Saving Faith: God’s Gift to Sinners or Sinners’ Gift to God?

[DHK]

Where did you glean this from? I was poking at DHK, because he repeatedly states God doesn't make us robots. Like we would advocate such a stoopid thing...

Of course you would never admit it. It is the natural conclusion of your belief. You can't have it any other way. God has predetermined (you say), every thought, word, and deed--absolutely everything. Therefore, the natural conclusion--you are but a puppet in his hand, a robot so to speak without any free will. It is the natural logical outcome of your theology.

I can relate to what you are going through. I used to be a Catholic. Go to the Other Christian Den. Forum. Accuse the RCC of idolatry because they bow down in front of statues. They take offense. They deny that they are committing idolatry. Tell them they are committing idolatry every time they pray to Mary. They protest. That is not idolatry. And in my eyes it wasn't, until much later in my Christian walk I saw that it was.
Idolatry is not giving God the glory that is his, or taking away that glory and giving it to another. That is why prayer to Mary is idolatry. All prayer should be directed to God and Him alone.

It is frustrating when you don't see the logical outcome of your own beliefs. If you believe that God has predetermined absolutely everything on this earth, then we are nothing more than puppets or robots. This is the outcome of a denial of free will.
Now be careful when you respond to this. Because you do not respond out of your own will. It is God that predetermines your answer.

 

[Robert William]

Robert William

Of course you do brother RW:thumbs: And you found it all in scripture as have millions before you and millions after you:thumbs:

Sadly...not all men have faith and many look at these truths and turn away worshipping the creature[free will] rather than the Creator.[/QUOTE]

Amen :thumbsup: Hey Icon, does this forum have a rep button, they have one in another Christian forum I'm involved with, it's called www.carm.org

 

[DHK]

DHK, I hope you realise that you have labeled yourself as Pelagian.

I didn't label myself at all.
You are responding to this quote:

They don't Steaver. They avoid them and go straight to Total Inability. That is their MO.

Total Inability is not the same as the depravity of man, which I do believe.
It is the total inability of man to respond to God in any way unless God does something in his heart first. I don't find that to be Biblical.

As I have already demonstrated, countess of times in Scripture there were many that came to Christ for various reasons, and Christ's answer to them was:
"Thy faith" hath made you whole.
Your faith has made you whole, etc. The emphasis from Christ was always "their faith," "your faith," etc. It was never "the faith of Christ."

The same holds true for Cornelius. God appeared to him in a dream, and told him his prayers had been answered. Here was an unsaved man, who had been doing good among the Jews, praying daily, and God told him that He had answered his prayers and would send Peter to tell him the truth that he was seeking.

These are troubling passages for the Calvinist. They like to work in absolutes. Absolutes like, it is impossible for God to speak to an unregenerated man. I think they will have to back track on that one.

 

[McCree79]

I didn't label myself at all.
You are responding to this quote:

They don't Steaver. They avoid them and go straight to Total Inability. That is their MO.

Total Inability is not the same as the depravity of man, which I do believe.
It is the total inability of man to respond to God in any way unless God does something in his heart first. I don't find that to be Biblical.

As I have already demonstrated, countess of times in Scripture there were many that came to Christ for various reasons, and Christ's answer to them was:
"Thy faith" hath made you whole.
Your faith has made you whole, etc. The emphasis from Christ was always "their faith," "your faith," etc. It was never "the faith of Christ."

The same holds true for Cornelius. God appeared to him in a dream, and told him his prayers had been answered. Here was an unsaved man, who had been doing good among the Jews, praying daily, and God told him that He had answered his prayers and would send Peter to tell him the truth that he was seeking.

These are troubling passages for the Calvinist. They like to work in absolutes. Absolutes like, it is impossible for God to speak to an unregenerated man. I think they will have to back track on that one.

DHK,

There is is no difficulty with Cornelius. The story quickly refers to Cornelius as a devout man of God. The natural man is not devoted to God. The sinner is enmity with God. If Cornelius was not regenerated already, he could not have been devoted to God. Just as the OT believers had faith, so did Cornelius. God just made sure his devoted follower had heard of the triumph of Jesus Christ. Cornelius was already of God's family.

 

[McCree79]

Of course you would never admit it. It is the natural conclusion of your belief. You can't have it any other way. God has predetermined (you say), every thought, word, and deed--absolutely everything. Therefore, the natural conclusion--you are but a puppet in his hand, a robot so to speak without any free will. It is the natural logical outcome of your theology.

I can relate to what you are going through. I used to be a Catholic. Go to the Other Christian Den. Forum. Accuse the RCC of idolatry because they bow down in front of statues. They take offense. They deny that they are committing idolatry. Tell them they are committing idolatry every time they pray to Mary. They protest. That is not idolatry. And in my eyes it wasn't, until much later in my Christian walk I saw that it was.
Idolatry is not giving God the glory that is his, or taking away that glory and giving it to another. That is why prayer to Mary is idolatry. All prayer should be directed to God and Him alone.

It is frustrating when you don't see the logical outcome of your own beliefs. If you believe that God has predetermined absolutely everything on this earth, then we are nothing more than puppets or robots. This is the outcome of a denial of free will.
Now be careful when you respond to this. Because you do not respond out of your own will. It is God that predetermines your answer.

DHK,

You continue to *mischaracterize the reformed view of free will. There is no puppet master of thought. One is free to make choices according to his nature. Either of Flesh or of the Spirit. Now, the choices one makes can and do vary greatly depending on your nature.

Here is a free book explaining reformed theology. I encourage you to read it. I do not expect you to agree with reformed theology, I just want you to represent it fairly when arguing against it. The book is absolutely free, even shipping. http://www.ligonier.org/freeresource/

 

[DHK]

DHK,

There is is no difficulty with Cornelius. The story quickly refers to Cornelius as a devout man of God. The natural man is not devoted to God. The sinner is enmity with God. If Cornelius was not regenerated already, he could not have been devoted to God. Just as the OT believers had faith, so did Cornelius. God just made sure his devoted follower had heard of the triumph of Jesus Christ. Cornelius was already of God's family.

A Muslim is so devout that he will become a suicide bomber and blow himself up thinking that will take him right to paradise.

A Hindu in India is so devout he will follow the cows in the city or towns, catching its urine, washing his face in it, and drinking it as well, because it is holy. Yes, that is where the phrase "holy cow!" originates from. He will also bathe (baptize) himself once a year in the polluted waters of the Ganges River thinking that it will wash away his sins. He will keep to a strict vegetarian diet. He is very "devout," as are many others in many different religions.

The word "devout" simply means "religious." And Cornelius was a religious man. But religion doesn't save; Christ and Christ alone saves!

To say that Cornelius was regenerated already is an asinine view. (I will use the strongest possible language I can). In fact it is heresy IMO.
He had never heard the gospel. He had never heard about Christ, except possibly in a negative sense by those or friends of those who had crucified him. The only light that he had is what he heard from afar from the synagogue. He was not a complete proselyte. He could not enter right into the synagogue, like the Ethiopian Eunuch could--for he was completely proselytized into Judaism. The centurion was not.
In spite of it all, God still heard his prayers. Don't make assumptions simply because you must fit your pre-conceived theology into it. If it doesn't fit change your theology.

 

[McCree79]

A Muslim is so devout that he will become a suicide bomber and blow himself up thinking that will take him right to paradise.

A Hindu in India is so devout he will follow the cows in the city or towns, catching its urine, washing his face in it, and drinking it as well, because it is holy. Yes, that is where the phrase "holy cow!" originates from. He will also bathe (baptize) himself once a year in the polluted waters of the Ganges River thinking that it will wash away his sins. He will keep to a strict vegetarian diet. He is very "devout," as are many others in many different religions.

The word "devout" simply means "religious." And Cornelius was a religious man. But religion doesn't save; Christ and Christ alone saves!

To say that Cornelius was regenerated already is an asinine view. (I will use the strongest possible language I can). In fact it is heresy IMO.
He had never heard the gospel. He had never heard about Christ, except possibly in a negative sense by those or friends of those who had crucified him. The only light that he had is what he heard from afar from the synagogue. He was not a complete proselyte. He could not enter right into the synagogue, like the Ethiopian Eunuch could--for he was completely proselytized into Judaism. The centurion was not.
In spite of it all, God still heard his prayers. Don't make assumptions simply because you must fit your pre-conceived theology into it. If it doesn't fit change your theology.

Devout= deep religious commitment. He can not be devoted/committed to God without being of God. Muslims are not of God

 

[McCree79]

A Muslim is so devout that he will become a suicide bomber and blow himself up thinking that will take him right to paradise.

A Hindu in India is so devout he will follow the cows in the city or towns, catching its urine, washing his face in it, and drinking it as well, because it is holy. Yes, that is where the phrase "holy cow!" originates from. He will also bathe (baptize) himself once a year in the polluted waters of the Ganges River thinking that it will wash away his sins. He will keep to a strict vegetarian diet. He is very "devout," as are many others in many different religions.

The word "devout" simply means "religious." And Cornelius was a religious man. But religion doesn't save; Christ and Christ alone saves!

To say that Cornelius was regenerated already is an asinine view. (I will use the strongest possible language I can). In fact it is heresy IMO.
He had never heard the gospel. He had never heard about Christ, except possibly in a negative sense by those or friends of those who had crucified him. The only light that he had is what he heard from afar from the synagogue. He was not a complete proselyte. He could not enter right into the synagogue, like the Ethiopian Eunuch could--for he was completely proselytized into Judaism. The centurion was not.
In spite of it all, God still heard his prayers. Don't make assumptions simply because you must fit your pre-conceived theology into it. If it doesn't fit change your theology.

The only heresy here is your faith by works teaching

 

[steaver]

A Muslim is so devout that he will become a suicide bomber and blow himself up thinking that will take him right to paradise.

A Hindu in India is so devout he will follow the cows in the city or towns, catching its urine, washing his face in it, and drinking it as well, because it is holy. Yes, that is where the phrase "holy cow!" originates from. He will also bathe (baptize) himself once a year in the polluted waters of the Ganges River thinking that it will wash away his sins. He will keep to a strict vegetarian diet. He is very "devout," as are many others in many different religions.

The word "devout" simply means "religious." And Cornelius was a religious man. But religion doesn't save; Christ and Christ alone saves!

To say that Cornelius was regenerated already is an asinine view. (I will use the strongest possible language I can). In fact it is heresy IMO.
He had never heard the gospel. He had never heard about Christ, except possibly in a negative sense by those or friends of those who had crucified him. The only light that he had is what he heard from afar from the synagogue. He was not a complete proselyte. He could not enter right into the synagogue, like the Ethiopian Eunuch could--for he was completely proselytized into Judaism. The centurion was not.
In spite of it all, God still heard his prayers. Don't make assumptions simply because you must fit your pre-conceived theology into it. If it doesn't fit change your theology.

:thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup: You can only lead the horse to the water, you can't make him drink!

 

[steaver]

The only heresy here is your faith by works teaching

And that is what God calls baring a false witness. Please provide a post by brother DHK which shows a faith by works teaching.

 

[DHK]

DHK,

You continue to *mischaracterize the reformed view of free will. There is no puppet master of thought. One is free to make choices according to his nature. Either of Flesh or of the Spirit. Now, the choices one makes can and do vary greatly depending on your nature.

Here is a free book explaining reformed theology. I encourage you to read it. I do not expect you to agree with reformed theology, I just want you to represent it fairly when arguing against it. The book is absolutely free, even shipping. http://www.ligonier.org/freeresource/

Do I mischaracterize it? Or is the truth more like you don't like what Calvin actually taught? For example:

In short, Augustine everywhere teaches…that there cannot be a greater absurdity than to hold that anything is done without the ordination of God; because it would happen at random. For which reason, he also excludes the contingency which depends on human will, maintaining a little further on, in clearer terms, then that…the order, method, end, and necessity of events, are…produced by the will of God

Everything, even evil, is attributed to God. There is nothing that is done "without the ordination of God." Why? Calvin answers, "because it would happen at random." Free will is "random," "a greater absurdity."
There is no free will in Calvin's system. Even the atrocities of ISIS is ordained of God.
Man is just a puppet, isn't he?

The quote is from: Institutes, I: xvi, 6, 8, 9.

 

[DHK]

Devout= deep religious commitment. He can not be devoted/committed to God without being of God. Muslims are not of God

Like your definition says--deep religious commitment. You are adding the rest. Muslims do have deep religious commitment. That is why they are waging war on us.

Acts 17:17 Therefore disputed he in the synagogue with the Jews, and with the devout persons, and in the market daily with them that met with him.
These devout persons were Greeks, unsaved Athenians, idolaters, that Paul was meeting daily. They also were devout in their religion.

 

[McCree79]

A Muslim is so devout that he will become a suicide bomber and blow himself up thinking that will take him right to paradise.

A Hindu in India is so devout he will follow the cows in the city or towns, catching its urine, washing his face in it, and drinking it as well, because it is holy. Yes, that is where the phrase "holy cow!" originates from. He will also bathe (baptize) himself once a year in the polluted waters of the Ganges River thinking that it will wash away his sins. He will keep to a strict vegetarian diet. He is very "devout," as are many others in many different religions.

The word "devout" simply means "religious." And Cornelius was a religious man. But religion doesn't save; Christ and Christ alone saves!

To say that Cornelius was regenerated already is an asinine view. (I will use the strongest possible language I can). In fact it is heresy IMO.
He had never heard the gospel. He had never heard about Christ, except possibly in a negative sense by those or friends of those who had crucified him. The only light that he had is what he heard from afar from the synagogue. He was not a complete proselyte. He could not enter right into the synagogue, like the Ethiopian Eunuch could--for he was completely proselytized into Judaism. The centurion was not.
In spite of it all, God still heard his prayers. Don't make assumptions simply because you must fit your pre-conceived theology into it. If it doesn't fit change your theology.

Abraham never heard the Gospel of Christ's work either. Never heard what Christ did. So, I guess he wasn't saved by faith? Being a "complete proselyte." Really????? Are you telling God that he can't accept the repentance and belief of a non Hebrew? Jonah did that as well. But Nineveh *repented and was spared. Hearts were changed in the non-Hebrews. Joel 2:13 refers to only by divine repentance does he relent from disaster.

* removed the word "was". It should have been removed when I changed the structure of the sentence.

 

[McCree79]

And that is what God calls baring a false witness. Please provide a post by brother DHK which shows a faith by works teaching.

Read our previous discussions. He repeatedly states that he generates his own faith. That God does not give him faith. If you generate faith from within...that is work. You had to come to your own conclusions.....fight against your fallen nature....work against Satan who tries to keep you from repentance. That is work.

 

[McCree79]

Do I mischaracterize it? Or is the truth more like you don't like what Calvin actually taught? For example:

Everything, even evil, is attributed to God. There is nothing that is done "without the ordination of God." Why? Calvin answers, "because it would happen at random." Free will is "random," "a greater absurdity."
There is no free will in Calvin's system. Even the atrocities of ISIS is ordained of God.
Man is just a puppet, isn't he?

The quote is from: Institutes, I: xvi, 6, 8, 9.

4 sentence fragments out of 3 different chapters from a book you haven't even read(I'm sure). Is that fair?

Where would you limit God's Sovereignty? At creation?

 

[McCree79]

Like your definition says--deep religious commitment. You are adding the rest. Muslims do have deep religious commitment. That is why they are waging war on us.

Acts 17:17 Therefore disputed he in the synagogue with the Jews, and with the devout persons, and in the market daily with them that met with him.
These devout persons were Greeks, unsaved Athenians, idolaters, that Paul was meeting daily. They also were devout in their religion.

Committed to God....."feared God". Read it. Deeply committed to who???? Devout to who???? Religious regarding who????? My bible says "God". Not a god...not a cow...not apollo...... But " God"

 

[McCree79]

And that is what God calls baring a false witness. Please provide a post by brother DHK which shows a faith by works teaching.

Better yet Steaver.
Let's allow DHK to state whether his faith comes from God or he comes up with it from within himself. One is by grace. The other choice is a work.

 

[DHK]

Abraham never heard the Gospel of Christ's work either. Never heard what Christ did. So, I guess he wasn't saved by faith? Being a "complete proselyte." Really????? Are you telling God that he can't accept the repentance and belief of a non Hebrew? Jonah did that as well. But Nineveh *repented and was spared. Hearts were changed in the non-Hebrews. Joel 2:13 refers to only by divine repentance does he relent from disaster.

Apples and oranges.
Abraham, et. al. lived pre-cross. Cornelius didn't.
Roman 4 distinctly says that Abraham was justified by faith. Do you need any more clarity than that?
1Cor.15:1-4 clearly says that one cannot be saved without the gospel.
Do you deny scripture? Cornelius had not heard the gospel. Regeneration and salvation take place simultaneously. This is the contortion that you have to make it in order to force it into your pre-conceived model. It just doesn't fit. So now we have regenerated people, yet unsaved walking about on the earth. Absurd!

* removed the word "was". It should have been removed when I changed the structure of the sentence.

eusebēs
Thayer Definition:
1) pious, dutiful
Part of Speech: adjective

From Strong's

eusebēs
yoo-seb-ace'
From G2095 and G4576; well reverent, that is, pious: - devout, godly.

--There is no hint that the word must define a regenerated person. It is simply one who is pious or religious.
A Muslim or Hindu fits that definition.
He was a pious Jew. The Jews (Judaism), by this time, had become a false religion.

 

[McCree79]

Apples and oranges.
Abraham, et. al. lived pre-cross. Cornelius didn't.
Roman 4 distinctly says that Abraham was justified by faith. Do you need any more clarity than that?
1Cor.15:1-4 clearly says that one cannot be saved without the gospel.
Do you deny scripture? Cornelius had not heard the gospel. Regeneration and salvation take place simultaneously. This is the contortion that you have to make it in order to force it into your pre-conceived model. It just doesn't fit. So now we have regenerated people, yet unsaved walking about on the earth. Absurd!



From Strong's

--There is no hint that the word must define a regenerated person. It is simply one who is pious or religious.
A Muslim or Hindu fits that definition.
He was a pious Jew. The Jews (Judaism), by this time, had become a false religion.

Was Cornelius alive before Christ's work on the Cross??? Yes he was. This is not apples and oranges. Could he have started his relationship with God prior to Christ's death??? Yes. Most likely he did since he had not heard of Christ's work. He was devout to God committed to God. He wasn't a Muslim....he wasn't Hindu. Those comparison are of religious people who are not of God. Scripture makes it clear he feared God. The natural man...the sinner does not have reverence or respect for God.

 

[DHK]

Read our previous discussions. He repeatedly states that he generates his own faith. That God does not give him faith. If you generate faith from within...that is work. You had to come to your own conclusions.....fight against your fallen nature....work against Satan who tries to keep you from repentance. That is work.

You are still bearing false witness. Can you provide any quote where I said a man "generates his own faith." In fact I repudiated such a statement. Why do you attribute to me the very things that I deny?

God does not give the unregenerate/the unsaved faith. I keep saying that, and keep asking for evidence from the Bible that if it is true provide Scripture. It is never provided. Why do you state fairy tale "truths." If you can't provide scripture don't post it.
Faith is not a work. Paul states that in Romans 4:4,5:
"But to him that worketh not but believeth but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly his faith is counted for righteousness."
Faith is in opposition to works.

As I posted here:
http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?t=98238&page=19

It was a post that was never answered because the thread was closed shortly after.

To the Roman Centurion:
Matthew 8:10 When Jesus heard it, he marvelled, and said to them that followed, Verily I say unto you, I have not found so great faith, no, not in Israel.
--Where did this centurion "get his faith" from?

To the men carrying the one sick of the palsy Jesus said:
Matthew 9:2 And, behold, they brought to him a man sick of the palsy, lying on a bed: and Jesus seeing their faith said unto the sick of the palsy; Son, be of good cheer; thy sins be forgiven thee.
--It was their faith; obviously Jesus didn't give it to them.

To the woman diseased with an issue of blood, Jesus said:
Matthew 9:22 But Jesus turned him about, and when he saw her, he said, Daughter, be of good comfort; thy faith hath made thee whole. And the woman was made whole from that hour.
--The woman's faith.

To two blind men requesting to be healed, he said:
Matthew 9:29 Then touched he their eyes, saying, According to your faith be it unto you.
--"their faith"--where did it come from; not from Christ.

A Canaanite woman had a daughter vexed with a demon and came to Jesus for help. Jesus first likened her to a dog:
Matthew 15:26 But he answered and said, It is not meet to take the children's bread, and to cast it to dogs.
But when she continued to plead, Jesus said:
Matthew 15:28 Then Jesus answered and said unto her, O woman, great is thy faith: be it unto thee even as thou wilt. And her daughter was made whole from that very hour.
--A Gentile woman had great faith according to Jesus. How did she come by this great faith? She certainly wasn't saved, or regenerated.

Paul came to Lystra and met a cripple:
Acts 14:9 The same heard Paul speak: who stedfastly beholding him, and perceiving that he had faith to be healed,
--Where did the faith come from? Paul makes no inference that it was from God.

All throughout the Bible, and especially the gospels faith is spoken of in a personal way. Jesus again and again speaks of "your faith."

I never said faith is generated. Neither did Jesus.
But Christ commended their faith. Your theology contradicts the work of Christ.