The Holy Spirit and Salvation !

[Tenchi]

Now notice that by a simple call to the supper that men made excuses not to come, but notice when the Master commanded that the servant in Vs 21 to go and BRING IN the Guest, it was different ! It was not up to the natural will of the guest, they WERE BROUGHT IN !

The words bring in here in the greek is Eisago and means:

to lead in
to bring in,

The words mean to cause to come

Its no longer up to the one being summoned to refuse, he or she must be caused to come, which is a blessing Ps 65:4

Blessed is the man whom thou choosest, and causest to approach unto thee, that he may dwell in thy courts: we shall be satisfied with the goodness of thy house, even of thy holy temple.

But it is entirely an assumption on your part, made in service to your Calvinist doctrines, that the servants, by physical violence, forced those out in the highways and hedges to attend their Master's meal. Why should the uninvited be compelled to attend the meal when the invited were free to reject the invitation? Why are you ignoring the liberty of the invited to choose whether or not they would accept the invitation?

It does no damage to Christ's parable - and seems to me to make better sense of it - to understand that the same freedom given to the invited to refuse attendance at the man's meal was given to the uninvited, also. The servants "compelled" the uninvited by strong urgings, not physical coercion, to partake in the feast.

Psalm 65:1-4 (NASB)
1 There will be silence before You, and praise in Zion, O God, And to You the vow will be performed.
2 O You who hear prayer, To You all men come.
3 Iniquities prevail against me; As for our transgressions, You forgive them.
4 How blessed is the one whom You choose and bring near to You To dwell in Your courts. We will be satisfied with the goodness of Your house, Your holy temple.

The Calvinist must presume that "choose and bring" means to "individually and sovereignly decree and coerce." But this isn't what David actually wrote. Certainly, God is sovereign. It was His unilateral choice to make Abraham's descendants His Chosen People. Does this necessitate that when "iniquities prevailed" in David's life that they did so because God had decreed that they would? If I take David to be saying that God forcibly brought David near, and that He did so because He ordains whatsoever comes to pass, I must settle the blame for David's iniquity upon God, not David. This makes God's forgiveness of David's transgressions exceedingly odd, since David actually bears no real culpability for them. In any case, does it necessarily follow that, if God acts unilaterally in some instances, He must do so in all instances? Is this what I see described in Scripture? No.

In fact its Illustrated here 2 Cor 5:19-20

19 To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation.

20 Now then we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God did beseech you by us: we pray you in Christ's stead, be ye reconciled to God.

This " be ye reconciled" is actually a imperative, but its in the passive voice, the ones being beseeched are at the same time by the power of the Gospel, being turned to or brought in, or compelled !

Its an imperative being issued, not a asking or giving a choice, Just like the servant was commissioned by the Master to do Lk 14:23

What need is there for Paul to implore (beseech) his readers to be reconciled to God if God is going to force them into His kingdom regardless of what they may want? This is a very strange, even absurd, thing for Paul to write if he really thought that being reconciled to God was something God did unilaterally to lost people, forcing them to salvation no matter what. Obviously, in such a circumstance, no beseeching is required.

 

[Brightfame52]

Because of the depravity or spiritual death of man ! 3

Now even though the word compel means to force the force meant is not a threatening like a law thunder force, either do it or suffer the consequences type thing, thats what false teachers think like, however its a persuading force, a Spiritual persuading ! Persuading is impelling, and remember the word draw Helkuo has the metaphorical meaning:
metaph., to draw by inward power, lead, impel

So its a persuading Spiritual force that makes them Willing in the Day of His Power Ps 110:3

3 Thy people shall be willing in the day of thy power, in the beauties of holiness from the womb of the morning: thou hast the dew of thy youth.

That word power here is also translated force, hence God's Chosen People shall be made willing in the Day of His Force or compelling !

And the word willing means a voluntariness, so God's force or Power makes them to come willingly, freely, they are not being draged against their will.

Yet all this tells us that the Coming was not dependent upon their freewill choice, but upon the Power and force of God's Spirit, and they had no choice but to come willingly, as those did previously but because of their depravity did not come Lk 14:18-20

18 And they all with one consent began to make excuse. The first said unto him, I have bought a piece of ground, and I must needs go and see it: I pray thee have me excused.

19 And another said, I have bought five yoke of oxen, and I go to prove them: I pray thee have me excused.

20 And another said, I have married a wife, and therefore I cannot come.

But with these, God's Servant was commissioned to compel them to come in, it was not up to them to come in ! And thats what it means to be drawn by the Father Per Jn 6:44

44 No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day.

The Father through the Son sends His Servant the Spirit to fetch them in to the Son, He brings them to Him !

 

[Brightfame52]

@Tenchi

We have many examples in the Bible of spiritually-unregenerate men who moved toward God in reverence,

No you dont, you deceived into thinking that way, but none naturally even seek the True God nor understand Him Rom 3:11,18

11 There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God.

18 There is no fear/reverence of God before their eyes.

 

[Tenchi]

Because of the depravity or spiritual death of man ! 3

Now even though the word compel means to force the force meant is not a threatening like a law thunder force, either do it or suffer the consequences type thing, thats what false teachers think like, however its a persuading force, a Spiritual persuading ! Persuading is impelling, and remember the word draw Helkuo has the metaphorical meaning:
metaph., to draw by inward power, lead, impel

So its a persuading Spiritual force that makes them Willing in the Day of His Power Ps 110:3

Yes, I think God's power to persuade is, at times, forceful enough to feel almost compulsive. Consider Paul's meeting with Christ on the road to Damascus. Christ could have just wrested Paul's mind and will to his service, without any interaction between them forcing Paul to do what he wanted Paul to do. But on this occasion, Christ worked to persuade Saul (later, Paul) to Himself, using very overt, external and frightening means to do so.

I've said to others that I was "forced" to a conclusion about something by the clarity, reasonableness and factual basis for that conclusion. I wasn't actually forced, however; I only felt that there was a kind of power exerted upon my mind by these things that constrained me to come to the conclusion that I did. A very simple example of what I mean is the mathematical statement 2+2=4. It's so obvious that this is so that one feels one has no choice but to accept that it is. But there's no wresting of my will or my mind that produces this feeling; I'm not forced to accept this mathematical statement of fact though every fiber of my being resists it.

So its a persuading Spiritual force that makes them Willing in the Day of His Power Ps 110:3

3 Thy people shall be willing in the day of thy power, in the beauties of holiness from the womb of the morning: thou hast the dew of thy youth.

That word power here is also translated force, hence God's Chosen People shall be made willing in the Day of His Force or compelling !

And the word willing means a voluntariness, so God's force or Power makes them to come willingly, freely, they are not being draged against their will.

Psalm 110:1-4 (NASB)
1 The LORD says to my Lord: "Sit at My right hand Until I make Your enemies a footstool for Your feet."
2 The LORD will stretch forth Your strong scepter from Zion, saying, "Rule in the midst of Your enemies."
3 Your people will volunteer freely in the day of Your power; In holy array, from the womb of the dawn, Your youth are to You as the dew.
4 The LORD has sworn and will not change His mind, "You are a priest forever According to the order of Melchizedek."

This is a Messianic passage, which is to say its main focus is Christ, not the Calvinist doctrine of Irresistible Grace. And its interesting, I think, how the NASB translates verse 3: "Your people will volunteer freely in the day of your power..." This is a very different - even opposite - construction of the verse than the one you're wanting to foist upon it, Brightfame52. Here's the ESV's rendition of the verse:

Psalm 110:3 (ESV)
3 Your people will offer themselves freely on the day of your power, in holy garments; from the womb of the morning, the dew of your youth will be yours.

And the NKJV:

Psalm 110:3 (NKJV)
3 Your people shall be volunteers in the day of Your power; In the beauties of holiness, from the womb of the morning,
You have the dew of Your youth.

That you've managed to make the verse say the opposite of what it actually says is another example, to me, of the dangerous contortions that Calvinists make to Scripture. Really, you've rewritten the verse, changing "the day of thy power," which is a noun phrase oriented around "day," to a noun phrase (the day of His) and a present-progressive verb (compelling). One describes a thing (the day of thy power), the other, an event (the day of thy compelling). But Psalm 110:3 doesn't actually describe the Lord doing anything, as your version of the verse does; the only ones acting in the verse are the Lord's people who "volunteer willingly."

Do you not see the contradictory nature of the phrase "makes them come willingly"? Volunteers are, by definition, not acting under any compulsion.

In any case, you didn't answer my point/question about the invitees being free to reject their invite while the uninvited strangers were "compelled" to take part in the feast.

 

[Tenchi]

No you dont, you deceived into thinking that way, but none naturally even seek the True God nor understand Him Rom 3:11,18

11 There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God.

18 There is no fear/reverence of God before their eyes.

Well, I gave you a number of examples of men who were given high praise by God in the Bible who were not spiritually-regenerate. Here they are again: Job, Noah, Daniel, Enoch, David, Cornelius. None of these men were "born-again" in the post-Calvary sense and yet they are described as "good," "God-fearing," "righteous," etc.

 

[JesusFan]

Well, I gave you a number of examples of men who were given high praise by God in the Bible who were not spiritually-regenerate. Here they are again: Job, Noah, Daniel, Enoch, David, Cornelius. None of these men were "born-again" in the post-Calvary sense and yet they are described as "good," "God-fearing," "righteous," etc.

OT saints were regenerated but not Indwelt by the Holy Spirit, as he moved upon specific ones for specific tasks and roles such as prophets and kings

 

[Tenchi]

OT saints were regenerated but not Indwelt by the Holy Spirit, as he moved upon specific ones for specific tasks and roles such as prophets and kings

Well, you'll have to do more than assert that this is so. An assertion, by itself, does not establish itself; it's just an assertion.

 

[percho]

Well, I gave you a number of examples of men who were given high praise by God in the Bible who were not spiritually-regenerate. Here they are again: Job, Noah, Daniel, Enoch, David, Cornelius. None of these men were "born-again" in the post-Calvary sense and yet they are described as "good," "God-fearing," "righteous," etc.

Must they need to be born again, in the post Calvary sense, in order to enter the kingdom of God?

1 Cor 15:50,51 Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption. Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed,

In the above is this, all being changed, a change from above and is it accomplished by/through the Holy Spirit?

 

[percho]

John 7:39 YLT and this he said of the Spirit, which those believing in him were about to receive; for not yet was the Holy Spirit, because Jesus was not yet glorified.

An interesting verst relative to the Holy Spirit and new birth/regeneration.

Maybe even more interesting; Acts 2:32,33 YLT 'This Jesus did God raise up, of which we are all witnesses; at the right hand then of God having been exalted -- also the promise of the Holy Spirit having received from the Father -- he was shedding forth this, which now ye see and hear;

 

[Brightfame52]

Yes, I think God's power to persuade is, at times, forceful enough to feel almost compulsive. Consider Paul's meeting with Christ on the road to Damascus. Christ could have just wrested Paul's mind and will to his service, without any interaction between them forcing Paul to do what he wanted Paul to do. But on this occasion, Christ worked to persuade Saul (later, Paul) to Himself, using very overt, external and frightening means to do so.

I've said to others that I was "forced" to a conclusion about something by the clarity, reasonableness and factual basis for that conclusion. I wasn't actually forced, however; I only felt that there was a kind of power exerted upon my mind by these things that constrained me to come to the conclusion that I did. A very simple example of what I mean is the mathematical statement 2+2=4. It's so obvious that this is so that one feels one has no choice but to accept that it is. But there's no wresting of my will or my mind that produces this feeling; I'm not forced to accept this mathematical statement of fact though every fiber of my being resists it.



Psalm 110:1-4 (NASB)
1 The LORD says to my Lord: "Sit at My right hand Until I make Your enemies a footstool for Your feet."
2 The LORD will stretch forth Your strong scepter from Zion, saying, "Rule in the midst of Your enemies."
3 Your people will volunteer freely in the day of Your power; In holy array, from the womb of the dawn, Your youth are to You as the dew.
4 The LORD has sworn and will not change His mind, "You are a priest forever According to the order of Melchizedek."

This is a Messianic passage, which is to say its main focus is Christ, not the Calvinist doctrine of Irresistible Grace. And its interesting, I think, how the NASB translates verse 3: "Your people will volunteer freely in the day of your power..." This is a very different - even opposite - construction of the verse than the one you're wanting to foist upon it, Brightfame52. Here's the ESV's rendition of the verse:

Psalm 110:3 (ESV)
3 Your people will offer themselves freely on the day of your power, in holy garments; from the womb of the morning, the dew of your youth will be yours.

And the NKJV:

Psalm 110:3 (NKJV)
3 Your people shall be volunteers in the day of Your power; In the beauties of holiness, from the womb of the morning,
You have the dew of Your youth.

That you've managed to make the verse say the opposite of what it actually says is another example, to me, of the dangerous contortions that Calvinists make to Scripture. Really, you've rewritten the verse, changing "the day of thy power," which is a noun phrase oriented around "day," to a noun phrase (the day of His) and a present-progressive verb (compelling). One describes a thing (the day of thy power), the other, an event (the day of thy compelling). But Psalm 110:3 doesn't actually describe the Lord doing anything, as your version of the verse does; the only ones acting in the verse are the Lord's people who "volunteer willingly."

Do you not see the contradictory nature of the phrase "makes them come willingly"? Volunteers are, by definition, not acting under any compulsion.

In any case, you didn't answer my point/question about the invitees being free to reject their invite while the uninvited strangers were "compelled" to take part in the feast.

Im speaking about regeneration, the new man, thats who is persuaded

 

[Brightfame52]

Well, I gave you a number of examples of men who were given high praise by God in the Bible who were not spiritually-regenerate. Here they are again: Job, Noah, Daniel, Enoch, David, Cornelius. None of these men were "born-again" in the post-Calvary sense and yet they are described as "good," "God-fearing," "righteous," etc.

No you are deceived, no natural man evens desires the True God Rom 3:11 If you read of men seeking the true God, its because they are new creatures, regenerated.

 

[JesusFan]

Well, you'll have to do more than assert that this is so. An assertion, by itself, does not establish itself; it's just an assertion.

There were many saved by God in the OT, but under that Old Covenant, theirs sins were remitted, but did not have within them the sealed indwelling Holy Spirit as we now all do under new Covenant

 

[Brightfame52]

Because of the depravity or spiritual death of man ! 4


It needs to be stated once again about the compelling and drawing written of in Jn 6:44 and Lk 14:23 , yes they denote force here to bring in God's People, and again this is not a physical brute force, but its a Spiritual Power and force, in fact its an Holy Force 2 Tim 1:9

9 Who hath saved us, and called us with an holy calling, not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began,

Its a Heavenly force Heb 3:1

Wherefore, holy brethren, partakers of the heavenly calling, consider the Apostle and High Priest of our profession, Christ Jesus;

See the bidding in Lk 14:17

17 And sent his servant at supper time to say to them that were bidden, Come; for all things are now ready.

The word bidden is the greek word kaleō and means:

I.
to call
A.
to call aloud, utter in a loud voice

B.
to invite


II.
to call i.e. to name, by name
A.
to give a name to
i.
to receive the name of, receive as a name

ii.
to give some name to one, call his name


B.
to be called i.e. to bear a name or title (among men)

C.
to salute one by name

And its the same word used for call in 2 Tim 1:9

9 Who hath saved us, and called us with an holy calling, not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began,

And its a Loving force Jer 31:3

3 The Lord hath appeared of old unto me, saying, Yea, I have loved thee with an everlasting love: therefore with lovingkindness have I drawn thee.

So the drawing of Jn 6:44 is nothing less than the Effectual Call, that brings the called to Christ, by the Power of the Holy Spirit ! 5

 

[Brightfame52]

There were many saved by God in the OT, but under that Old Covenant, theirs sins were remitted, but did not have within them the sealed indwelling Holy Spirit as we now all do under new Covenant

They were saved under the Old Covenant but it was by virtue of the Everlasting Covenant which is the New Covenant in time. They were regenerated also in the OT times because their Faith is evidence of that.

 

[JesusFan]

They were saved under the Old Covenant but it was by virtue of the Everlasting Covenant which is the New Covenant in time. They were regenerated also in the OT times because their Faith is evidence of that.

I think better for me to have posted were saved during the OT times by being under The New Covenant of Grace, as the Father back dated to them the effects of Calvary yet to have come

 

[Brightfame52]

I think better for me to have posted were saved during the OT times by being under The New Covenant of Grace, as the Father back dated to them the effects of Calvary yet to have come

Thats fine, but the everlasting covenant is the foundation, Jesus shed His Blood for the Everlasting Covenant Heb 13:20

20 Now the God of peace, that brought again from the dead our Lord Jesus, that great shepherd of the sheep, through the blood of the everlasting covenant,

Jesus shed His Blood for the New Covenant Matt 26:28

28 For this is my blood of the new testament/covenant, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.

Same Covenant, the New Covenant is the revealing more vividly of the Everlasting Covenant b4 Time

 

[Tenchi]

No you are deceived, no natural man evens desires the True God Rom 3:11 If you read of men seeking the true God, its because they are new creatures, regenerated.

As I've noted before, simply asserting something doesn't, by itself, establish the assertion. You can assert I'm deceived, but this assertion alone doesn't prove itself. In other words, your assertion is just an opinion, so long as it stands without well-supported and reasoned argument.

What I think you don't realize is that your degree of conviction about the doctrines of Calvinism is not in-and-of-itself a proof of their being true. When, then, from your certainty about Calvinist doctrine, you say, "No, you're deceived," I just shrug off your remark as unfounded opinion. You've given me no good reason to do otherwise.

There were many saved by God in the OT, but under that Old Covenant, theirs sins were remitted, but did not have within them the sealed indwelling Holy Spirit as we now all do under new Covenant

No one could be saved prior to Christ's Atonement on the cross of Calvary. Obviously, if a person could be saved prior to the cross, and thus by some means other than the cross, then the cross was unnecessary.

The OT sacrificial system was sufficient to atone for sins until such time as Christ's atonement was made "once for all." But that OT system of sacrifice was by no means completely satisfactory, being temporary, finite and made by imperfect men who, themselves, needed to make sacrifice for their own sin. See Hebrews 7-10. If what Christ would do on the cross could be "back dated," as you suggest, its effects applied before his sacrifice had occurred, why could God not have done this "back dating" across-the-board, making the OT system of sacrifice unnecessary? Why did the OT saints you think were the recipients of this "back dating" make sacrifices for themselves according to the Mosaic system? Being retroactively "covered" by Christ's death on the cross long before it happened, they had no need of such sacrifice, right?

Hopefully, these question help you to see why the Calvinist contortions necessary to account for these godly but non-regenerate men are not at all persuasive to me. Not being a Calvinist, I see no reason in Scripture to think that Job, Noah, Enoch, David, Daniel, Cornelius, etc, were "God-fearing," "righteous," and "good" in God's eyes because they were spiritually-regenerate, as is the believer under the New Covenant.

I think the OT saints were, until Christ died on the cross as "the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world" (Jn. 1:29), kept from God's wrathful judgment, by the OT system of sacrifice, their faith in Jehovah and their obedience to His commands. But until Jesus sacrificed himself, the OT saints could not be said to be "saved" or "born-again" in the post-Calvary sense.

 

[Tenchi]

Because of the depravity or spiritual death of man ! 4


It needs to be stated once again about the compelling and drawing written of in Jn 6:44 and Lk 14:23 , yes they denote force here to bring in God's People, and again this is not a physical brute force, but its a Spiritual Power and force, in fact its an Holy Force 2 Tim 1:9

This is a distinction without a difference, if the spiritual regeneration of a lost person remains ultimately coercive. If a man is made to rob a bank because, if he doesn't, his wife will be murdered, is he any less coerced to enact the robbery than if he had been physically forced at gunpoint to do so? No. Whether by some direct, physical means (do it or I'll shoot you), or by indirect extortion (we'll kill your wife), the man is forced to rob the bank.

9 Who hath saved us, and called us with an holy calling, not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began,

I don't see anything about coercive force in this verse. "Calling" doesn't communicate such a thing at all, in my view. But, then, I don't have Calvinist lenses on when I read the verse...

Its a Heavenly force Heb 3:1

Wherefore, holy brethren, partakers of the heavenly calling,

How does "calling" translate into coercion? Take off your Calvinist "glasses" when you read this verse and answer this question, if you can.

So the drawing of Jn 6:44 is nothing less than the Effectual Call, that brings the called to Christ, by the Power of the Holy Spirit ! 5

I don't see that you've properly established the premises that ground your conclusion here at all. Far from it.

 

[JesusFan]

As I've noted before, simply asserting something doesn't, by itself, establish the assertion. You can assert I'm deceived, but this assertion alone doesn't prove itself. In other words, your assertion is just an opinion, so long as it stands without well-supported and reasoned argument.

What I think you don't realize is that your degree of conviction about the doctrines of Calvinism is not in-and-of-itself a proof of their being true. When, then, from your certainty about Calvinist doctrine, you say, "No, you're deceived," I just shrug off your remark as unfounded opinion. You've given me no good reason to do otherwise.



No one could be saved prior to Christ's Atonement on the cross of Calvary. Obviously, if a person could be saved prior to the cross, and thus by some means other than the cross, then the cross was unnecessary.

The OT sacrificial system was sufficient to atone for sins until such time as Christ's atonement was made "once for all." But that OT system of sacrifice was by no means completely satisfactory, being temporary, finite and made by imperfect men who, themselves, needed to make sacrifice for their own sin. See Hebrews 7-10. If what Christ would do on the cross could be "back dated," as you suggest, its effects applied before his sacrifice had occurred, why could God not have done this "back dating" across-the-board, making the OT system of sacrifice unnecessary? Why did the OT saints you think were the recipients of this "back dating" making sacrifices for themselves according to the Mosaic system? Being retroactively "covered" by Christ's death on the cross long before it happened, they had no need of such sacrifice, right?

Hopefully, these question help you to see why the Calvinist contortions necessary to account for these godly but non-regenerate men are not at all persuasive to me. Not being a Calvinist, I see no reason in Scripture to think that Job, Noah, Enoch, David, Daniel, Cornelius, etc, were "God-fearing," "righteous," and "good" in God's eyes because they were spiritually-regenerate, as is the believer under the New Covenant.

I think the OT saints were, until Christ died on the cross as "the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world" (Jn. 1:29), kept from God's wrathful judgment, by the OT system of sacrifice, their faith in Jehovah and their obedience to His commands. But until Jesus sacrificed himself, the OT saints could not be said to be "saved" or "born-again" in the post-Calvary sense.

They were all saved by Same method and basis we were, by the Death and resurrection of the Lord Jesus, as the Suffering Servant Isaiah 53, as they trusted in what was to come, we do by trusting in what has come

 

[Tenchi]

They were all saved by Same method and basis we were, by the Death and resurrection of the Lord Jesus, as the Suffering Servant Isaiah 53, as they trusted in what was to come, we do by trusting in what has come

Ultimately, yes, they were saved by the Atonement, just as you and I are. But they were not so until the Atonement had taken place, for the reasons I've already pointed out to you.