Poll: “Many are saved having never heard the gospel”?

[canadyjd]

I agree it is hard being the youngest in a large family. If I caused offense then please accept my apology.

We are not going to agree on this or I suspect a number of other things but we are still brothers in Christ.

I accept your apology. I will discuss scripture with anyone. I will admit if I’m wrong and change my mind if convinced from scripture.

Although I believe this particular belief is a grievous error, I consider you a brother in Christ.

peace to you

 

[AustinC]

You have just proven my point. I made this comment in post # 18

"You actually amaze me at times, actually most calvinists do that. Your the ones that trumpet that God is sovereign then turn around and say well only so much. He is not allowed to do anything that does not fit with my theology. So much for your sovereign god."

To which I received this comment
The idiotic nature of this post is astounding.#69 Reformed1689,

So you have just proven my point. You do not trust that the living God could actually save someone that calls out to God even though they have not heard the gospel. But at the same time you believe that God has to give people faith after they are saved so they will believe.

You keep presenting you r narrow view, just because people made idols does not mean they could never call out to God and I am quite sure that if they did God would hear them. Do you not believe that?

Your gong is clanging.
I have addressed the Sovereignty of God.
Your version of Sovereignty makes God a liar, which is why I reject your false teaching. Moreso, you attempt to diminish God and make God your servant to whom you dictate the function of the covenant.
In whole, you have a very low view of God and a very high view of self.

 

[Silverhair]

I understand the context of Galatians. Paul was specially addressing Jews that had come into the church and were attempting to convince Christians they had to keep the OT law, especially circumcision.

But his language in the condemnation was much broader. He says “any other gospel” but the gospel of Jesus Christ and Him crucified.

Since your belief that “many are saved having never heard the gospel” deliberately removes Jesus Christ and Him crucified from the gospel, it is a different gospel, whether you understand that or not.

Now, addressing the sovereignty of God one last time. I do not “struggle” with God’s sovereignty. I accept and embrace it.

I also believe that God has revealed to us in His word the means by which He brings people to salvation. That is the preaching of the gospel of Jesus Christ and Him crucified.

Your belief “many are saved having never heard the gospel” directly contradicts scripture and puts God in conflict with Himself.

It diminishes the sacrifice of our Lord. It diminishes His name, His glory, His position at the right hand of the Father as the one and only means of salvation for God’s children.

Peace to you

Well as I have said before and it still holds true if you want to limit God, which you do even though you will deny this, then that is your right. What I have said is not another gospel but you will insist that it is.

I trust the sovereign creator God to do as He pleases in who and how He saves. You just do not like that idea as it does not fit with your calvinist theology.

 

[Silverhair]

Your gong is clanging.
I have addressed the Sovereignty of God.
Your version of Sovereignty makes God a liar, which is why I reject your false teaching. Moreso, you attempt to diminish God and make God your servant to whom you dictate the function of the covenant.
In whole, you have a very low view of God and a very high view of self.

Thought I would save myself some typing and just do a copy paste.

Your gong is clanging.
I have addressed the Sovereignty of God.
Your version of Sovereignty makes God a liar, which is why I reject your false teaching. Moreso, you attempt to diminish God and make God your servant to whom you dictate the function of the covenant.
In whole, you have a very low view of God and a very high view of self.

Austin the theology has to many holes it it to hold water. You think it is good I do not.

 

[Silverhair]

I accept your apology. I will discuss scripture with anyone. I will admit if I’m wrong and change my mind if convinced from scripture.

Although I believe this particular belief is a grievous error, I consider you a brother in Christ.

peace to you

As I said we will disagree on any things and that is to be expected. If I thought that my understanding was wrong then I would change it but as I have said and shown God saves those that trust in Him. It is the condition of the heart that matters not the words.

 

[Reformed1689]

Then I would have to conclude that you no longer agree with the DoG. as they do limit God.
Only those that are included in the Unconditional Election will partake of the Limited Atonement and will be drawn to God by His Irresistible Grace. So all men do not have an equal chance to know or trust in God.

That is not what God says is it
1Ti 2:3 For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior,
1Ti 2:4 who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.
Rom 10:13 For "WHOEVER CALLS ON THE NAME OF THE LORD SHALL BE SAVED."

Your DoG denies both of these, the gospel call in calvinism is not a well meant call or sincere offer. Calvinist theology has made the good faith offer of salvation moot. If, according to Calvinism, you are not part of this select group then you are doomed for the start.

No that is where you are wrong. Nothing I believe limits God except for limits that GOD has put on himself.

No we do not deny 1 Timothy or Romans 10:13. These are more strawman argument.s

 

[Revmitchell]

How were men saved while the Gospel of Christ remained a mystery?

God bless.

the gospel of Christ has never been a mystery. Not knowing Jesus name and when He would come is not the same as the gospel of Christ being a mystery.

 

[Silverhair]

No that is where you are wrong. Nothing I believe limits God except for limits that GOD has put on himself.

No we do not deny 1 Timothy or Romans 10:13. These are more strawman argument.s

Then you must be comfortable with the contradiction. Your DoG and 1Ti 2:3-4 and Rom 10:13 can not both be true.

 

[Reformed1689]

Then you must be comfortable with the contradiction. Your DoG and 1Ti 2:3-4 and Rom 10:13 can not both be true.

Of course they can. And they are.

 

[Silverhair]

Of course they can. And they are.

How so? It would seem to me that one says man has a free will and the DoG says man does not.

 

[Reformed1689]

How so? It would seem to me that one says man has a free will and the DoG says man does not.

And there you go with the strawman arguments again and you get really confused on what free will is, and what it is not. You keep arguing for what I call absolute free will. Meaning free will with nothing to impede it. But that is not reality. Our will is impeded by, hindered by, captive by, our sin. This results in people being free to choose their desires. As a Calvinist, I do not dispute that one single bit. Anybody is free to choose what they desire. The question is, what do people desire? Nobody desires God. That is what Scripture states. Nobody does good. That is what Scripture states. I understand you don't agree with that. That's fine. But you can't say Calvinists don't believe in free will just because it doesn't fit whatever definition you put on that free will. When I look at the will, I look at reality. Our will is free within certain parameters. That parameter is the reality of our sinful condition.

 

[Revmitchell]

And there you go with the strawman arguments again and you get really confused on what free will is, and what it is not. You keep arguing for what I call absolute free will. Meaning free will with nothing to impede it. But that is not reality. Our will is impeded by, hindered by, captive by, our sin. This results in people being free to choose their desires. As a Calvinist, I do not dispute that one single bit. Anybody is free to choose what they desire. The question is, what do people desire? Nobody desires God. That is what Scripture states. Nobody does good. That is what Scripture states. I understand you don't agree with that. That's fine. But you can't say Calvinists don't believe in free will just because it doesn't fit whatever definition you put on that free will. When I look at the will, I look at reality. Our will is free within certain parameters. That parameter is the reality of our sinful condition.

Free will is having a choice between doing it or not. A choice between either or. Im sorry but trying to make a case for free will by saying we only choose what we desire and then only having the ability to desire one option is not in any way free will. Not even close.

 

[Silverhair]

And there you go with the strawman arguments again and you get really confused on what free will is, and what it is not. You keep arguing for what I call absolute free will. Meaning free will with nothing to impede it. But that is not reality. Our will is impeded by, hindered by, captive by, our sin. This results in people being free to choose their desires. As a Calvinist, I do not dispute that one single bit. Anybody is free to choose what they desire. The question is, what do people desire? Nobody desires God. That is what Scripture states. Nobody does good. That is what Scripture states. I understand you don't agree with that. That's fine. But you can't say Calvinists don't believe in free will just because it doesn't fit whatever definition you put on that free will. When I look at the will, I look at reality. Our will is free within certain parameters. That parameter is the reality of our sinful condition.

One of the marks of being human is that God has given us the ability to choose. Some may refer to this as the power of choice, but no matter how you define it, we all have a free will.

When you look at what the Bible says about free will, you discover that we have the right and the ability to choose the direction we will go and what we will do. This power to choose is not something that should be considered lightly, because what comes along with the power to choose is the reality there are consequences for your choices.

I really do not understand why some believe we have no free will, when in the Word of God Jesus asks people do you believe? (Joh_11:25-26, Joh_16:31, Mat_9:28)

If your will makes no difference then why would Jesus ask them anything?? (Rom_10:17) Choice has always been in God's order!(Jos_24:15) If you cannot choose, why does Jesus send out disciples to preach the good news for you to decide?

What would be the point of Jesus doing anything. If all was predestined

The model Lords prayer has the phrase: "Lead us not into temptation..." No matter the context, wouldn't that mean that we have a choice?

You say I keep arguing for absolute free will
absolute free will is the ability to have wilfully chosen otherwise for any previous decision. Daniel Miessler
This is the type of free will that is required for true moral responsibility. In short, if someone could not have made a wilful choice to do otherwise than they did, then they cannot be held responsible for what they did do.

So if we go by your logic man can not be held responsible for his sins, so who is? God or man?

By the way I do not like the term "absolute free will" man either has a free will or he has no free will.

 

[Reformed1689]

Free will is having a choice between doing it or not. A choice between either or. Im sorry but trying to make a case for free will by saying we only choose what we desire and then only having the ability to desire one option is not in any way free will. Not even close.

I mean if you want to ignore reality that is fine but that doesn't change reality. And yes, that is the free will of REALITY. Not absolute free will that you seem to want to so desperately have which does not exist.

 

[Reformed1689]

One of the marks of being human is that God has given us the ability to choose. Some may refer to this as the power of choice, but no matter how you define it, we all have a free will.

When you look at what the Bible says about free will, you discover that we have the right and the ability to choose the direction we will go and what we will do. This power to choose is not something that should be considered lightly, because what comes along with the power to choose is the reality there are consequences for your choices.

I really do not understand why some believe we have no free will, when in the Word of God Jesus asks people do you believe? (Joh_11:25-26, Joh_16:31, Mat_9:28)

If your will makes no difference then why would Jesus ask them anything?? (Rom_10:17) Choice has always been in God's order!(Jos_24:15) If you cannot choose, why does Jesus send out disciples to preach the good news for you to decide?

What would be the point of Jesus doing anything. If all was predestined

The model Lords prayer has the phrase: "Lead us not into temptation..." No matter the context, wouldn't that mean that we have a choice?

You say I keep arguing for absolute free will
absolute free will is the ability to have wilfully chosen otherwise for any previous decision. Daniel Miessler
This is the type of free will that is required for true moral responsibility. In short, if someone could not have made a wilful choice to do otherwise than they did, then they cannot be held responsible for what they did do.

So if we go by your logic man can not be held responsible for his sins, so who is? God or man?

By the way I do not like the term "absolute free will" man either has a free will or he has no free will.

More strawman arguments.

 

[Revmitchell]

I mean if you want to ignore reality that is fine but that doesn't change reality. And yes, that is the free will of REALITY. Not absolute free will that you seem to want to so desperately have which does not exist.

It does exist. Every day we have multiple options on a great many things. Without multiple options there is no choice and there is no free will.

 

[Silverhair]

More strawman arguments.

That is not an answer is it? Answer the post. It is a fair question that you should be able to respond to.

 

[Reformed1689]

It does exist. Every day we have multiple options on a great many things. Without multiple options there is no choice and there is no free will.

And I have never said there were no options to choose from.

 

[canadyjd]

Free will is having a choice between doing it or not. A choice between either or. Im sorry but trying to make a case for free will by saying we only choose what we desire and then only having the ability to desire one option is not in any way free will. Not even close.

You are correct, it is not freewill, which is the point. We have human will enslaved to sin. It is not “free”.

I don’t know anyone that denies people make. choices. The question is “why” we make the choices we do.

Romans 7 clearly makes the point “sin” is a controlling master that dictates our choices. We are slaves to sin. We do what the master desires. When the “sin master” is finished with us, he delivers us to the “death master”. Thus, the wages of sin (the sin master) is death (delivery to the death master).

When Paul cries out “who can deliver us from this body of death?” (This body belonging to the death master), the answer is Christ.

peace to you

 

[Reformed1689]

One of the marks of being human is that God has given us the ability to choose. Some may refer to this as the power of choice, but no matter how you define it, we all have a free will.

Never said we do not have the ability to choose. That is why this is a strawman argument.

If your will makes no difference then why would Jesus ask them anything?? (Rom_10:17) Choice has always been in God's order!(Jos_24:15) If you cannot choose, why does Jesus send out disciples to preach the good news for you to decide?

Again, who said we cannot choose? Not me. I said we WILL NOT choose. There is a difference.

By the way I do not like the term "absolute free will" man either has a free will or he has no free will.

You have to define what you mean when you say free will. When I say absolute free will I mean a will that has no external influences and the choice between two options is equal. But that isn't reality. That is my point. Our will IS influenced by external factors. So it freely chooses what it desires. Unregenerate man always desires sin. Never seeks God. Never chooses God.