So the bible lies when it says the Egyptian sorcerers did miracles much like Moses?
What other places have you found that God the Holy Spirit lied when inscripturating the bible?
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Same song second verse
- Thread starter James Donovan
- Start date
What other places have you found that God the Holy Spirit lied when inscripturating the bible?
glad4mercy
Active Member
If lost pe
I'm sorry. I thought that Paul said that God justifies the UNGODLY through faith. I thought we believed in justification by faith. We have been justified and righteousness has been imputed to us by faith. Obviously, we were lost if we were ungodly and were not yet justified
I'm sorry. I thought that Paul said that God justifies the UNGODLY through faith. I thought we believed in justification by faith. We have been justified and righteousness has been imputed to us by faith. Obviously, we were lost if we were ungodly and were not yet justified
Last edited:
My bible is in perfect harmony, God has never lied. I'm pretty sure if the devil showed up and sneezed it would count as a miracle.
What you are insinuating is not new, Chosen elect holier then thou folks have done it before:
Matthew 12
24But when the Pharisees heard this, they said, “This man casts out demons only by Beelzebul the ruler of the demons.”
25And knowing their thoughts Jesus said to them, “Any kingdom divided against itself is laid waste; and any city or house divided against itself will not stand. 26“If Satan casts out Satan, he is divided against himself; how then will his kingdom stand?
According to Christ, Demons don't drive each other out, else you have a "Satan cast out Satan" scenario. That means when they cast out demons that was a complete GOD GIVEN POWER. And God does NOT ever WILL NOT give that power to reprobate.
Don't get upset with me because my explanations are ready.
You lock yourself in absolute rules of man made spiritual mechanics with a pre-made theology.
I got it easy.
The Devil absolutely believe that Christ blood can save you too.
There is only one virtue that establishes allegiance and you have not stated it.
1 Corinthians 13
2If I have the gift of prophecy, and know all mysteries and all knowledge; and if I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing. 3And if I give all my possessions to feed the poor, and if I surrender my body to be burned, but do not have love, it profits me nothing.
You can have ALL FAITH, Omniscient & Omnipotent, If you do not have love it is trash.
I think Only elect are given the GIFT of prophecy, I could be wrong, God given gift, so is faith, knowledge, intelligence etc.
You have a current system that sets up a blanket of "invincible ignorance" where if I do something evil its because "I am only human" because my nature limits me, I don't know how to do good nor know what is right and only to do evil acts. But TRUE EVIL like the Devil absolutely know what is GOOD, know what is the right thing to do, have the capacity to do what is right and absolutely choose to do wrong.
When I sin it is MY FAULT not my nature's fault. I have no excuse at all. When I sin I really did have the option to do what is right with full knowledge it is the right thing to do, with the full capacity to do it.
glad4mercy
Active Member
A. If a person has not been justified, they are lost.
B. Justification is through faith. For them to be justified through faith, they must have faith.
C So yes, lost people can believe and be saved.
Do you suppose a person who has not been justified is lost? Of course. Can a person who is lost believe? Of course. How else can they be justified, seeing that justification is through faith? And how can they be regenerate until they are justified? How can a sinner who is still under the guilt of sin have life? And how can they be free from the guilt of sin unless they believe, justification through faith
glad4mercy
Active Member
Classical Arminians do not believe in irresistible grace. I'm apparently not the one who needs to brush up on classical Arminianism. If I thought grace was irresistible, I would accept TULIP en toto.
To say that God's saving grace is offered to all AND is irresistible would amount to universalism
Last edited:
Where did I say Classical Arminians fully believe in irresistible grace the exact same way Calvinists believe it? I think you are confusing modern Arminianism and Classical. A Classical believes in both resistable and irresistible grace. They believe that God has issued a universal resistable call to man. They also believe that In God's ultimate sovereignty He chooses to issue an irresistible call to those whom He chooses to.To most C.A. those would be the "elect."
If you understand Classical Arminianism, you would know that it and Calvinism are only a razors edge apart on 4 points. C.A. has no official position on eternal security.
T.U.L.I.P is accurate of Calvinism. If you try to say the opposite of T.U.L.I.P. is C.A. then you do not understand C.A.
Semi Pelagianism, not C.A., is the opposite of TULIP.
Last edited:
glad4mercy
Active Member
I have not found irresistable grace in the writings of Arminianism or the remonstrance. Do you have citations for this.
Besides this, can you tell me ONE thing that I have said that disagrees with Classical Arminianism?
most of what you say disagrees with C.A.
I will dig up the citations tonight on I.R.
glad4mercy
Active Member
Give me the most glaring example of something that disagrees with C.A. It will make it simple if I can show that the one you find most glaring does not contradict. And if it does, I will show that it does not contradict scripture.
And while in points, Calvinism and classical Arminianism are close, the CONCLUSIONS they draw are far apart. I agree with much of what Calvinism says, but I don't think the conclusions always follow from the premises.
If you don't have the citations for IR, don't work too hard at it. Just give me one that goes back a ways, not something very recent.
Last edited:
Yes, that is obvious.
No, they can't. A lost person is, by definition, an unbeliever. If he were a believer he would no longer be lost.
Of course not. The moment he believed he would no longer be lost.
Yes, we know that. But we are not talking about justification. We are talking about regeneration. Very different things.
How can they be justified until they are regenerate?
By the regenerating Grace of God.
Yes, again, obviously. But you seem to have conflated justification with regeneration. They are not the same thing.
James Arminius was a Dutch REFORMED theologian. He agreed with all points of TULIP except Unconditional Election. He believed Election was due to God looking down the corridor of time and seeing who would believe, and electing that person to eternal life.
glad4mercy
Active Member
I never said the opposite of tulip is CA. And if you read my posts with understanding, you would know that I do not hold to "opposite of Daisy". Also, you would know that I am not semi pelagian and I do not accuse
C.A of being semipelagian. In fact, I said that that was a misrepresentation.
I am not upset. And your "explanations" make no sense whatsoever.
No, I don't. I would ask you to not post falsehoods about what I believe and why I believe it.
No, I don't have a system that sets up a blanket of invincible ignorance. Again, please, I would ask you to not post falsehoods about what I believe and why I believe it.
You are forgiven, although I am not sure what you are apologizing for. You certainly haven't offended me.
Exactly.
We do.
Correct.
No "if" about it. We were lost, ungodly, and unjust. We were enemies of God. But God intervened with His Wonderful Grace, and regenerated our sin-sick souls and gave us faith to believe, repentance to turn from our sinful ways, and the desire and ability to obey Him. God is Good.
glad4mercy
Active Member
NO, that is a false statement. No one is conflating justification with regeneration. What I am saying is that justification is necessary to remove the guilt and condemnation of sin, and I cannot see God taking up His dwelling in us BEFORE the guilt and condemnation of sin are dealt with by justifying grace. You have the Spirit coming to dwell in sinners before they are justified. Where does the Bible teach this?
Last edited:
glad4mercy
Active Member
You are forgiven, although I am not sure what you are apologizing for. You certainly haven't offended me.
Exactly.
We do.
Correct.
No "if" about it. We were lost, ungodly, and unjust. We were enemies of God. But God intervened with His Wonderful Grace, and regenerated out sin-sick souls and gave us faith to believe, repentance to turn from our sinful ways, and the desire and ability to obey Him. God is Good.
I agree with this, except that there is no regeneration unless the Spirit comes and indwells a person. Do you hold that the Spirit indwells people BEFORE they are justified? Your doctrine has God coming and taking up His abode in us while we are still under the condemnation of sin and seperated from the Holy God by our sin-guilt.
Yes, I believe you are.
Yes, we know. That is what Justification means, "Just As If I Had Never Sinned."
No, I don't.
I disagree. Regeneration is the work of the Spirit by which He is then able to indwell and "He will guide you into all truth."
The Spirit is the Justifier.
Not at all. My doctrine (bible doctrine) has God regenerating the sin-sick soul, the new born person then being enabled to believe, repent, and obey, and the Spirit Justifying, Redeeming, Sealing, Indwelling, and serving as Guide into all Truth."
glad4mercy
Active Member
As long as you don't have the Spirit indwelling a person before justification, then I can go along with that.
Yes, I believe you are.
Yes, we know. That is what Justification means, "Just As If I Had Never Sinned."
No, I don't.
Well as long as you don't have the Spirit indwelling a person before faith and justification, I'm Ok with that. I understood "regeneration/the New Birth to occur when the Holy Spirit indwells a believer.
I spoke of the Divine operation that you are referring to here earlier, and agreed with what you are saying, I just did not call it regeneration. So we agree in principle, but the disagreement is semantic, based on how we define regeneration. Thanks for the discussion. Blessings.
Last edited: