Review of Free Will 2

[Reformed]

You seem to be saying, that no, people can't even know the facts of the Gospel because they are spiritually discerned.

You and I do not interact much, which is probably a good thing, and @TCassidy does not need me to take up for him. However, it grates against me when a person's view is being intentionally misinterpreted. @TCassidy never said that an unregenerate person cannot understand the words of the Gospel. He never even hinted at it. When a Monergist states that an unregenerate person cannot understand the Gospel, he is referring to spiritual appropriation. Of course, the unregenerate person can understand facts. He can hear the Gospel and understand its words. What he cannot do is spiritually appropriate those words because he is still unregenerate. There should be no need for him, or any other Monergist, to qualify that point ad infinitum, ad nauseum.

 

[InTheLight]

You and I do not interact much, which is probably a good thing, and @TCassidy does not need me to take up for him. However, it grates against me when a person's view is being intentionally misinterpreted. @TCassidy never said that an unregenerate person cannot understand the words of the Gospel. He never even hinted at it.

Reread this:
Review of Free Will 2
and
Review of Free Will 2

When a Monergist states that an unregenerate person cannot understand the Gospel, he is referring to spiritual appropriation. Of course, the unregenerate person can understand facts. He can hear the Gospel and understand its words. What he cannot do is spiritually appropriate those words because he is still unregenerate. There should be no need for him, or any other Monergist, to qualify that point ad infinitum, ad nauseum.

Well, sorry, but this Monergist idea flies in the face of Romans 1:16

16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel [a]of Christ, for it is the power of God to salvation for everyone who believes, for the Jew first and also for the Greek.[/QUOTE]

 

[SovereignGrace]

Great, except that's not what Ephesians 1:4 says...



View attachment 2499

And i still stand by what i said in my post...

ἐκλέγομαι

eklegomai

1. to pick out, choose, to pick or choose out for one's self
   1. choosing one out of many, i.e. Jesus choosing his disciples
   2. choosing one for an office
   3. of God choosing whom he judged fit to receive his favours and separated from the rest of mankind to be peculiarly his own and to be attended continually by his gracious oversight
      1. i.e. the Israelites
   4. of God the Father choosing Christians, as those whom he set apart from the irreligious multitude as dear unto himself, and whom he has rendered, through faith in Christ, citizens in the Messianic kingdom: (James 2:
2. so that the ground of the choice lies in Christ and his merits only

Eklegomai - New Testament Greek Lexicon - New American Standard

Any way you cut it, your view is horribly wrong. We were chosen in Christ before the foundation/creation of the world.

 

[Reformed]

Well, sorry, but this Monergist idea flies in the face of Romans 1:16

I never said you have to agree with the Monergist position, but it would be helpful if you do not mischaracterize it. Monergists believe that the unregenerate cannot spiritually understand the Gospel. Every Monergist believes that, or else they are not a Monergist. Again, feel free to disagree with Monergism on that point. We are all big pants people and can handle that.

 

[37818]

What verse says " bondage to sin ?

Romans 6:17. KJV uses the words "the servants. of sin."

Further checking the phrase "bondage to sin" is found in the NASB Romans 7:14 the KJV has "sold under sin."

 

[Rockson]

I never said you have to agree with the Monergist position, but it would be helpful if you do not mischaracterize it. Monergists believe that the unregenerate cannot spiritually understand the Gospel. Every Monergist believes that, or else they are not a Monergist. Again, feel free to disagree with Monergism on that point. We are all big pants people and can handle that.

But you should have to explain yourself in clear terms. What exactly do you mean sinners cannot understand the gospel? It's rather simplistic which is how God wanted it to be. Jesus came to the earth as a sinner's substitute for punishment. He took our sins and we receive his righteousness because of Jesus precious blood.

There's more words that can be said but those are the basic thoughts. What is there not to understand. God's revelation comes to the sinner they actually understand the words, the concept and the principles about it .....now they can choose.

Are they going to mock and make light of it and reject it...or rather receive it and walk in the light of it. Mock it they might be it can't be said they don't understand it.

 

[Rockson]

They do not believe that the sinner is spiritually dead (Eph. 2:1; Col. 2:13). They believe the sinner is spiritually ill, but possesses a latent faith that just needs a swift kick to wake it up. It is then up to the sinner to choose whether to believe.

Nope. We believe the sinner is spiritually dead but spiritual death does not mean the cessation of consciousness. It means the sinner is out of fellowship with God which is a higher quality of life called eternal life. But it can be said the sinner in this condition is sick.

They that are whole have no need of the physician, but they that are sick; I came not to call the righteous, but the sinners to repentance.
Mk 2:17

 

[Rockson]

Yes. And He explains to Nicodemus WHY he didn't have the vaguest notion. He had to be born again FIRST in order to understand. Jesus said so!

No I can't agree with that based on the scriptures. If Jesus said he needed to be born again to have an understanding of the subject then why would he have said in Jn 3: "You're a teaching in Israel and don't understand these things?" How can one argue in any sense of fairness how language is used that would have to mean, "You should have been understanding these things being a teacher of Israel!" If Jesus meant as you suggest it would have been, "That's OK Nicodemus! That's perfectly understandable that you don't understand! You do after all have to be born again to be able to do so!" Did he say that? NO.

So you think 1 Cor 2:14 is wrong?

Well better question Cassidy. Do I think your interpretation of 1 Cor 2:14 is wrong? Let me think about it for a moment....OK...Yes I do.

"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.

Well another poster has already pointed to you that it's talking about the more mature Christians as compared to those who aren't. I agree with their conclusion. 1 Cor 3:1-3 also brings the balance and its only 3 verses away.

Brothers and sisters, I could not address you as people who live by the Spirit but as people who are still worldly—mere infants in Christ. 2 I gave you milk, not solid food, for you were not yet ready for it. Indeed, you are still not ready. 3 You are still worldly. For since there is jealousy and quarreling among you, are you not worldly? Are you not acting like mere humans? 1 Cor 3:1-3

He was talking about spiritually immature Christians that were the state of only being able to receive the basic things of Christianity and not the meat of God's word but had to stay on milk. Things in regard to repentance and what is takes to become a son of God.

 

[Rockson]

I know. I was, and am, a good teacher. But, unfortunately, I can explain it to you but I cannot understand it for you.

Well if you were a good Bible teacher why would you be praising yourself? Doesn't wisdom say let another man do that? Prov 27:2 But really though I 'll acknowledge that you might indeed be a good teacher but the fact is with many of us we do not KNOW all things. Shouldn't you admit that's the same with you?

 

[loDebar]

Can someone show a case that says the Natural man, without spiritual discernment, becomes the lost man with spiritual discernment?

 

[Reformed]

But you should have to explain yourself in clear terms.

I suppose we need to, but considering Monergists have been consistently saying the same thing since time and immemorial, you would think Synergists would know what we mean.

It's rather simplistic which is how God wanted it to be. Jesus came to the earth as a sinner's substitute for punishment. He took our sins and we receive his righteousness because of Jesus precious blood.

So, now you are hiding behind the "simplistic" curtain? "Simple" is not always a good defense for one's argument. When Monergists look at Romans 3:9-18, 1 Corinthians 2:14, Romans 8:7, Ephesians 2:1, and Colossians 2:13 et al., the condition and inability of the sinner comes into sharp relief. None of that negates the fact that Jesus came to earth to take on Himself the punishment for our sins and offer us His righteousness through His blood.

God's revelation comes to the sinner they actually understand the words, the concept and the principles about it .....now they can choose.

You can try reasoning with a corpse in the nearest funeral home until you are blue in the face, but unless a miracle takes place that causes that corpse to come alive (Eph. 2:1), it is not about to choose anything.

 

[Reformed]

We believe the sinner is spiritually dead but spiritual death does not mean the cessation of consciousness. It means the sinner is out of fellowship with God which is a higher quality of life called eternal life. But it can be said the sinner in this condition is sick.

Contradict yourself much? You believe the sinner is spiritually dead and then refute your own statement by saying the sinner is sick? Which one is it, dead or sick? Also, you are not making sense. You say that the sinner is out of fellowship with God, which is a higher quality of life called eternal life. So being out of fellowship with God is a higher quality of life? Either you have no idea what you are talking about or you write poorly.

 

[robycop3]

2 Peter 3:9 The Lord is not slow concerning his promise, as some count slowness; but is patient with us, not wishing that any (of us) should perish, but that all should come to repentance.

Paul is talking about "the us." It is none of "us" who will perish. In Greek ημας is an accusative plural and τινας is an accusative plural. Toward "US" and "ANY of us." They have to refer to the same people according to the rules of Greek grammar.

But God made Peter's writing here become Scripture & thus applying to all.

And I simply do NOT believe God created anyone predestinated for hell before they took their first breath,

 

[1689Dave]

I believed she was a doctor. So? You define that as faith?

But, how can choosing to believe in Jesus, not be an act of faith? Do you choose to believe in things not real to you? Only crazy people do this....

 

[JonShaff]

I believe in the foolishness of preaching (the Gospel) that is powerful enough to penetrate dead ears and hearts.

 

[Rockson]

You can try reasoning with a corpse in the nearest funeral home until you are blue in the face, but unless a miracle takes place that causes that corpse to come alive (Eph. 2:1), it is not about to choose anything.

When are you going to stop using this faulty way of reasoning that spiritual death is the same as physical. Someone in spiritual death still has consciousness... they can hear talk reason and respond.

 

[Revmitchell]

So we are not elect from the foundation of the world as the bible says?

Sorry for your mis-quote of scripture. Maybe you need to go back and actually quote what it says.

 

[SovereignGrace]

Can someone show a case that says the Natural man, without spiritual discernment, becomes the lost man with spiritual discernment?

Bruh, the natural man without spiritual discernment IS a lost man. The natural man does not have spiritual discernment.

 

[JonShaff]

So we are not elect from the foundation of the world as the bible says?

The Jews thought they were "Chosen" (individually for salvation) because they were of the seed (Physically) of Abraham. They thought their election was contingent upon being "Randomly born" into the family of Abraham. Calvinists similarly misunderstand the nature of Election in that they think they are "Randomly born from above" into Christ.

I believe election has two sides--One for Service, and One for Salvation. Both of these points are in direct relationship to Christ being the Elect one. Christ was Chosen to Bring people into the Image of God. Christ was also chosen to Work through His people to continue to accomplish God's Will. So, on one side, Christ is the Elect one to bring salvation to those who believe on Him. And on the other side of the same coin, people have been elected to serve in a specific capacity for God's will to be done through them.

We only become "part of the Elect" when we are baptized into Christ. He is the Chosen seed of Abraham. He is the Chosen One before the Foundations of earth to bring God's Will to pass. Just like Isaac and Rebekah--Isaac was the chosen seed (in partial fulfillment) to bring God's plan together. Rebekah reaped the benefit of Isaac's election because she married him. Similarly, the Church Reaps all the benefits of Christ's Election because we are married to Him, we are in union with Him.

 

[SovereignGrace]

And I simply do NOT believe God created anyone predestinated for hell before they took their first breath,

And neither do we.