The effect of Free Will on Scripture.

[Van]

LOL

Yet another off topic deflection. Personal incredulity is a logical fallacy used to hide the inability to defend what is obviously false.

Returning to topic:

1) 1 Corinthians 2:14 says "the things" not "all the things" so what things might natural men understand?
2) Spiritual milk, the fundamentals of the gospel are "the things" of the Spirit that men of flesh can understand as shown in 1 Corinthians 3:1.
3) Therefore scripture teaches here and elsewhere that "total spiritual inability" is bogus. The effort to change "the things" to "all the things" in 1 Cor. 2:14 does not reflect the context of 1 Corinthians 3:

 

[Dave G]

Once again, deflection and no effort to explain why Paul spoke to them as to men of flesh. Obviously men of flesh can respond to spiritual milk.

I'll take that as your final reply, Van.

As I see it, you are unable to engage the text thoroughly, and present your case clearly with that as the basis.
To me, you keep avoiding the opportunity to allow the reader to see exactly how you get your understanding of the passage, and simply accuse me of deflecting in order to support that avoidance.

From my perspective,
I've already shown the reader how I get my understanding of it, and you've yet to show yours.
To me, you simply refuse to be as transparent in your treatment of the Scriptures as I have, and your replies never get to the point that you are willing to actually develop, out in the open and for all to see, how you are arriving at your conclusions.

You keep posting assertions, but you don't actually get to the point that the reader can understand why you are making them.

 

[Dave G]

The problem with your request is that the proof text you want to deal with is far to narrow to be understood in context.

I disagree.
I don't have a problem understanding it, but I can say that it wasn't always so, until relatively recently.

I'd also add that it really should pose no problem for a believer to understand the immediate context, given that Scripture can be understood quite thoroughly, at some point in their lives, by any of God's children.
They have all that they need that pertains to life and godliness ( 2 Peter 1:3 ), and the Holy Spirit is their teacher and He gives them the ability to understand the word apart from the teaching of men ( 1 John 2:20-27 ).

Therefore, anyone that has truly believed on Christ, from the heart, can enjoy the blessing of having God reveal His word to them each and every time they study it, and simply obeying His command as found in 2 Timothy 2:15 can and will result in rightly dividing the word of truth.

What I find interesting in these two chapters is that now where does Paul say that one must be regenerated in order to understand the wisdom of God. If such a doctrine even existed this would have been an appropriate place to bring it up.

It does exist, and it is drawn out in 1 Corinthians 2:9-16 as well as Romans 8:5-8.

I call it "having ears to hear", and it is found in many places,
Such as Matthew 11:15, Matthew 13:11, Luke 24:45 and others.

Then we get to the proof text that calvies love so much. Verse 14 which in no way suggests or says anything about total inability.

Sure it does...
Where do you think I get the proof that unregenerate men cannot understand spiritual things from?

God's word, not John Calvin's.

As for calling me a "calvie", I'll take the derogatory naming from you in stride, Mark;
Because I know that, deep down in your heart, you bear no ill will towards those who differ from you, and you don't really intend to demean them in any way.

 

[Dave G]

By the numbers

1) 1 Corinthoians 2:14 says "the things" not "all the things" so what things might natural men understand? Not the the things of the Spirit.
2) Spiritual milk, the fundamentals of the gospel are "the things" of the Spirit that men of flesh can understand as shown in 1 Corinthians 3:1. No, they cannot. Paul is speaking to them as men of flesh, because they are spiritually immature. They are not "men of flesh", but "men of Spirit". They are new creatures in Christ ( 2 Corinthians 5:17 ).
3) Therefore scripture teaches here and elsewhere that "total spiritual inability" is bogus. The effort to change "the things" to "all the things" in 1 Cor. 2:14 does not reflect the context of 1 Corinthians 3:1.There is no effort to change "the things" to "all the things". It is a clear effort to show you, by the text, that there are two sets of "things"..."the things of the Spirit" and "the things of man". The natural man only knows the things of man. The spiritual man knows the things of God, the things of the Spirit of God.

I've replied within the body of your quote above.

Respectfully, Van, the way I see it,
When you can do the same thing that I did and break down the Scriptures line by line to give the reader the chance to see how you arrive at your conclusions, then we will never get any farther than where we have in this thread.

I'm more than happy to get into the "nuts and bolts"...but it seems that if I ask you to do the same, you run from it.

I've nothing to hide from my brothers and sisters, sir.
Any one of them can ask me why I believe what I do from God's word, and I will be more than willing to take the Bible out, open it up, and expound any passage, verse by verse, in my own words ( and as closely as possible to the very words on the page ) to give them the opportunity to see why I understand it the way that I do.

Are you?
Not from what I've seen so far.

In addition, within the short time that I've been here on this forum this opportunity has been presented to both you and to @Revmitchell ( please see Choice: God or Man - exegete John 6:32-40 ) , and neither of you has been willing to tackle that opportunity.
Frankly, I don't see why you are unwilling to do this, as it really isn't all that difficult if a believer has studied the Bible deeply, IMO.
The reward is definitely worth the effort.

It's also not like I'm trying to re-write Scripture, as you have accused me of here, Van:

Your effort to rewrite the verse to say Paul spoke to born anew believers who were "in the flesh" is nonsense.

To me, it's one thing for a person to twist it, and quite another for that person to draw it out and expound it, bringing in support from other places in the Bible and "fleshing things out" for the reader to see.

Perhaps someday one or both of you will indulge me on this...
But then again, perhaps not.
For some reason, I don't expect it to happen anytime soon.

This is my final reply in this thread.
My apologies to the OP for the apparent hijack, but I feel that the teaching of 1 Corinthians 2:14 is closely related to the effect of "free will" on Scripture.


May God, in His kindness, bless all of you richly as you study His words.

 

[Van]

Returning to topic:

1) 1 Corinthians 2:14 says "the things" not "all the things" so what things might natural men understand?
2) Spiritual milk, the fundamentals of the gospel are "the things" of the Spirit that men of flesh can understand as shown in 1 Corinthians 3:1.
3) Therefore scripture teaches here and elsewhere that "total spiritual inability" is bogus. The effort to change "the things" to "all the things" in 1 Cor. 2:14 does not reflect the context of 1 Corinthians 3:

Is a fallen, lost, unregenerate person able to understand the "spiritual solid food" of the Spirit? Nope. Therefore a discussion of "free will" is a strawman argument., whereas a discussion of limited spiritual ability of "men of flesh" (unregenerate) would be enlightening.

 

[Yeshua1]

That may be what you call your self but in reality you are a Calvinist. By the way the Baptist church has not been reformed it has been invaded.
MB

What would be the difference between a Reformed or a Calvinist Baptist to you?

 

[Yeshua1]

Returning to topic:

1) 1 Corinthians 2:14 says "the things" not "all the things" so what things might natural men understand?
2) Spiritual milk, the fundamentals of the gospel are "the things" of the Spirit that men of flesh can understand as shown in 1 Corinthians 3:1.
3) Therefore scripture teaches here and elsewhere that "total spiritual inability" is bogus. The effort to change "the things" to "all the things" in 1 Cor. 2:14 does not reflect the context of 1 Corinthians 3:

Is a fallen, lost, unregenerate person able to understand the "spiritual solid food" of the Spirit? Nope. Therefore a discussion of "free will" is a strawman argument., whereas a discussion of limited spiritual ability of "men of flesh" (unregenerate) would be enlightening.

Paul speaks of milk of the word to those new borns in Christ, or spiritually still immature, NEVER to the lost!

 

[Yeshua1]

I agree...
It has been invaded by "free will" teaching, similar to the way that the Catholic church was over 1,600 years ago.

Many Baptist churches in New England, New York and Maine, 200-300 years ago, were "Calvinistic" and taught the "doctrines of grace".
Many in England even earlier than that, were "Calvinistic".
Most Baptist churches in the South, in America 200 years ago, were also "Calvinistic".

Nowadays, you'd be hard-pressed to find one in 100.
They almost all teach "free will"...

The same as the Roman Catholic Church and most other "Protestant" denominations, do.

We also were invaded by bad things like Charismatic Chaos and Theistic Evolution and women as Pastors to boot

 

[Van]

Paul speaks of milk of the word to those new borns in Christ, or spiritually still immature, NEVER to the lost!

You seem to like to make false assertions non-stop. Note Y1 last three posts attempt to change the subject.

Paul spoke to the new born Christians "as to men of flesh." Therefore "men of flesh" unregenerates can receive the milk of the gospel. Just read 1 Corinthians 3:1 folks, and know the false doctrine of total spiritual inability has been once again shown to be bogus.

The unregenerate lost have limited spiritual ability, able to understand and receive spiritual milk but not spiritual solid food.

Such an obvious truth, makes you wonder what else is bogus in Calvinism.

 

[MB]

What would be the difference between a Reformed or a Calvinist Baptist to you?

There is none.
MB

 

[Yeshua1]

RB wou

There is none.
MB

RB hold to all Reformed theology, while Calvinist tend to hold to mainly Sotierology proper!

 

[Yeshua1]

You seem to like to make false assertions non-stop. Note Y1 last three posts attempt to change the subject.

Paul spoke to the new born Christians "as to men of flesh." Therefore "men of flesh" unregenerates can receive the milk of the gospel. Just read 1 Corinthians 3:1 folks, and know the false doctrine of total spiritual inability has been once again shown to be bogus.

The unregenerate lost have limited spiritual ability, able to understand and receive spiritual milk but not spiritual solid food.

Such an obvious truth, makes you wonder what else is bogus in Calvinism.

The unsaved have have NO spiritual capacity within them to hear or read with discernment the Bible!

 

[Van]

The unsaved have have NO spiritual capacity within them to hear or read with discernment the Bible!

Yet another falsehood, another deflection and another assertion of nonsense. This is all they have folks.

Paul spoke to the new born Christians "as to men of flesh." Therefore "men of flesh" unregenerates can receive the milk of the gospel. Just read 1 Corinthians 3:1 folks, and know the false doctrine of total spiritual inability has been once again shown to be bogus.

The unregenerate lost have limited spiritual ability, able to understand and receive spiritual milk but not spiritual solid food.

Such an obvious truth, makes you wonder what else is bogus in Calvinism.

 

[Yeshua1]

Yet another falsehood, another deflection and another assertion of nonsense. This is all they have folks.

Paul spoke to the new born Christians "as to men of flesh." Therefore "men of flesh" unregenerates can receive the milk of the gospel. Just read 1 Corinthians 3:1 folks, and know the false doctrine of total spiritual inability has been once again shown to be bogus.

The unregenerate lost have limited spiritual ability, able to understand and receive spiritual milk but not spiritual solid food.

Such an obvious truth, makes you wonder what else is bogus in Calvinism.

The Holy Spirit stated to us thru Paul that the natural man cannot receive the things of the scriptures, as they cannot spiritually discern it in their fallen states, do you believe that?

 

[Van]

The Holy Spirit stated to us thru Paul that the natural man cannot receive the things of the scriptures, as they cannot spiritually discern it in their fallen states, do you believe that?

I have rebutted this nonsensical misread many times, but Y1 just ignores the rebuttal and regurgitates the bogus view. 1 Cor. 2:14 does not all all the things of the Spirit, therefore some of the things, spiritual milk, can be understood. See 1 Cor. 3:1. Paul says he would speak as to men of flesh, therefore men of flesh can understand spiritual milk.

 

[Yeshua1]

I have rebutted this nonsensical misread many times, but Y1 just ignores the rebuttal and regurgitates the bogus view. 1 Cor. 2:14 does not all all the things of the Spirit, therefore some of the things, spiritual milk, can be understood. See 1 Cor. 3:1. milk.

Babes in Christ Paul says are those who are acting immature, due to either recently saved or not learning as they should, but lost persons cannot receive spiritual things in sense of knowing and understanding them!

 

[Van]

Babes in Christ Paul says are those who are acting immature, due to either recently saved or not learning as they should, but lost persons cannot receive spiritual things in sense of knowing and understanding them!

Here we have yet another fabrication of deflection. Paul spoke "as to men of flesh."

Did Y1 address the issue, that "men of flesh" can understand spiritual milk? Nope. Instead he makes the bogus claim the verse reads "men in the flesh." Not how it reads. On and on they openly rewrite scripture to fit their bogus views.

 

[Yeshua1]

Here we have yet another fabrication of deflection. Paul spoke "as to men of flesh."

Did Y1 address the issue, that "men of flesh" can understand spiritual milk? Nope. Instead he makes the bogus claim the verse reads "men in the flesh." Not how it reads. On and on they openly rewrite scripture to fit their bogus views.

Natural Man receives not the things of God that are spiritual, how do you understand that?

 

[Van]

Natural Man receives not the things of God that are spiritual, how do you understand that?

You are just repeating the same nonsense. Receives not the things does not mean receives not all the things of God. The natural man (men of flesh) receive some of the things of the Spirit of God, spiritual milk, 1 Cor. 3:1.

 

[Yeshua1]

You are just repeating the same nonsense. Receives not the things does not mean receives not all the things of God. The natural man (men of flesh) receive some of the things of the Spirit of God, spiritual milk, 1 Cor. 3:1.

Paul stated only babes in Christ receive it as that!