Featured The Arminian Dilemma

You don't know that the Holy Spirit was not working (as surely was upon Saul/Paul, Cornelius, the Philippian Jailor, Eunuch).

That is pure speculation on your part.

The Scriptures state Simeon had the Spirit, David prayed that the Spirit not be taken from him, Mary had the Spirit come upon her, Elizabeth felt John the Baptizer move inside her when she saw Mary.

Nicodemus was told by Christ, that the Spirit is like the wind. No one knows where it has been or where it is going. It is under the direction and purpose of the Father.

That YOU desire it to appear at some place according to your own scheme is not warrant to suggest that many did not have the work of the Spirit before Pentecost. John 12 (if my memory is correct) states MANY of the rulers believed but did not confess out of fear. How could they believe without the HS doing the work?

One more point.

How would you react to someone who states to you, "You love your lies more than the Word of God?"

In effect that is how you closed your post.

Do you really think that type of statement wins any favors?

Winman, you have some good thinking, please don't try to bolster your argument with these kind of statements.

 

Sure, the Holy Spirit was working to convince them. When they saw flames appear above the apostles heads, and when they heard the apostles and disciples speak in their native language, this was a very convincing demonstration of God's power. It was a miracle before their eyes.

But here is the part that seems to escape Calvinists, the supernatural work was performed on and by the believers, not the unbelievers. There is no mention of a supernatural work happening to the 3000 unbelievers, it does not say they were regenerated to have the ability to believe. No, the supernatural work was performed on the believers only.

Not quite, you forget one very important detail, Jesus told Nicodemus he could HEAR the Spirit.

Jhn 3:8 The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit.

How do you hear the Spirit? By hearing God's word.

Men are born with the innate ability to believe, but no man can believe what he does not know. When the apostles and disciples spoke in tongues on the day of Pentacost, they were able to preach the gospel to each person present in their native language. This is all that was necessary for them to believe, and 3000 did believe that day.

If I was ignoring scripture to hold to a system, I would be convicted.

I am not here to win friends, I am here to stop error. I showed Biblicist at least half a dozen verses that all showed unregenerate men without the Holy Spirit could believe the gospel.

He can read, he knows what I showed him was true. I was not twisting or wresting scripture in any way, and he knows that.

And if you have been reading these scriptures then YOU also know I was not twisting or wresting scripture.

So, you have a choice, which are you going to believe, the word of God, or Calvinism?

 

In Acts 2 Peter says "you put Christ to death" yet this was Pentecost 50 days after Passover - and while some people may have attended the trial 50 days before - many were likely attending after hearing about the events 50 days earlier.

You cannot bend the text farther than the details allow.

2 Tim 1
3 I thank God, whom I serve with a pure conscience, as my forefathers did, as without ceasing I remember you in my prayers night and day, 4 greatly desiring to see you, being mindful of your tears, that I may be filled with joy, 5 when I call to remembrance the genuine faith that is in you, which dwelt first in your grandmother Lois and your mother Eunice, and I am persuaded is in you also. 6 Therefore I remind you to stir up the gift of God which is in you through the laying on of my hands

That is the background and context for 2Tim 3

14 But you must continue in the things which you have learned and been assured of, knowing from whom you have learned them, 15 and that from childhood you have known the Holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. 16 All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, 17 that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work.


There were indeed - saints - in the OT

3 I thank God, whom I serve with a pure conscience, as my forefathers did, as without ceasing I remember you

And "the scriptures" being talked about in 2Tm 3:14-17 are first and foremost what we today call "The Old Testament".



More OLD testament saints -

Enoch and Abel:
11 Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. 2 For by it the elders obtained a good testimony.
3 By faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that the things which are seen were not made of things which are visible.
4 By faith Abel offered to God a more excellent sacrifice than Cain, through which he obtained witness that he was righteous, God testifying of his gifts; and through it he being dead still speaks.
5 By faith Enoch was taken away so that he did not see death, “and was not found, because God had taken him”; for before he was taken he had this testimony, that he pleased God.

6 But without faith it is impossible to please Him, for he who comes to God must believe that He is, and that He is a rewarder of those who diligently seek Him.

Genesis 5
24 And Enoch walked with God; and he was not, for God took him.



Noah:

Heb 11
6 Now without faith it is impossible to please God, for the one who draws near to Him must believe that He exists and rewards those who seek Him. 7 By faith Noah, after he was warned about what was not yet seen and motivated by godly fear, built an ark to deliver his family. By faith he condemned the world and became an heir of the righteousness that comes by faith.


Genesis 6
8 But Noah found grace in the eyes of the Lord.
9 These are the generations of Noah: Noah was a just man and perfect in his generations, and Noah walked with God.

Genesis 7
7 And the Lord said unto Noah, Come thou and all thy house into the ark; for thee have I seen righteous before me in this generation.

What "kind" of righteousness??
Heb 11:7 the righteousness that comes by faith.

 

Wiman,

Short answer: You have again misaligned the Scriptures.

Using your own example, you said,

"Not quite, you forget one very important detail, Jesus told Nicodemus he could HEAR the Spirit."
​

Then you tried to show proof by posting this verse:

Jhn 3:8 The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit.
​

Then you attempt to validate your statement by assuming your statement was correct, saying,

"How do you hear the Spirit? By hearing God's word."
​

The problem is that what is heard was the WIND - not the Spirit. "The WIND bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest THE SOUND THEREOF..."

The "thereof" refers back to the wind, not spirit.

 

No, Jesus was comparing the Holy Spirit to the wind. You can't see the wind, but you can hear it. Likewise, you can hear the Spirit when you hear God's word.

Jhn 6:63 It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.

You see, Jesus's words, or the word of God, is spirit.

I knew what I was saying.

 

I think I missed this one before...

We are not saying that the gospel is anything other than God's power. It is the power OF God UNTO SALVATION...

That has NOTHING to do with the means of attaining righteousness. Under law it was thought to be by law through works...UNATTAINABLE. Under gospel it IS ACTUALLY and ALWAYS HAS BEEN by grace through faith...which is ATTAINABLE, because that is the actual purpose for which it was sent. You are focusing all of your attention on the nature of man and ignoring the nature of God's work in revelation...as if that has nothing to do with the ability of man's response and potential attainment.

Aww, here is where the root of your misunderstanding rests.

Asking for forgiveness, and believing in God doesn't make one holy. Just because one seeks forgiveness doesn't mean they deserve it. If someone killed your loved one then begged for forgiveness would that make them worthy of being forgiven and freed? Of course not, that would be CHOICE of the one OFFENDED. The choice of God to forgive those who ask is ALL OF GRACE. He chooses exalt the humble, not because the humble deserve it, but because HE IS GRACIOUS. He chooses to make us Holy through imputation of Christ's blood, but that is not something we earn, deserve, or merit in any way shape or form. That is completely God's gracious choice.

"Humble yourselves and you will be exalted."

 

It accomplishes its purpose, which is to enable a response. That's what invitations (as in the wedding banquet analogy) and 'appeal' (2 Cor 5) are INTENDED to do. A gift or invitation doesn't have to be effectually applied (forced) in order for the giver to get full credit for giving it.

This approach is consistent with all of God's provisions of grace throughout history. Lifting the snake in the dessert is PROVISIONAL to all, not effectual for a select few. The passover was PROVISIONAL to all, not effectual for a select few...etc.

This is hyper-Calvinism and should be avoided by Reformed brethren. When you begin explaining away the appeal or offer of the gospel meant for all man, you are stepping into dangerous ground.

 

From Phil Johnson/John MacArthur:

A hyper-Calvinist is someone who either:
Denies that the gospel call applies to all who hear, OR
Denies that faith is the duty of every sinner, OR
Denies that the gospel makes any "offer" of Christ, salvation, or mercy to the non-elect (or denies that the offer of divine mercy is free and universal), OR
Denies that there is such a thing as "common grace," OR
Denies that God has any sort of love for the non-elect.

 

no, no, no
I'm seeing more and more how you view our system. No wonder you have rejected it. I would too if I thought what you did.

In our system, the nature of man doesn't change until after he comes. He turns to have the veil removed. He is regenerated after he believes. He is forgiven after he repents. And it is those who are forgiven much who love much. The new nature of love and gratitude come AFTER not before repentance and forgiveness.

Think about the story of the prodigal as just an example. Was the son really changed on his way home? He was going home with just a hope to be forgiven, and maybe given a servants position. He was broken, humiliated and shamed on his way home, he wasn't loving or caring for his father. That came after he got all that mercy and grace upon his return. Those forgiven much love much! Understand?

 

Please heed the rebuke from Phil Johnson/John MacArthur about this hyper-Calvinistic view of yours...didn't know if you saw that post.

Read what he goes on to say about 'the rest' and my point will be made clear. The rest, are stumbling but not beyond recovery. The rest are hardened but still might be provoked to envy and saved. The rest are being 'cut off' but may be grafted back in if they leave their unbelief. All of those are almost VERBATIM quotes of what happens to the 'rest who were hardened.'

The remnant reserved from the hardening is in reference to Jews, like Paul, who were not 'sent a spirit of stupor' but who were set apart as the divinely appointed messengers of the gospel light, sent to all the world. God always reserves a group of messengers to carry his truth throughout every generation...that is what Paul is referencing earlier when he speak of being used for noble purposes, where 'the rest' of Israel was used for the common purpose of being hardened in their rebellion so as to accomplish redemption for the world.

 

I apologize. It sounded like you were denying that the gospel was an offer meant for all, and instead was only 'declarative.'

Was I mistaken, because if you go back and read that post, that is precisely what you wrote. Maybe you meant it differently than it came across?

 

I argued that the gospel was sent for the purpose of making an appeal or offer to all people...and you replied..

But after reading MacArthur's rebuke you write instead:

You shifted the purpose of the gospel to being a 'conditional offer.' So, it is not 'only declarative' as you first stated?

Then you shifted to comment again on the inability of man to willingly heed that offer. So which is it?

I'm confused?

This is significant because the law is never presented as an offer, which goes to "PURPOSE" and thus the "POWER" behind it. If you willingly admit its an offer then you are in agreement with the shift in purpose.

 

So, do you believe it's an offer of salvation intended for all or not?

So, do you consider yourself a four pointer? I ask because this is typically the reasoning of those who deny limited atonement.