The Eternal Purpose of God in Christ

[SovereignGrace]

I agree to proceed with caution. I would never beg a person to make a decision. As a pastor I never hold long extended invitations, but if I am not preaching the gospel (that is another topic like prophecy), then I will be sure to include a brief explanation of the gospel.

I do expository preaching: Book by book, chapter by chapter, verse by verse.
Tonight I preached on God's love which was all about the gospel. I closed in prayer without giving an invitation. But a visitor had come and trusted the Lord as her Savior. Yes God saved her tonight. One might say she was the recipient of God's grace. One might also say she put "her faith" and trust in Christ. Both are correct. Salvation is the gift of God. She reached out and accepted it by faith. I did nothing to pressure her.

I see nothing wrong with what you posted. We are to receive that with He bestows.

 

[DHK]

I see nothing wrong with what you posted. We are to receive that with He bestows.

More often than not we make mountains out of molehills. Just an opinion.

 

[SovereignGrace]

More often than not we make mountains out of molehills. Just an opinion.

I sent that girl I work with a sermon through a PM on facebook from Paul Washer titled 'Repent & Believe'. He is a very gifted preacher.

 

[Protestant]

Irresistible Love

DHK wrote:

You had no choice (i.e. you were forced).

PreachTony wrote:

We just do not buy the theology that God forces salvation or damnation upon mankind

By using the verb ‘force’ our adversaries are united when insisting, in effect, we teach violence is committed by the Lord against man’s free will.

Thus, they conclude we are mere puppets whose lives are manipulated by an evil Puppet Master.

This is precisely the same argument used against the Apostle Paul when declaring the divine right of the Lord to have mercy on some and not all, leaving the rest dead in their sins for which they will be hardened in judgment and ultimately damned. (Romans 9:18)

For since God has predetermined the eternal destiny of each man before they were born, they argue that, in effect, God has ‘forced’ His will upon all men without their consent.

As a result, man has no choice but to obey His sovereign, irresistible will.

That being the case, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will? (Romans 9:19)

In other words, how can a just God condemn men who are simply obeying His will of reprobation?

What choice did they have?

Our modern-day critics make several similar fundamental misapprehensions which lead them to a false conclusion.

One such assumption is the power of man’s will. It is not free, but bound.

1. Man is under the power and dominion of sin and Satan, his master. (John 8:34, 44)

2. Man does not have the power to break those chains. Only God has that power. (John 8:36)

3. Unless God draws him, man will not come to Christ for deliverance. (John 6:44, 65)

Given the enslaved condition of man as described by Jesus, man is totally at the mercy of God to set him free.

But the situation is a bit more complicated.

Man, by nature, views the true God as his enemy and wants nothing to do with Him. In fact, he prefers Him dead. (Romans 8:7, Acts 2:23)

In addition, many men deny they are sin sick and have no need for a physician. (Mark 2:17)

And then there are those who seek healing and forgiveness through false gods. (John 4:22; Acts 17:23; Romans 1)

Therefore, rather than permit the entire human race to destroy itself through its sin of unbelief and hatred of the true God, out of love the Lord has graciously chosen many to be vessels of mercy, destined to glory.

He accomplished His will of good pleasure by sending His Son who took on flesh that He might perfectly fulfill the Law of God in the stead of the Chosen Ones, thereby qualifying as their sin offering which satisfied the justice of God.

Once propitiated, the Father and the Son send forth the Holy Spirit who removes the enmity and the chains which bound the will, allowing the Chosen sinner to experience and respond positively to the love and mercy of God.

I ask our critics, Did your wives ‘force’ you to love and marry them?

Or was love and marriage your natural response?

In like manner, when our Lord reveals Himself to the sinner by His Spirit, His love and grace is so overwhelming and undeniable that the sinner willingly and enthusiastically says, ‘Yes, I will marry you!’

The truth of God’s irresistible saving grace is not to be despised, but to be praised and shouted from the roof tops.

Blessed be the LORD God of Israel from everlasting to everlasting: and let all the people say, Amen. Praise ye the LORD.

 

[DHK]

We use the English language. Do you? One cannot change the meaning of words.
By using the term "Irresistible Grace" you demonstrate that grace cannot be resisted, and thus it is "forced" upon an individual. I am not teaching this, you are. If this is the "violence" you are teaching and don't like then for Pete's sake stop it!! I don't like it either.

Thus, they conclude we are mere puppets whose lives are manipulated by an evil Puppet Master.

Absolutely. Do you know that there are some Calvinists that would agree with that assessment of the teaching of Calvin. That is the logical conclusion. Don't run from it. It is what you believe.

This is precisely the same argument used against the Apostle Paul when declaring the divine right of the Lord to have mercy on some and not all, leaving the rest dead in their sins for which they will be hardened in judgment and ultimately damned. (Romans 9:18)

Then you should do something about it.

For since God has predetermined the eternal destiny of each man before they were born, they argue that, in effect, God has ‘forced’ His will upon all men without their consent.

Your premise is flawed.
"Predestination" is not the same as "omniscience." Just because he knows the outcome does not mean he predestinated it to be that way. That makes God the author of evil. There is no way out of that conclusion.
Did God predestinate that Hitler should wipe out approximately six million Jews during the WWII. Is it ever God's will to murder, let alone mass murder or committing the complete genocide of an entire nation? He knew it would happen. It was not his will. He did not "predestinate" Hitler to carry out such a heinous crime. He did not force Hitler to commit such war crimes. But that is what you believe. It is not much different than Islam's belief of fatalism. I have said that before, and it offends people. But people need to see things for what they are. Predeterminism is simply fatalism and nothing more.

As a result, man has no choice but to obey His sovereign, irresistible will.

Yep, fatalism. No free will, no choice, The Puppeteer and his puppets.

That being the case, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will? (Romans 9:19)

In Calvinism this statement makes no sense, and it is ironic that you can't see it. The non-Cal can see the truth of this statement. The hypothetical person putting forth the complaint has the power and the free will to complain to God. If this were Calvinism he would not be able to register a complaint at all. His will would be bound up irresistibly. He would have no free will. He is the puppet of God. He cannot complain. He does not have that option. But the non-Cal says that man does have that option to complain--right or wrong, it is still there. He does have a will.

In other words, how can a just God condemn men who are simply obeying His will of reprobation?

Nothing is said about a will of reprobation. You are reading into scripture something that is not there, and not taught in Scripture. If you even realized the context here, it is speaking of the history of Israel and God's plans for her. It is not even speaking of salvation or election which pertains to the Gentiles at all.

What choice did they have?

We always have a choice. You had a choice whether or not to post this.

Our modern-day critics make several similar fundamental misapprehensions which lead them to a false conclusion.

One such assumption is the power of man’s will. It is not free, but bound.

Just like Adam after he sinned. It was bound by sin. Still, Adam was able to communicate with God, even as a dead person. Your theology is not consistent, and has many loopholes in it. Man's spirit in his unsaved state is "inoperable" not non-existent," it is separated from God, not a "lifeless corpse." If it were a corpse it would not be able to choose even bad things much less good things. It would not be able to choose at all. The metaphor is a useless one when referred to as a corpse. He is separated from God.

1. Man is under the power and dominion of sin and Satan, his master. (John 8:34, 44)

So aren't we all. Satan is the god of this world, so scripture says. If man chooses in faith, to trust Christ he will have the power to overcome Satan.

2. Man does not have the power to break those chains. Only God has that power. (John 8:36)

God offers man the gift of salvation, the gift of eternal life, which is always available to all and every one to freely accept.

3. Unless God draws him, man will not come to Christ for deliverance. (John 6:44, 65)

It is Christ that has drawn all men to himself.
It is Christ that said wide is the road that leads to destruction...and narrow is the path that leads to life but few there are that enter into it. That path must be chosen. One must enter by his own volition. God doesn't force people down the right road.

Given the enslaved condition of man as described by Jesus, man is totally at the mercy of God to set him free.

Grace and mercy have been provided.
Grace and mercy need to be accepted by faith
Somewhere along the line you have heard of sola fide, haven't you?

But the situation is a bit more complicated.

Man, by nature, views the true God as his enemy and wants nothing to do with Him. In fact, he prefers Him dead. (Romans 8:7, Acts 2:23)

Scripture taken out of context. If that were true, then in Acts 2, 3,000 people would not have been saved. You contradict yourself.

In addition, many men deny they are sin sick and have no need for a physician. (Mark 2:17)

More scripture taken out of context. Many came to Jesus admitting they were sick: they came as blind, lepers, lame, the palsy, etc. Admitting their illnesses and desiring to be healed, they were all healed "according to THEIR faith."

And then there are those who seek healing and forgiveness through false gods. (John 4:22; Acts 17:23; Romans 1)

Given the above evidence would you infer that Christ was a false god since many were healed and granted forgiveness through him. I hope not.

Therefore, rather than permit the entire human race to destroy itself through its sin of unbelief and hatred of the true God, out of love the Lord has graciously chosen many to be vessels of mercy, destined to glory.

No, he chose whosoever would believe on him." That is mercy, grace, and justice.

He accomplished His will of good pleasure by sending His Son who took on flesh that He might perfectly fulfill the Law of God in the stead of the Chosen Ones, thereby qualifying as their sin offering which satisfied the justice of God.

He satisfied the demands of God in paying the penalty of the sins of all mankind (John 1:29; 1Jn.2:2)

Once propitiated, the Father and the Son send forth the Holy Spirit who removes the enmity and the chains which bound the will, allowing the Chosen sinner to experience and respond positively to the love and mercy of God.

No. The Holy Spirit's function is more accurately described in John 16:8-11.
It is Christ that saves.

I ask our critics, Did your wives ‘force’ you to love and marry them?

No, and that is why the Calvinist is wrong. Our wives freely chose.

Or was love and marriage your natural response?

Indeed it was a natural response that comes from a loving relationship.
But in Calvinism that is not the case.

In like manner, when our Lord reveals Himself to the sinner by His Spirit, His love and grace is so overwhelming and undeniable that the sinner willingly and enthusiastically says, ‘Yes, I will marry you!’

NO it isn't. He is forced to. The "grace" is irresistible. Joy or no joy, he has not choice in this matter. He is a puppet in the hand of God forced to do his will whether or not he wants to.

The truth of God’s irresistible saving grace is not to be despised, but to be praised and shouted from the roof tops.

Blessed be the LORD God of Israel from everlasting to everlasting: and let all the people say, Amen. Praise ye the LORD.

To try and force joy into a person is despicable. He is but a robot in the hand of God with no choice for he predestined before the foundation of the world, and has never had a choice in the matter, never. There is no motivation, no impetus at all for him to serve the Lord, for he was simply forced to be a Christian. It wasn't his choice "to be this way."

 

[Yeshua1]

Over and over again the Bible provides us examples of invitations by God the Father, the Son, and the prophets and preachers. Even in Revelation, Jesus says "Let him that is athirst, come." He didn't say "Let him that God has irresistibly made thirsty..."

Why do you think God's sovereignty is weakened by Him allowing man to accept or reject Him?



No. Not at all. Understand that when non-Cals (at least of the kind I tend to associate with) speak of free will in the soteriological sense, we mean it only in terms of man accepting the gift of God. If I brought you a gift, and you accepted the gift, does that make you the one who provided the gift? No. You are capable of accepting or rejecting the gift, but you were not the one who produced the gift in the first place.

Again, where does that "saving faith" come from, does it reside in all sinners, or just to those whom God provided for to have?

How can someone who is bound and enslaved by a fallen nature at war against God though freely decide that by themselves?

 

[Yeshua1]

So, if God changes a sinner's will so that they can "freely believe," is it possible for that sinner to not believe in God?

If not, then I can't help but see this argument as nothing more than semantics. It's like someone claiming to be "pro-life" instead of "anti-abortion." It's just a word game.

Is the big hang up here due to some not wanting to believe that sinners no longer have full free will remaining?

 

[Yeshua1]

DHK,


Does anyone deserve to be saved?

Well, since the natural man receives not the things of the Spirit, and is also at war against God, then?

 

[Iconoclast]

We use the English language. Do you? One cannot change the meaning of words.
By using the term "Irresistible Grace" you demonstrate that grace cannot be resisted, and thus it is "forced" upon an individual. I am not teaching this, you are. If this is the "violence" you are teaching and don't like then for Pete's sake stop it!! I don't like it either.

Absolutely. Do you know that there are some Calvinists that would agree with that assessment of the teaching of Calvin. That is the logical conclusion. Don't run from it. It is what you believe.

Then you should do something about it.


Your premise is flawed.
"Predestination" is not the same as "omniscience." Just because he knows the outcome does not mean he predestinated it to be that way. That makes God the author of evil. There is no way out of that conclusion.
Did God predestinate that Hitler should wipe out approximately six million Jews during the WWII. Is it ever God's will to murder, let alone mass murder or committing the complete genocide of an entire nation? He knew it would happen. It was not his will. He did not "predestinate" Hitler to carry out such a heinous crime. He did not force Hitler to commit such war crimes. But that is what you believe. It is not much different than Islam's belief of fatalism. I have said that before, and it offends people. But people need to see things for what they are. Predeterminism is simply fatalism and nothing more.


Yep, fatalism. No free will, no choice, The Puppeteer and his puppets.


In Calvinism this statement makes no sense, and it is ironic that you can't see it. The non-Cal can see the truth of this statement. The hypothetical person putting forth the complaint has the power and the free will to complain to God. If this were Calvinism he would not be able to register a complaint at all. His will would be bound up irresistibly. He would have no free will. He is the puppet of God. He cannot complain. He does not have that option. But the non-Cal says that man does have that option to complain--right or wrong, it is still there. He does have a will.


Nothing is said about a will of reprobation. You are reading into scripture something that is not there, and not taught in Scripture. If you even realized the context here, it is speaking of the history of Israel and God's plans for her. It is not even speaking of salvation or election which pertains to the Gentiles at all.


We always have a choice. You had a choice whether or not to post this.


Just like Adam after he sinned. It was bound by sin. Still, Adam was able to communicate with God, even as a dead person. Your theology is not consistent, and has many loopholes in it. Man's spirit in his unsaved state is "inoperable" not non-existent," it is separated from God, not a "lifeless corpse." If it were a corpse it would not be able to choose even bad things much less good things. It would not be able to choose at all. The metaphor is a useless one when referred to as a corpse. He is separated from God.


So aren't we all. Satan is the god of this world, so scripture says. If man chooses in faith, to trust Christ he will have the power to overcome Satan.


God offers man the gift of salvation, the gift of eternal life, which is always available to all and every one to freely accept.


It is Christ that has drawn all men to himself.
It is Christ that said wide is the road that leads to destruction...and narrow is the path that leads to life but few there are that enter into it. That path must be chosen. One must enter by his own volition. God doesn't force people down the right road.


Grace and mercy have been provided.
Grace and mercy need to be accepted by faith
Somewhere along the line you have heard of sola fide, haven't you?


Scripture taken out of context. If that were true, then in Acts 2, 3,000 people would not have been saved. You contradict yourself.


More scripture taken out of context. Many came to Jesus admitting they were sick: they came as blind, lepers, lame, the palsy, etc. Admitting their illnesses and desiring to be healed, they were all healed "according to THEIR faith."


Given the above evidence would you infer that Christ was a false god since many were healed and granted forgiveness through him. I hope not.


No, he chose whosoever would believe on him." That is mercy, grace, and justice.


He satisfied the demands of God in paying the penalty of the sins of all mankind (John 1:29; 1Jn.2:2)


No. The Holy Spirit's function is more accurately described in John 16:8-11.
It is Christ that saves.


No, and that is why the Calvinist is wrong. Our wives freely chose.


Indeed it was a natural response that comes from a loving relationship.
But in Calvinism that is not the case.


NO it isn't. He is forced to. The "grace" is irresistible. Joy or no joy, he has not choice in this matter. He is a puppet in the hand of God forced to do his will whether or not he wants to.


To try and force joy into a person is despicable. He is but a robot in the hand of God with no choice for he predestined before the foundation of the world, and has never had a choice in the matter, never. There is no motivation, no impetus at all for him to serve the Lord, for he was simply forced to be a Christian. It wasn't his choice "to be this way."

:laugh:..:laugh::laugh::laugh:
All wrong

 

[DHK]

:laugh:..:laugh::laugh::laugh:
All wrong

You laugh to the wind. You declare it wrong. But, as usual, you can't refute a single point. Sad.

 

[SovereignGrace]

PreachTony,

Say I have $10,000,000 dollars, it is mine, and mine alone. Now, do I have a right to keep it to myself or give it money to people who I deem needy of it? By your standards, I must offer money to everybody I come into contact with or I am being unjust, not giving some to some people and giving money to others. Now, I am sure you are going to throw out that I would be unjust to give it to one asking me for some cash and not to some who are also asking for some cash.

Here is the thing, though...no one is asking God for His saving grace in the sinful, fallen state. They want nothing to do with Him, they run from Him. I witness to many people who do not realize they are spiritually broke. They realize they do not “Suppose one of you wants to build a tower. Won’t you first sit down and estimate the cost to see if you have enough money to complete it? For if you lay the foundation and are not able to finish it, everyone who sees it will ridicule you, saying, ‘This person began to build and wasn’t able to finish.’[Luke 14:28-30]

Jesus backed up what I just posted when He said “But he answered one of them, ‘I am not being unfair to you, friend. Didn’t you agree to work for a denarius? Take your pay and go. I want to give the one who was hired last the same as I gave you. Don’t I have the right to do what I want with my own money? Or are you envious because I am generous?’Matt. 20:13-15]

You guys act like God is entitled to make an offer to everybody, even those who never knew He existed. God did not have to make a covenant with His Son, but He chose to. He then chose a multitude of sinners(none could have been saved and He would still be just, mon ami), but you think we are making Him unfair by stating He does not offer everybody a chance at the table.

If He saved 'goose-egg', would He still be just, PreachTony?

Uhhhhh hem!!! PreachTony?

Pg. 18 post #175.

 

[DHK]

Posted by Sovereign Grace:

Jesus backed up what I just posted when He said “But he answered one of them, ‘I am not being unfair to you, friend. Didn’t you agree to work for a denarius? Take your pay and go. I want to give the one who was hired last the same as I gave you. Don’t I have the right to do what I want with my own money? Or are you envious because I am generous?’Matt. 20:13-15]

You guys act like God is entitled to make an offer to everybody, even those who never knew He existed. God did not have to make a covenant with His Son, but He chose to. He then chose a multitude of sinners(none could have been saved and He would still be just, mon ami), but you think we are making Him unfair by stating He does not offer everybody a chance at the table.

If He saved 'goose-egg', would He still be just, PreachTony?

You are taking this parable and misapplying it.
What is the point of the parable. It speaks toward the day of judgment.
Walvoord summarizes it this way:

By this illustration, Jesus was teaching that the matter of rewards is under the sovereign control of God, the “Landowner” in the parable. God is the One before whom all accounts will be settled. Many who have prominent places will someday find themselves demoted. And many who often find themselves at the end of the line will find themselves promoted to the head of the line: The last will be first, and the first will be last. (This supports what Jesus had said in Mat_19:28-30.) In the final accounting, the Lord’s analysis will carry the greatest and only important weight.

Take the entire parable into account, not just your pet verses.

 

[SovereignGrace]

Posted by Sovereign Grace:

You are taking this parable and misapplying it.
What is the point of the parable. It speaks toward the day of judgment.
Walvoord summarizes it this way:

Take the entire parable into account, not just your pet verses.

Non mon ami, non. I would take not $1,000 and read Walvoord. That heretic calls the church, the church which Christ was beaten for, mocked for, spit upon for, nailed to cross for, pierced in His hands and feet for, and then His side after He died for, was buried for, was resurrected for, and ascended for, an interruption, an intercalation in God's plan for Israel.

You really need to find someone better to quote. He was a heretic.

 

[SovereignGrace]

Does anyone deserve heaven, DHK?

Does anyone deserve God's grace monsieur?

 

[DHK]

Does anyone deserve heaven, DHK?

Does anyone deserve God's grace monsieur?

I do not deserve heaven, nor his grace; neither do you, nor does anyone.
But then why did God create us. He created us as object of his love to bestow his love and grace upon us. He did not create mankind to choose or elect some to eternal life and others to eternal damnation. That is against his character, against the character of mankind who is made in the image of God.

King Manasseh, he son of Hezekiah, made his children walk through the fire. He sacrificed them. They burned to death. Would you do the same with your children? Choose some to live and others to walk through a fire and burn to death. It is against man's nature. If man would not do such a terrible thing then why would God, for no good reason do the same thing. It does not glorify him. You say it does. But eternal damnation in the Lake of Fire brings no glory to God.

I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked saith the Lord.

He came to seek and to save the lost (not the elect).
The lost are the world; those that are in need of a Savior.

Those who freely receive his offer of salvation will be saved. They are not more worthy but more willing.

 

[steaver]

In Calvinism this statement makes no sense, and it is ironic that you can't see it. The non-Cal can see the truth of this statement. The hypothetical person putting forth the complaint has the power and the free will to complain to God. If this were Calvinism he would not be able to register a complaint at all. His will would be bound up irresistibly. He would have no free will. He is the puppet of God. He cannot complain. He does not have that option. But the non-Cal says that man does have that option to complain--right or wrong, it is still there. He does have a will.

Not only does he not have the option to complain, Calvinist have always declared that those who are lost want nothing to do with forgiveness of sins and submission to God thus they would not and could not come to God and complain in the first place.

But the part the Calvinist always leaves out when citing Ro 9 is vs22... "What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction". This shows the love and patience of God, not willing that any should perish. If you read this in light of Calvinism, God is at work shaping and forming most people for the sole purpose that He may destroy them for His great pleasure.

 

[Iconoclast]

You laugh to the wind. You declare it wrong. But, as usual, you can't refute a single point. Sad.

There was so many errors on this one post....I had to pull off the road and get to a place of safety before looking closely at it:laugh:

I am at the key board now:wavey::wavey: I will refute this and seek to quarantine this post:thumbsup:

 

[Protestant]

But then why did God create us?

Scripture has the answer:

Thou art worthy, O Lord, to receive glory and honour and power: for thou hast created all things, and for thy pleasure they are and were created. (Rev. 4:11)

Answer: It was not out of necessity, as if something was lacking in God which required Him to create.

It was purely out of His will of good pleasure because it pleased Him to do so.

The sovereign Lord wills to have mercy upon those He freely chooses to have mercy for no other reason than it pleases Him to do so.

It is from the same will of good pleasure that He passes by the majority of mankind, refusing to give them what they do not deserve: mercy.

There is no cause for His decrees outside of Himself.

His will is the final arbiter of truth, justice and grace.

Does it disturb you that The LORD hath made all things for himself: yea, even the wicked for the day of evil? (Proverbs 16:4)

This is exactly what Paul testifies to when he brings forth Pharaoh as a perfect example of a man created and raised to a position of great wealth, prestige and authority for the express purpose that he be destroyed by the hand of God in judgment.

As the Supreme Potter it pleases Him to make vessels of mercy who will glorify His grace.

Likewise it pleases the Supreme Potter (not Puppeteer) to also make vessels of wrath who will glorify His justice.

You say you don’t believe God created most men in order that they may be righteously judged for the sins which they willingly committed?

The Apostle Paul replies:

Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus?
21 Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour? (Romans 9:20-21)

 

[Protestant]

But the part the Calvinist always leaves out when citing Ro 9 is vs22... "What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction". This shows the love and patience of God, not willing that any should perish. If you read this in light of Calvinism, God is at work shaping and forming most people for the sole purpose that He may destroy them for His great pleasure.

Unfortunately, you completely misinterpret the point Paul is making.

Had Paul said, "What if God willing to show His mercy and to make His grace known endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction."

But alas, Paul actually said the very opposite.

The reason God puts up with the sins of the wicked as long as He does is because He waits for their evil to reach the perfect pitch to where He can judge them with even greater condemnation.

This truth is exemplified by Mystery Babylon. Our Lord is waiting for the sins of the Roman Catholic Church to reach a fever pitch which He has predetermined. When reached, He will destroy the Vatican.

And I heard another voice from heaven, saying, Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues.

5 For her sins have reached unto heaven, and God hath remembered her iniquities.

6 Reward her even as she rewarded you, and double unto her double according to her works: in the cup which she hath filled fill to her double.(Rev. 18:4-6)

 

[percho]

So, if God changes a sinner's will so that they can "freely believe," is it possible for that sinner to not believe in God?

If not, then I can't help but see this argument as nothing more than semantics. It's like someone claiming to be "pro-life" instead of "anti-abortion." It's just a word game.

Who was before a blasphemer, and a persecutor, and injurious: but I obtained mercy, because I did it ignorantly in unbelief. 1 Tim 1:13

And Saul was consenting unto his death. Acts 8:1 As for Saul, he made havock of the church, entering into every house, and haling men and women committed them to prison. 8:3 And Saul, yet breathing out threatenings and slaughter against the disciples of the Lord, went unto the high priest, And desired of him letters to Damascus to the synagogues, that if he found any of this way, whether they were men or women, he might bring them bound unto Jerusalem. And as he journeyed, he came near Damascus: and suddenly there shined round about him a light from heaven:9:1-3

Would you agree that Saul/Paul at this moment is in unbelief?

And he fell to the earth, and heard a voice saying unto him, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me? And he said, Who art thou, Lord? And the Lord said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest: it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks. And he trembling and astonished said, Lord, what wilt thou have me to do? And the Lord said unto him, Arise, and go into the city, and it shall be told thee what thou must do.

And Saul/Paul was led into the city, being blind. Was he still spiritually blind at this time?

Acts 9:9 And he was three days without sight, and neither did eat nor drink.

The Lord told Ananias to go and lay hands on Saul/Paul thst he might reveive his sight for which Paul had been praying and had a vision, wonder where that came from. Ananias did not want to go foe he knew who Saul/Paul was and what he was up to. What did the Lord tell him?

But the Lord said unto him, Go thy way: for he is a chosen vessel unto me, to bear my name before the Gentiles, and kings, and the children of Israel:
For I will shew him how great things he must suffer for my name's sake. Acts 9:15,16

And Ananias went his way and entered the house; and laying his hands on him he said, “Brother Saul, the Lord Jesus,fn who appeared to you on the road as you came, has sent me that you may receive your sight and be filled with the Holy Spirit.” Immediately there fell from his eyes something like scales, and he received his sight at once; and he arose and was baptized. Acts 9:17,18

Did Paul receive the Spirit of Truth?

Jhn 14:17
Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you.
Jhn 15:26
But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me
Jhn 16:13
Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.

Now I ask, did Saul/Paul all of a sudden have some change of heart that welled up from within himself, and he repented and asked Jesus to come into his heart? Or, did God through his Son Jesus move Saul/Paul from unbelief unto belief because Saul/Paul was to be a chosen vessel of the Lord?

Paul was going down the road in unbelief, was struck blind, showing him his unbelief, I believe and in three days receiving the Holy Spirit, received his sight, belief and almost immediately began to preach Jesus as the Christ the Son of God.

What say you?