with:


Hebrews 9:15

King James Version (KJV)

15 And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance.


It was, and is, the grace of God and His grace only which allowed men who had not received atonement upon their death...to not be eternally separated from God.

That same grace restrains God from justly enforcing eternal judgment upon all men. No man is born and lives such that he might assuage the penalty of sin which he was born under.

As stated in the above verse, it is Christ that redeemed the transgression of the Old Testament Saint, and it is Christ that redeems the one responding to the ministry of the Comforter. It is the long-suffering of God that has historically allowed for sinful man that rather than the justly deserved punishment being exacted, grace instead was provided.

We often forget that in the eternal sense we are dealing with a Holy God and trying to contrast that with the goodness we perceive to be in men. There is a great gulf betwixt the two which can never be reconciled.


Isaiah 64:5-7

King James Version (KJV)

5 Thou meetest him that rejoiceth and worketh righteousness, those that remember thee in thy ways: behold, thou art wroth; for we have sinned: in those is continuance, and we shall be saved.

6 But we are all as an unclean thing, and all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags; and we all do fade as a leaf; and our iniquities, like the wind, have taken us away.

7 And there is none that calleth upon thy name, that stirreth up himself to take hold of thee: for thou hast hid thy face from us, and hast consumed us, because of our iniquities.


I don't think we should, as the atheist or Secular Humanist, bring man down to a level of the animal in which the likeness and image of God we were created with, though fallen, is completely made void. However, in relation to the Holiness of God we should remember our condition as physical beings whose flesh awaits redemption. If we keep that in perspective it is not so hard to perceive our condition and our righteousness as failing to meet that Holy Standard.


God bless.

 

[Van]

So what part of the natural person, one who has just their own sin nature, will be freely able to respond to Jesus to get saved?

And IF the Cross of Jesus meant that all sinners were averted from wrath of God, then all should get saved, correct?

What part of 1 Cor. 2:14-3:3 did you not understand. Men of flesh can understand spiritual milk, according to scripture. And did I say "free spiritual ability" or "limited spiritual ability?" Why not address views accurately.

Did I say that all sinners were "averted?" Nope. I said Jesus provided the means of salvation, the propitiation, for all men but all men are not saved. Why not address views accurately.

Folks, they have no answers so we get misrepresentation. But we have got to love them.

 

[Van]

Hi Darrel C, I see you have posted a tremendous amount of verbiage. I am just going to address one point.

I already addressed 1 Cor. 2:14-3:3 where Paul teaches the exact opposite of your claim.

And I have addressed that since.

We do not see unregenerate seeking God there, either, but believers behaving in an unspiritual manner, thus provoking rebuke. But Paul does not call them unspiritual, he states only he must address them as such.

Why not speak to the topic. Did I say the verse addresses unregenerates seeking God? Nope. But you posted it was not there. If you want to evade discussion, just say so.

The passage, 1 Cor. 2:14-3:3, addresses whether natural men, fallen men, men of flesh, unregenerate men can understand some spiritual things. Your view was they could not understand any spiritual things. I said this passage teaches the exact opposite. Paul speaks to new Christians as "men of flesh" presenting spiritual milk. Thus men of flesh can understand spiritual milk, i.e. some things of the Spirit of God, but not all things, i.e. spiritual meat.

This is obvious, yet you have not agreed. If you do not explicitly address this biblical truth, I will know we are done.

 

[Darrell C]

Hi Darrel C, I see you have posted a tremendous amount of verbiage. I am just going to address one point.

Why not speak to the topic. Did I say the verse addresses unregenerates seeking God? Nope. But you posted it was not there. If you want to evade discussion, just say so.

The passage, 1 Cor. 2:14-3:3, addresses whether natural men, fallen men, men of flesh, unregenerate men can understand some spiritual things. Your view was they could not understand any spiritual things. I said this passage teaches the exact opposite. Paul speaks to new Christians as "men of flesh" presenting spiritual milk. Thus men of flesh can understand spiritual milk, i.e. some things of the Spirit of God, but not all things, i.e. spiritual meat.

This is obvious, yet you have not agreed. If you do not explicitly address this biblical truth, I will know we are done.

Not sure, with the great amount of "verbiage," lol, you think I want to evade discussion.

But even in this post you disqualify the unregenerate being in view:

Paul speaks to new Christians as "men of flesh" presenting spiritual milk.

Then convert these new Christians to men of flesh...

Thus men of flesh can understand spiritual milk, i.e. some things of the Spirit of God, but not all things, i.e. spiritual meat

Thus equating them with the unregenerate.

No new Christian is unregenerate, and the fact that Paul has to speak to them as unspiritual doesn't make them unspiritual or "men of flesh."

As mentioned before, he has to speak to them as worldly, carnal, but, he does not negate his own previous teaching that the natural man, without controversy...cannot know nor receive the spiritual things of God. Both milk and meat are a diet for the regenerate only. Not the natural man.

And really have to go, so sorry this is rushed. Not an evasion, lol. Just think about what has been said a little, that's all I ask.

I will add that in Post# 45 you said...

Originally Posted by Van View Post
1) They say no unregenerate person ever seeks God at any time, but scripture (Matthew 23:13) says unregenerate men were entering heaven.

This is the focal point of this particular issue. If you wish to declare at this time that you did not mean to counter a Calvinistic view regarding the position that no unregenerate person seeks God and that you did not intend to imply the Lord is teaching that unregenerate men were entering Heaven, okay. I'm okay with that.

God bless.

 

[Yeshua1]

What part of 1 Cor. 2:14-3:3 did you not understand. Men of flesh can understand spiritual milk, according to scripture. And did I say "free spiritual ability" or "limited spiritual ability?" Why not address views accurately.

Did I say that all sinners were "averted?" Nope. I said Jesus provided the means of salvation, the propitiation, for all men but all men are not saved. Why not address views accurately.

Folks, they have no answers so we get misrepresentation. But we have got to love them.

You do know that Paul was addressing ther babes in Christ, who he wanted to grow up on solid meat, right?

And since in your view jesus died to provide for God the means to save all sinners, was the propiation for all sinners, and it is the will of God to have all sinner repent and receive jesus, then?

 

[Van]

You do know Paul spoke to the "babes in Christ" as men of flesh!!! Why not address that fact. Why avoid it.

Your next question is yet another attempt to change the subject from 1 Cor. 2:14-3:3. Please admit scripture teaches fallen men of flesh can understand spiritual milk. So simple a truth.

Do you admit propitiation = Jesus = means of salvation? Why not admit the truth?

We will get no where if no one accepts scripture as written!

 

[Van]

Hi Darrel C, you answered my question.

The idea is not to convert born anew believers back into men of flesh. So yet another evasion.

When scripture reads "but as to men of flesh" the capacity of men of flesh is in view. This is obvious.

The biblical view is that unregenerate men were entering heaven, not that they had entered heaven. You deny this.

Paul did not ever teach no unregenerate person ever seeks God at any time. You added "at any time" to the text. Not how it reads. It could just as easily be understood to say, no unregenerate person seeks God all the time. And when we are not seeking God we are sinning. Thus we are under sin. Another obvious truth.

 

[Darrell C]

Hi Darrel C, you answered my question.

Not yet, I think.

The idea is not to convert born anew believers back into men of flesh. So yet another evasion.

The point was that in your explanation you converted men back to "men of flesh" which you are equating with the unregenerate. Paul does not do that, he simply states they are behaving like the world, so he has to speak to them as such. But at no time does he (1) negate what he previously taught (the natural man cannot know or receive the spiritual things of God) or (2) imply these believers were unregenerate seekers of God.

When scripture reads "but as to men of flesh" the capacity of men of flesh is in view. This is obvious.

That still does not justify you're insistence that the unregenerate seek after God, which contradicts what Scripture states clearly:


Romans 3:9-11

King James Version (KJV)

9 What then? are we better than they? No, in no wise: for we have before proved both Jews and Gentiles, that they are all under sin;

10 As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one:

11 There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God.

...twice...


Psalm 14

King James Version (KJV)

1 The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good.

2 The Lord looked down from heaven upon the children of men, to see if there were any that did understand, and seek God.

3 They are all gone aside, they are all together become filthy: there is none that doeth good, no, not one.


The natural man is dependent on the intervention of God due to his nature:


John 6:44

King James Version (KJV)

44 No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day.

The biblical view is that unregenerate men were entering heaven, not that they had entered heaven. You deny this.

Even you deny it...

We disagree, Matthew 23:13 means what it says - fallen men were entering heaven, thus seeking God effectively.

You seem to change what you are saying as this post progresses...

Matthew 23:13 teaches the unregenerate were in the process of "entering heaven" but does not say or teach they actually entered heaven.

Paul did not ever teach no unregenerate person ever seeks God at any time.

He did:


1 Corinthians 2:14

King James Version (KJV)

14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.


We would have to deny what is written to make natural man seek after God according to his natural ability. We would have to ignore that the spiritual things of God are revealed by the Spirit of God.

You added "at any time" to the text. Not how it reads.

Since you did not quote me I am not sure what you are referring to. Please provide the quote where I use "at any time" so I can see the context it is said in.

Nevertheless, "none" pretty much covers "at any time."

If there are "...none that seek after God" at what time do we have them seeking?

It could just as easily be understood to say, no unregenerate person seeks God all the time.

That is not what it says:


Romans 3:9-11

King James Version (KJV)

11 There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God.

And when we are not seeking God we are sinning.

You're complicating it to the point of exclusion of the point: we are not talking about Christians, we are talking about natural men and the ability.

At no time does Paul imply those he speaks to are unregenerate men seeking after God. At no time does Paul negate his teaching that the natural man simply cannot receive nor know the spiritual things of God. At no time does Paul negate that which God has already stated that there are none, at no time, who seek after God.

Again, the entire point is that man is dependent upon God's intervention, and that apart from that enlightenment men remain dead. After that enlightenment, as shown in numerous texts and with much verbiage (lol)...men can resist God, specifically the Ministry of the Holy Spirit Who has consistently ministered to the hearts of men for the purpose of salvation.

Thus we are under sin. Another obvious truth.

So let's back up and get back to the focal point:


1 Corinthians 2:9-14

King James Version (KJV)

9 But as it is written, Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him.
10 But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God.

11 For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God.

12 Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God.

13 Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.

14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.


Again, the single point offered is that all men are dependent on the Spirit of God to know or receive the spiritual things of God. The Ministry of the Comforter, under New Covenant standard, ministers specifically in a way which is not seen in the Old Testament, which is the revelation of the Gospel of Christ. Prior to that Ministry men are natural, dead, and blind to their condition. He, the Holy Spirit, seeks to bring them to the knowledge of the truth, and except He do that, the natural man continues in a state which is properly likened to death, because has no conscious ability which connects him with that which is spiritual.


God bless.

 

[Van]

As I said Darrel C, we are done. You are simply denying the obvious.

Your understanding of Romans 3:11 adds to scripture "at any time." Yet you deny this, but claim that is what it says.

You say Paul when speaking to new born Christians "as men of flesh" was not teaching "men of flesh" can understand spiritual milk. The passage obviously does. Yet you deny it.

Unregenerate men were entering heaven (Matthew 23:13) and thus seeking God effectively, yet you deny it.

Thus I have presented three verses all teaching the same truth, some unregenerate men can understand and receive spiritual milk some of the time. Others have been hardened, losing their ability to receive spiritual milk.

These truths from scripture are obvious to any objective reader.

 

[Yeshua1]

As I said Darrel C, we are done. You are simply denying the obvious.

Your understanding of Romans 3:11 adds to scripture "at any time." Yet you deny this, but claim that is what it says.

You say Paul when speaking to new born Christians "as men of flesh" was not teaching "men of flesh" can understand spiritual milk. The passage obviously does. Yet you deny it.

Unregenerate men were entering heaven (Matthew 23:13) and thus seeking God effectively, yet you deny it.

Thus I have presented three verses all teaching the same truth, some unregenerate men can understand and receive spiritual milk some of the time. Others have been hardened, losing their ability to receive spiritual milk.

These truths from scripture are obvious to any objective reader.

Paul NEVER addressing the saved and yet carnal/babes in Chrsit as being "in the flesh" as if they were now somehow lost again!

He point is obvious in this, as he is trying to reveal to them that by acting wordly and acting as babes in Christ means that they are NOT walking as they shoudl be, its an encouragement to grow up and mature in Christ, NOT to get saved again!

And no one devoid of the Holy Spirit can read and understand the bible in a spiritual sense, as they can know what it says and states, but not as to what it really means!

THAT takes the Spirit to allow them to do that!

 

[Van]

Ah, Yeshua1, still making unbiblical assertions and avoiding answering questions.

1) No one said the babes in Christ were lost. So a strawman, a misrepresentation, an evasion.

2) Paul said that he addressed new born Christians as "men of flesh" with spiritual milk because they could not receive yet spiritual meat. I am waiting for someone of integrity to acknowledge this obvious truth.

3) Paul teaches unregenerate "men of flesh" cannot understand spiritual meat, but can understand spiritual milk.

4) No verse or passage says all unregenerate men cannot at any time understand the gospel of Christ. On the other hand, scripture can lead people to Christ.

5) God's revelation to fallen people, brought to us through the work of the Holy Spirit, i.e. empowering Christ and inspiring the NT, is sufficient to enlighten us.

6) And to repeat, no one has rebutted the fact that Matthew 23:13 teaches unregenerate men were entering heaven and thus seeking God effectively. Thus Total Spiritual Inability is unbiblical. No amount of changing the subject and claiming scripture does not mean what it says will nullify this truth.

7) 1 Cor. 2:14 does not say fallen people cannot understand "all of" the things of the Spirit of God, so the scope must be interpreted by context. 1 Cor. 3:1 provides that context, fallen men can understand spiritual milk but not spiritual meat. This is obvious.

8) Romans 3:11 teaches that no fallen person seeks after God, but does not teach that no fallen person does not seek after God some of the time. This misrepresentation is based on adding "at any time" to scripture. But that addition is unbiblical because of Matthew 23:13. The correct understanding of Romans 3:11 is no fallen person seek after God "all of the time," i.e. when sinning, and therefore we are all under sin.​

 

[Darrell C]

As I said Darrel C, we are done.

Sorry to hear that, but that is of course your choice.

You are simply denying the obvious.

Whereas I see it as pointing out the obvious.

Not sure how you can credit the natural man with ability to comprehend spiritual things which can only be discerned by those who are spiritual.



1 Corinthians 2:14

King James Version (KJV)

14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.


It is only when the Holy Spirit enlightens the natural man that he is brought to an understanding of those spiritual things.

Your understanding of Romans 3:11 adds to scripture "at any time." Yet you deny this, but claim that is what it says.

If I say, "Van, there are none on this earth that have been to Tatooine, no, not one," would you argue that my statement (and let's just assume it is true, lol) is not all inclusive?

Would it not be equally true, "Nobody on earth, at any time, has been to Tatooine?"

You say Paul when speaking to new born Christians "as men of flesh" was not teaching "men of flesh" can understand spiritual milk. The passage obviously does. Yet you deny it.

That is precisely what I, and Paul, are saying. They are "men of flesh" only in the sense of behaving like that, that does not equate them to the natural man Paul speaks of in Ch.2. You are, as I said before, converting them and equating someone who acts like the world (which is what he means by carnal) with a literally unsanctified person.

He was not teaching natural men as you imply, but Christians who were spiritual. That he could not teach them as spiritual is no different than someone saying to an adult, "If you are going to act like a child then I am going to treat you like a child." Doesn't make them a child, it just qualifies how they are treated.

Unregenerate men were entering heaven (Matthew 23:13) and thus seeking God effectively, yet you deny it.

As I said, so do you:

Originally Posted by Van
We disagree, Matthew 23:13 means what it says - fallen men were entering heaven, thus seeking God effectively.



Matthew 23:13 teaches the unregenerate were in the process of "entering heaven" but does not say or teach they actually entered heaven.

Apart from the apparent contradiction here, it should be understood that the efforts of men in regards to relationship to God and His Kingdom should not be equated to the New Birth and indwelling experienced by those who, Post-Pentecost, after the coming of the Comforter, place faith specifically in Christ and His accomplished Work.

There is no equation.

Not even among the Disciples of Christ, who sat under His teaching for some three years...had known or received the Gospel of Jesus Christ. In fact, we see in Peter a direct rejection of the Gospel...


Matthew 16:21-23

King James Version (KJV)

21 From that time forth began Jesus to shew unto his disciples, how that he must go unto Jerusalem, and suffer many things of the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and be raised again the third day.

22 Then Peter took him, and began to rebuke him, saying, Be it far from thee, Lord: this shall not be unto thee.

23 But he turned, and said unto Peter, Get thee behind me, Satan: thou art an offence unto me: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men.


But wait, some will say, Peter knew that Jesus was the Christ, the Son of the Living God!

That's right, but again we see how he knew:


Matthew 16:16-19

King James Version (KJV)

16 And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.

17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.


And then Christ teaches what He will build His Church upon:


18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

19 And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.


It is simply professing Who Christ is and what He did. The Lord did not say "Upon this rock am I building My Church," but that He would build His church upon that confession, and history testifies to this truth, as does the record of the New Testament.

No man, not even a disciple of Christ, who preached the Kingdom Gospel, healed, cast out demons...had received the Mystery of the Gospel. Not one of the disciples could be found with enough faith in Christ...not to abandon Him when the Gospel unfolded before their eyes.

They were natural men at that point, and until the Spirit of God revealed unto them the Gospel of Christ, they stood in the same light as every man born into this world.

Thus I have presented three verses all teaching the same truth, some unregenerate men can understand and receive spiritual milk some of the time.

I have not seen the first verse that contradicts some very simple statements which attest to the fact that man is separated from God, dead in trespasses and sins, and in his natural condition does not consider the spiritual things of God...foolishness.

Others have been hardened, losing their ability to receive spiritual milk.

Nowhere in the text.

These truths from scripture are obvious to any objective reader.

When we balance truth there is a demand that certain concepts be negated. Natural man having an ability in his state of separation from God, apart from God's intervention, is one of the concepts forcefully dismissed.


God bless.

 

[Darrell C]

Ah, Yeshua1, still making unbiblical assertions and avoiding answering questions.

1) No one said the babes in Christ were lost. So a strawman, a misrepresentation, an evasion.
​

That is what is said when "men of flesh" is equated to the natural man of 2:14.

2) Paul said that he addressed new born Christians as "men of flesh" with spiritual milk because they could not receive yet spiritual meat. I am waiting for someone of integrity to acknowledge this obvious truth.

It is acknowledged, but doesn't change the fact that you are using spiritual men to shore up your view that natural men can understand the spiritual things of God and that natural men do sometimes seek after God.

3) Paul teaches unregenerate "men of flesh" cannot understand spiritual meat, but can understand spiritual milk.

No, Paul teaches spiritual men can be babes not capable of receiving more complicates teaching.

His point is that they should not be babes in Christ, but similar to the writer of Hebrews' statement, for the time they should be teachers. He is incredulous at their behavior, and goes on to warn of the judgment we will receive...as believers.

4) No verse or passage says all unregenerate men cannot at any time understand the gospel of Christ. On the other hand, scripture can lead people to Christ.

Not apart from the Ministry of the Comforter. The natural man has no ability to know or receive the spiritual things, the Gospel topping the list for the natural man.

5) God's revelation to fallen people, brought to us through the work of the Holy Spirit, i.e. empowering Christ and inspiring the NT, is sufficient to enlighten us.

Bingo.

And we do not credit man with the Comforter's Ministry, we credit God.

That is not something in the natural man's ability.

6) And to repeat, no one has rebutted the fact that Matthew 23:13 teaches unregenerate men were entering heaven and thus seeking God effectively. Thus Total Spiritual Inability is unbiblical. No amount of changing the subject and claiming scripture does not mean what it says will nullify this truth.

Not only has it been rebutted but it has been shown that you yourself deny men actually entering Heaven.

It has also been mentioned that equating going to Heaven and seeking to enter the Kingdom of God is, from my view, a mistake. Men could not enter into the Holy Place which is the True, according to the Writer of Hebrews.

7) 1 Cor. 2:14 does not say fallen people cannot understand "all of" the things of the Spirit of God, so the scope must be interpreted by context. 1 Cor. 3:1 provides that context, fallen men can understand spiritual milk but not spiritual meat. This is obvious.

The context of 1 Corinthians 2 is that the Gospel was the hidden wisdom of God, unrevealed to men, who would not have crucified Christ had they known it. The revelation of the Mystery is ascribed, not to man understanding in his natural condition (which is without controversy denied as a possibility, he only having understanding of the things of man), but to the Spirit of God, Who has always been the One to bring understanding to those who are...dead. That deadness refers to spiritual ability, a result of not being in union with God Himself. The New Birth and indwelling of God is the remedy for that deadness, whereby we come to share the life of Christ.

8) Romans 3:11 teaches that no fallen person seeks after God, but does not teach that no fallen person does not seek after God some of the time. This misrepresentation is based on adding "at any time" to scripture. But that addition is unbiblical because of Matthew 23:13. The correct understanding of Romans 3:11 is no fallen person seek after God "all of the time," i.e. when sinning, and therefore we are all under sin.

"At any time" is implied.

In regards to Matthew 23:13, the context is a context within the (Covenant of) Law. Equating the "Kingdom of Heaven" with actually entering Heaven is the first mistake.


Matthew 23

King James Version (KJV)

1 Then spake Jesus to the multitude, and to his disciples,

2 Saying The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat:

3 All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not.


Are you saying that keeping the Law is how men entered Heaven?

If you do choose to answer, please give it some consideration before answering.


God bless.