"...shalt surely die."

[Allan]

As to sin nature -- never mind. I can only surmise you go along with the infant baptism crowd who think the "new nature" comes to infants through baptism and cannot consciene that such baptism does nothing for the infant.

You BET I DO!!!!!
Just as much as you believe that belief has absolutely NOTHING to do with salvation :smilewinkgrin:

Oh, and I can't let you get away thinking you know what "sin nature" is cause you don't.

That is fine, but I'm not going to make something up just because I don't understand the scriptures concerning it to better fit what I want either.

 

[reformedbeliever]

You BET I DO!!!!!
Just as much as you believe that belief has absolutely NOTHING to do with salvation :smilewinkgrin:


That is fine, but I'm not going to make something up just because I don't understand the scriptures concerning it to better fit what I want either.

Merry Christmas brother. I pray your new church start is going well. Satan is attacking us from every direction he can. Pray for us.

 

[Allan]

Merry Christmas brother. I pray your new church start is going well. Satan is attacking us from every direction he can. Pray for us.

Merry Christmas to you as well brother.
We will CONTINUE to pray for yours brother.
We are having another family move away. It is a good thing though because the husband was just hired as personal security for "In Touch Ministries" with Charles Stanley. But that is the third family to move away which made up almost the whole group . They were the ones praying for 5 years to have a church like this one come in but once God used them to get us there through prayer, and He has now lead them elsewhere. So it isn't so much the church that needs prayer but me though the body of Christ ALWAYS needs prayer.

I have been preaching for the church I am up here strenthening as well and have hit them like a sledge hammer with God's holiness and their need as a church to repent for their slothfulness (yes, the pastor knew what I was going to preach and agreed it was a needed message). But ... who knows.

All I can say is ... Blessed be the Name of the Lord!

 

[J.D.]

Good! We got to a place where you have to think before responding. :laugh:

Very funny.

When is one sanctified?

I believe we are eternally set-aside as the elect, passively. But the usual use of "sanctification" in the Bible refers to our active sanctification in this life which takes place after regeneration and conversion.

So your sanctification is basically your life of Christian growth, right?

Technically, they are not the same. But they are intrinsicly related. The Holy Spirit sanctifies us passively (sets aside) which frees us to grow spiritually, which leads to greater sanctification in our life (active).

What does God elect you for?

God elected me TO salvation FOR His glory.

do we hear the word "election" in the gospel of Jesus Christ? No! We hear "whosoever believeth on Him" in John 3. We hear "repent ... be baptized ... receive the Holy Spirit ... save yourselves..." in Acts 2. We hear "I preached the gospel, which you received and wherein you stand, By which also you are saved ... that Christ died for our sins..." 1Cor 15:1 NOTHING about election in the gospel.

The Gospel would not impart life to the hearers unless God had elected to enable the hearers to receive it. But those that receive the Gospel and believe don't have to understand the doctrine of election to be saved. I don't know why you would bring it up. Oh wait, I just remembered - you take special joy in misrepresenting calvinistic teachings.

Election is NOT the mechanism by which we are saved

Agreed. In fact, election is not "mechanism" at all. Election, foreknowledge, predestination - these are all part of the design phase of the plan. The plan is executed through the "mechanism" (means) of preaching, Holy Spirit conviction, regeneration, repentance, faith, sanctification, and glorification. The airplane you fly was designed by engineers long before the manufacturing began. Somebody "elected" to build an airplance because they had "foreknowledge" that one was needed and what it was required to do and be; then they "predestined" its building by drawing the plans and features of it on paper so it would turn out the way they wanted it, and by securing the funding and technology to do it. Then it was up to the "mechanics" to actually build it. And the mechanics can only build it the way the designer has purposed it.

And so here's the point --- you apparently came to Christ through the preaching of election and not through the preaching of the gospel.

Apparently, that's a lie. You have no business assuming that you know how I came to Christ. I never even heard of election until many years after I had been saved.

we all get to the same place in the end." That is, we all arrive at our election.

Yes, people that study their Bibles and take it seriously must eventually either accept or reject what the Bible says about election.

Is it the gospel of election or the gospel of Jesus Christ?

You've never heard a calvinist say such a thing as "gospel of election". You made it up.

 

[J.D.]

Merry Christmas to you as well brother.
We will CONTINUE to pray for yours brother.
We are having another family move away. It is a good thing though because the husband was just hired as personal security for "In Touch Ministries" with Charles Stanley. But that is the third family to move away which made up almost the whole group . They were the ones praying for 5 years to have a church like this one come in but once God used them to get us there through prayer, and He has now lead them elsewhere. So it isn't so much the church that needs prayer but me though the body of Christ ALWAYS needs prayer.

I have been preaching for the church I am up here strenthening as well and have hit them like a sledge hammer with God's holiness and their need as a church to repent for their slothfulness (yes, the pastor knew what I was going to preach and agreed it was a needed message). But ... who knows.

All I can say is ... Blessed be the Name of the Lord!

Tis a shame - we live in a day that ministers have to have personal security. raying:

Thank the liberals for destroying America! (a free opinion)

 

[Frogman]

So as Adrian Rogers used to say, you have "laid yourself down in the gutter next to Calvinism and you are taller. Big deal! Let's stand up and see how we compare to God and scripture.

And as to forekowledge -- if God didn't choose BELIEVERS according to foreknowledge, how is it only believers are saved??

skypair

Dear Skypair,
Read what I wrote again.

Are all believers saved? Check scripture.

Are all non-believers unsaved? Check scripture

bro. Dallas

 

[skypair]

I believe we are eternally set-aside as the elect, passively. But the usual use of "sanctification" in the Bible refers to our active sanctification in this life which takes place after regeneration and conversion.

Thank you -- yes.

Technically, they are not the same. But they are intrinsicly related. The Holy Spirit sanctifies us passively (sets aside) which frees us to grow spiritually, which leads to greater sanctification in our life (active).

Passively?? I thought that HS was our Comforter AND Teacher leading us into all truth. I thought He prayed words that we couldn't utter. But it sounds to me like you are doing all the "work."

God elected me TO salvation FOR His glory.

Show it to me in the gospel, pls. Did you have to know that God had elected you before you could be saved?

The Gospel would not impart life to the hearers unless God had elected to enable the hearers to receive it. But those that receive the Gospel and believe don't have to understand the doctrine of election to be saved. I don't know why you would bring it up. Oh wait, I just remembered - you take special joy in misrepresenting calvinistic teachings.

OK, let me just ask you ---- where did Christ come into this "election" you have? I mean, when God was choosing you specifically, it doesn't sound like Christ was even a consideration in that choice He made.

Agreed. In fact, election is not "mechanism" at all. Election, foreknowledge, predestination - these are all part of the design phase of the plan.

Good, I like that thougt.

The plan is executed through the "mechanism" (means) of preaching, Holy Spirit conviction, regeneration, repentance, faith, sanctification, and glorification.

I guess this is another place that is problematic. You see, I still can't see Christ involved until after you are already regenerated/born again/Spirit indwelt. How is it that it is not your repentance to and faith in Christ that brings the gifts of regeneration, sanctification, etc.? Are you truly saying that you were elect apart from Christ's death and resurrection?? Are you maybe saying that you believe in Christ's death and resurrection because you are elect OR are you elect because you believe them?

This is why I struggle with Calvinism, JD, and it would be good not to mischaracterize it as me "having it in for" Calvinists. I can't tell what gospel they are proclaiming -- the gospel of election unto belief or belief unto election. In the first instance, there is really nothing we can do -- mankind is destined to believe what he is "programmed"/elected (double predestination) to believe. OR "there is no other name given under heaven whereby ye MUST be saved." IOW, our choice, not God's.

And then lately I get all this static about God not "reacting" to men -- not being dictated to by men -- from Calvies. What -- does God really NOT answer prayer?? If I prayed the sinner's prayer right now from my heart of belief, might God not save me because I thought to try to influence God's choice/decision?

Then it was up to the "mechanics" to actually build it. And the mechanics can only build it the way the designer has purposed it.

That imagery is good up to a point. But airplanes are inanimate. Surely you are not saying that humans are inanimate objects (though the way some Calvies here would toss infants into hell like so many aborted fetuses into "bio hazard" bags makes me rekindles my concern for Calvies).

Apparently, that's a lie. You have no business assuming that you know how I came to Christ. I never even heard of election until many years after I had been saved.

My point exactly!! BUT you are foisting "election" on all those who would make askance, even if just lurking here, and it truly has no business being a consideration for them, does it??

You've never heard a calvinist say such a thing as "gospel of election". You made it up.

Gee, ya caught me! Gospels are named according to the primary hope. OT was "kingdom," NT it was "grace." Yes, I am saying that the primary hope of the Calvinism is "election" -- God's choice! You would stand here to my face and deny that "whosoever" could pray to receive Jesus and be saved.
He/she cannot overturn God's choice, you'd say! Well, stick that where the sun don't shine, mr! God loves EVERYONE and, for you information, He'll accept ANY totally depraved sinner who humbly asks for salvation in the name of Christ!

skypair

 

[skypair]

You BET I DO!!!!!
Just as much as you believe that belief has absolutely NOTHING to do with salvation :smilewinkgrin:.

Allan -- you know we almost never disagree, thank goodness. You are a formidable scholar in most areas and I do value your perspective usually. And I didn't mean to be obnoxious before.

But I have to say you have been somewhat "won over" by the other side on this issue of "sin nature" and it is not to the glory of God. Much as you and they try to "make allowances," the issue is "black or white." Either "sin guilt" and hell or "innocence" and redemption.

Blessings to you and don't be too hard on your church. Exhortation and edification are one thing --- well, you know.

skypair

 

[skypair]

Where'd everybody go?

Have I made my point that Adam's experience wtih innocence and sin is nearly the same as ours? That we "surely die" when we sin in the same way that Adam "surely died" when he ate the forbidden fruit?

No, we don't plunge the earth into the curse -- but we do plunge ourselves under the wrath of God and are aware of it when we first sin. We do run away from God and hide like Adam did, right? It wasn't God who broke the relationship between God and creature; it was us even as it was Adam.

skypair

 

[Frogman]

'was' is past tense on both counts. Innocent infants are present tense.

We are born with a carnal mind because of Adam's fall, therefore we are born at enmity with God. We sin even when we try to perform righteousness while in that particular condition.

bro. Dallas:wavey:

 

[Jarthur001]

(modified by me) I

But God has set forth a moral law in the hearts of ALL men, given them a conscience to know the most basic moral values and truths. Thus they know to do good things and can even do them because it is something they ALREADY know. Even Jesus compares sinful mans ability to give good things to our children with that God giving to His Children. Christ Himself compared unregenerate mans basic moral good with God's absolute good. Now granted there is a difference but the illistration Christ gave establishes the fact that even the reprobate knows or has a basic understanding of good and evil and can do either but not in any meritorious or salvic sense.


That does not matter in the least. When they come against their conscience and the moral good inherently known of men they must choose to act contrary to it. The more they push it aside the less it will bother them until their conscience becomes seared by a hot iron (I believe referencing Gods judgment - He gives them over to their sins (Rom 1:18 -, and 2 Thes 2:10-12)

conscience to know the most basic moral values and truths

Where this is true, it is also clear that many a man has never been moved by this conscience. This maybe hard for us to relate with being we know the law of God. However each of us have met others that live in sin with no clue. No guilt is found in them. No thought of God. NOTHING.

Maybe you have not...but I have met many like this. I have met them out of the nation as well. They worship a god, but have not a clue about the God of the Bible. So based on your idea that one must know of sin before the guilt is placed on them, would mean we need to keep the laws of God away from the non-believer, thereby never passing on the guilt of sin.In other words, going by your idea, if you tell others that a sin is wrong and they reject what you have to say, you have just helped them place them under the guilt of sin. Where as if you had said nothing, the guilt would not be there.

I of course do not believe such things.

 

[skypair]

'was' is past tense on both counts. Innocent infants are present tense.

I think I missed this point. What is it?

We are born with a carnal mind because of Adam's fall, therefore we are born at enmity with God. We sin even when we try to perform righteousness while in that particular condition.

"Carnal mind.? Explain, pls. I think when you think about it, it is nothing sinful of itself. It is merely "survival instinct," is it not? We do not hate God at birth, do we? Or run from One we don't even know, much less comprehend, do we?

skypair

 

[Allan]

conscience to know the most basic moral values and truths

Where this is true, it is also clear that many a man has never been moved by this conscience. This maybe hard for us to relate with being we know the law of God. However each of us have met others that live in sin with no clue. No guilt is found in them. No thought of God. NOTHING.

Maybe you have not...but I have met many like this. I have met them out of the nation as well. They worship a god, but have not a clue about the God of the Bible. So based on your idea that one must know of sin before the guilt is placed on them, would mean we need to keep the laws of God away from the non-believer, thereby never passing on the guilt of sin.In other words, going by your idea, if you tell others that a sin is wrong and they reject what you have to say, you have just helped them place them under the guilt of sin. Where as if you had said nothing, the guilt would not be there.

I of course do not believe such things.

If you do not believe it then you would appear to deny scripture which states just that:

Rom 2:14 For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves:

Rom 2:15 Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and [their] thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another)

It matters not whether any man 'has been moved by their conscience' but the fact is the conscience has already born witness and they rejected it. The law already in and of their own heart condemns them.

Their guilt is established by the rejection of the truth both witnessed by nature and their conscience. The fact it didn't move any and or moved a few or many is irrelevent for it is and has done that which God has declared. It is a testimony for or against them with regard to the truth revealed.

 

[Jarthur001]

If you do not believe it then you would appear to deny scripture which states just that:


It matters not whether any man 'has been moved by their conscience' but the fact is the conscience has already born witness and they rejected it. The law already in and of

their own heart condemns them.

Their guilt is established by the rejection of the truth both witnessed by nature and their conscience. The fact it didn't move any and or moved a few or many is irrelevent for it is and has done that which God has declared. It is a testimony for or against them with regard to the truth revealed.

Allan,

Of course I believe the Bible. Lets look at your verses.

Rom 2:14 For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves:

Notice "hotan" or when. When...or at the time something happens....something else is applied. Let me put this in my own words. When those without the Law of Moses, do good, this goodness is then a law unto them. What paul means is that all have a form of what they view as right. No matter how evil you are, you still view somethings as good...or right. This may or may not be in line with the Bible view. This is done by all men. This idea becomes a law to them as to what is wrong and right.

Rom 2:15 Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and [their] thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another)

This is not saying man keeps the Law of Moses. It is saying their actions...their works that they have rules and laws of what is good and bad....in turn show they have a conscience of the idea that there is a wrong and right...a good and bad....which governs them..and governs how they view others. And many of these actions ..but not limited to just this, are reflections of the written law of moses. In other words...

One law that is found in all nations be it Bible based or not, is murder. This does not have to be based on the Bible, for it is a given by all that murder is wrong. But...it also reflects the law of Moses.

Notice also...many think that this verse says God wrote the law on their hearts. But really it does not say this at all. It is saying that they are driven by this idea of a right and wrong, and their actions prove it.

Therefore we must return to what I said...

.In other words, going by your idea, if you tell others that a sin is wrong and they reject what you have to say, you have just helped them place them under the guilt of sin. Where as if you had said nothing, the guilt would not be there.

 

[Allan]

Notice "hotan" or when. When...or at the time something happens....something else is applied. Let me put this in my own words. When those without the Law of Moses, do good, this goodness is then a law unto them. What paul means is that all have a form of what they view as right. No matter how evil you are, you still view somethings as good...or right. This may or may not be in line with the Bible view. This is done by all men. This idea becomes a law to them as to what is wrong and right.

I don't agree.
The 'when' doesn't reflect any change in what I have contended.
The scripture states (in my own words), when the Gentiles (non-believers) who does not have and therefore know the Law of God specifically, and yet or STILL does BY NATURE those basic things contained in the Law, those who do not have the literal law ARE a law to themselves.

This law will be used to judge them according to the next verse. But why?
It is because of those things inherently known by the conscience among all men due to their current nature. This nature (the sin natue) is fallen or corrupt but it is not the wooden literal meaning of word dead, and therefore we are not still-born. That is why in knowing the dim reflection of truth, they not only acknowledge it but willfully reject it and that conscience will be used to judge them. It is why those things which are in and all around us in nature can be seen and understood even by them as the Lord reveals it even to those who do not believe and because of that sin nature which is not a wood literal meaning, there is STILL a dim aspect of their nature which confirms the good set forth in the Law even if THEY don't know it. They know what good is because they know good vai their NATURE which God created it in man. Their nature is still at emnity with God, and seperated becuase it is corrupt and fallen but it still remembers that from which it fell.

Those who do good without having the Law reveals a commonly acknowledged goodness or a standard of basic goodness known to all whether Jew or Gentile, and establishes the Truth or True Goodness which is found expressly in Gods own written Law.

This is not saying man keeps the Law of Moses.

No one has said such.

It is saying their actions...their works that they have rules and laws of what is good and bad....in turn show they have a conscience of the idea that there is a wrong and right...a good and bad....which governs them..and governs how they view others. And many of these actions ..but not limited to just this, are reflections of the written law of moses. In other words...

So far so good, ...

Notice also...many think that this verse says God wrote the law on their hearts. But really it does not say this at all. It is saying that they are driven by this idea of a right and wrong, and their actions prove it.

So tell me James
Just were did their conscience come up with the 'ideas' which reflect the Law of God in men born spiritually seperated from God, if God did not put it there?

Where does this inherent knowledge of basic goodness come from that makes them a law unto themselves, James?

Of course they are driven by their 'ideas' of right and wrong, but God gave them both physical nature and their own conscience to show them and lead them toward the truth IF they will accept it. But like in Rom 1:18 till the end of the chapter, they change that which they KNOW, corrupt it, and make it into their own truth rather than believe the truth that was revealed to them, et., et, et...

If I'm not making any real sense, I'm sorry I'm just a tired but I tried - I might come back later tonight (as I will be at work) and try to help out where I lost you. Which will be from the very first word in the post, huh? :laugh:

BTW James - Have a blessed Christmas. I pray you will be blessed in the Lord our God who has redeemed us.

 

[Allan]

BTW - What do you think it means when it states the non-believers 'do by nature' the things contained in the law, or those good things regarding the Law?

I'm curious.

 

[skypair]

BTW - What do you think it means when it states the non-believers 'do by nature' the things contained in the law, or those good things regarding the Law?

I'm curious.

I would say that even before the law of Moses, there was right and wrong written in the conscience of individual man, that their combined consciences directed society's laws, and that there was a special conscience/orderliness within the family of right and wrong. These all very much prefigure the Mosaic law.

It all stems from Adam and Eve knowing, having coscienciousness of, "GOOD and evil" and demonstrating that in their lives (the point that Calvies vehemently deny under total depravity).

skypair

 

[Jarthur001]

I don't agree

This is not the 1st time.

So far so good, ...

well....you are coming ago here.

So tell me James
Just were did their conscience come up with the 'ideas' which reflect the Law of God in men born spiritually seperated from God, if God did not put it there?

This would seem to be a problem for none Calvinist, and if anything it would seem we have changed sides on this one issue. I'll give you this much Allan, I am the one that must back my statement. I'm going against most writers on this. However it is something to think about...if you will.

You asked how does this come about?

That is fair to ask...but again I must say, the text itself does not tell us. You have to agree with that part. However there is a key that helps give understanding. It goes back to the word "when". When you consider the meaning, there places not only a condition on the event. If there is a condition, there must be a time when the condition is not in place. I think the passage clearly states when this takes place and what "the law" is in this case. It is said by most writers..Calvinist and non-calvinist alike that this is talking about the law of God on mans heart. The passge does not say this unless as you state...where did it come from? Then one could conclude on there own it came from God.

Unless we go just by the text and then we see another picture.

BTW James - Have a blessed Christmas. I pray you will be blessed in the Lord our God who has redeemed us.

Thanks Allan, and the same blessing go out to you and your family.

 

[skypair]

This It is said by most writers..Calvinist and non-calvinist alike that this is talking about the law of God on mans heart. The passge does not say this unless as you state...where did it come from? Then one could conclude on there own it came from God.

CS Lewis was one. :thumbs:

Conscience is the soul -- it is the awareness of God (good) and the awareness of self (bad). It is given to all beings. It is like a "program" for survival. It probably accounts for ducklings following the first bring they see.

Clearly the disposition in humans changes according to our own thought processes even "overwriting" many of the survival "programs" as we learn to enjoy self-destructive behavior -- sin.

But saying all this to a Calvinist is probably wasted words. (sigh)

skypair