The Offer of the Gospel

[quantumfaith]

QF,

Well sure it is...that is why we all sound similar- we mostly differ based more on spiritual growth and some being more familiar with the teachings.
To be honest I will contend for it however I prefer to discuss and learn more about the issues moving forward and learning more truth than can be used to be a more effective witness to those outside the Kingdom.

More seem to want to attack the truth we profess ....so it leads to some rather crisp exchanges than moving forward.

I think your word "attack" is a bit off, you are sounding like another of your compatriots.

 

[Iconoclast]

I think your word "attack" is a bit off, you are sounding like another of your compatriots.

You think as you like.I know the difference between debate and attack:thumbsup:

 

[Herald]

You think as you like.I know the difference between debate and attack:thumbsup:

There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that threads are started on the C&A topic with the intent to bait and then launch into an attack. It happens when the author fails to state or defend their own position. All doubt is removed when that is their repeated M.O. I will leave it to the reader to decide who on either side of the debate is guilty of that.

 

[Winman]

The power of God in the Gospel Does indeed accomplished its task, as that is the agent that God ordain was the method to have His elected ones to get saved, by hearing the good news, and by the Spriit Himself quickening them to respond and receive jesus to get saved!

its not lacking anything, but not intended by God to save all who hear it!

The part of Yeshua1's answer I have bolded is error. A person is not quickened to have the ability to respond and receive Jesus and be saved.

That is saying you have to be saved to be able to be saved!

To be quickened IS to be saved, quickening is when all of one's sins and transgressions are forgiven.

Col 2:13 And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses;

Colossians 2:13 defines exactly what "quickened" means, it means to be forgiven all your trespasses. However, no man is forgiven all his trespasses until he first believes on Jesus.

So, this verse proves men have the ability to believe the gospel, and when they do, they will be quickened, having all their sins and trespasses forgiven.

In our own day certain preachers assure us that a man must he regenerated before we may bid him believe in Jesus Christ; some degree of a work of grace in the heart being, in their judgment, the only warrant to believe. This also is false. It takes away a gospel for sinners and offers us a gospel for saints. It is anything but a ministry of free grace.

If I am to preach faith in Christ to a man who is regenerated, then the man, being regenerated, is saved already, and it is an unnecessary and ridiculous thing for me to preach Christ to him, and bid him to believe in order to be saved when he is saved already, being regenerate.

http://www.spurgeon.org/sermons/0531.htm

Spurgeon recognized that it is ridiculous to bid a man who is already quickened and regenerated to believe on Jesus to be saved, when he is already saved.

What Spurgeon just called ridiculous is exactly what Yeshua1 and most other Calvinists believe. They believe you have to be saved to have the ability to believe and be saved! Absurd.

 

[Skandelon]

:thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup: Even though it may be that you and I are a little different on the concept and doctrine of election.

http://evangelicalarminians.org/jack-cottrell-election-calvinism-and-the-bible/

Great article. I found no 'differences' with this scholar on his and my 'doctrine of election.' Maybe I wrote something that appeared to contradict this, but I don't think so?

 

[Skandelon]

There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that threads are started on the C&A topic with the intent to bait and then launch into an attack.

At the top of this page you will see that this is a DEBATE forum. Its very purpose is to DEBATE by forming arguments supporting your view of soteriology and denouncing the opposing views. This can be done without making speculations about the character of other posters by implying impure motivations, etc. (ad hominem). When a particular poster takes it upon himself to become the 'motive police' and his target is always those on the 'other side of the isle' the bias becomes obvious.

Instead, we should choose to engage the discussions that we feel comfortable engaging and refrain from those we don't. We should not speculate as to others character and motive, because we cannot read their minds...especially in a format where we can only read their words and we have the bias of our perspective influencing our judgement.

It happens when the author fails to state or defend their own position.

Again, the nature of a debate forum with various threads lends itself to 'bite size' discussions, not full manifestos of one's entire systematic approach. If one desires to see or know more about an author's own view, he simply must inquire in a mutually respectable manner. I cannot think of a single time I (or others of my perspective) have been unwilling to provide such when asked.

 

[preacher4truth]

There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that threads are started on the C&A topic with the intent to bait and then launch into an attack. It happens when the author fails to state or defend their own position. All doubt is removed when that is their repeated M.O. I will leave it to the reader to decide who on either side of the debate is guilty of that.

I agree and know many others who feel the same way, conditioned by experience, which is why they stay out. Well, there are more reasons, but another is that the OP's are generally based upon a faulty premise or are straw man arguments.

As to the 'op' the offer is given, only the elect will be saved, and 2 Tim. 2:8-10

 

[Skandelon]

Willis,
For example, how many times have you heard a Calvinist quote Rom. 9 about the vessels made for noble purpose or common use as proof text for the exact same thing as you are doing with sheep and goats above?

You all quote these verses as if mankind has nothing to do with being a vessel used for good or not. Just like you quote your sheep and goat proof texts with the assumption that men have no decision in the matter. But the bible is very clear that we do have a part to play in this, and that the Calvinistic application of these analogies is simply untrue.

For instance, read 2 Tim 2:20, where Paul refers to his same vessel analogy: "In a large house there are articles not only of gold and silver, but also of wood and clay; some are for noble purposes and some for ignoble. 21 If a man cleanses himself from the latter, he will be an instrument for noble purposes, made holy, useful to the Master and prepared to do any good work."

Allow me to restate the point that IMO is the most important one of this thread...

Calvinists take analogies, such as noble vs. ignoble vessels (i.e. Rm 9), and applies them to their dogma that mankind has NOTHING to do with which vessel they will become.

The passage above CLEARLY denounces that interpretation by showing that a man has the RESPONSE-ABILITY to cleanse himself (repent) so as to BECOME the noble vessel. The idea that some are born noble while the others are born ignoble, and there is no hope of that changing, is shot out of the water with this one verse alone.

 

[Skandelon]

the OP's are generally based upon a faulty premise or are straw man arguments.

Ok, now we are getting somewhere. We have an accusation of a faulty premise and a straw man argument.

A faulty premise is a false or unfounded foundation conclusion. Maybe you can quote that 'faulty premise' for us and make your case?

A 'straw man argument' is a debate fallacy where one makes unfair or untrue presumptions about their opponents position so as to tear it down. Maybe you can quote that 'straw man argument' for us and make your case?

Then we would actually be debating instead of making unfounded blanket accusations that never actually engage the content of the thread. I look forward to hearing your case.

 

[preacher4truth]

At the top of this page you will see that this is a DEBATE forum. Its very purpose is to DEBATE

No need to be condescending toward a brother.

I cannot think of a single time I (or others of my perspective) have been unwilling to provide such when asked.

You've been called on that many times for not practicing what you preach. We suppose ('others of my perspective') that we must simply all be wrong.

 

[Skandelon]

No need to be condescending toward a brother.

Again, you are reading a motive into my words. I was simply pointing out the purpose of this forum so as to help people understand the difference between a perceived 'attack' and an honest debate of the issues (as those can be confused in the written forum). I think if you read back through my posts you will see that I have discussed the topic not the person. When you read a 'tone' into the words of your opponent things can come across differently than intended. I apologize if this sounded condescending, that wasn't my intent.

Now, can we discuss the topic at hand? Thanks

 

[quantumfaith]

Allow me to restate the point that IMO is the most important one of this thread...

Calvinists take analogies, such as noble vs. ignoble vessels (i.e. Rm 9), and applies them to their dogma that mankind has NOTHING to do with which vessel they will become.

The passage above CLEARLY denounces that interpretation by showing that a man has the RESPONSE-ABILITY to cleanse himself (repent) so as to BECOME the noble vessel. The idea that some are born noble while the others are born ignoble, and there is no hope of that changing, is shot out of the water with this one verse alone.

:thumbs::thumbs::thumbs:

 

[preacher4truth]

Again, you are reading a motive into my words.

Now, can we discuss the topic at hand? Thanks

People have discernment, and simply because you want to act as if using it is wrong, doesn't make it wrong, and people are going to continue to use their good common sense and address the apparent. Several have called you on this, and many from your tribe do the same toward our camp, unremittingly at times, and it is hardly ever an issue when it comes from that side nor is it rebutted or addressed. So let's leave it alone unless it's going to get the same attention without any bias.

And this; perhaps listen to your peers for a change, and, uh, change? :wavey:

I've addressed the topic when it came up, and I've addressed the personal remarks when they've come up, which is exactly the pattern you've practiced.

What's good for the goose is good for the gander.

As to your OP, I've already answered it sufficiently. If that sounds condescending, well, maybe it does, that's up to you. :thumbs:

 

[Skandelon]

P4T, sorry you feel that way and forgive me if I have offended you.

Now, can we debate the topic of the thread...specifically the last point that was made?

 

[quantumfaith]

P4T, sorry you feel that way and forgive me if I have offended you.

Now, can we debate the topic of the thread...specifically the last point that was made?

I appreciate your "over kindness" to unwarranted criticisms of particular individuals. I only wished I could keep my "cool" as well as you do. Blessings. Oh...and don't change!!! You represent yourself, and many of us who disagree with "reformational theology" in one degree or another very well and quite articulately.

 

[Winman]

Here is what Spurgeon believed about the gospel;

The text says that Jesus Christ will draw all men unto himself. Now, all men who hear of Jesus Christ at all are drawn, but they do not all yield. Some of them pull back, and the most awful thing that ever happens to a man is when he pulls back till Jesus lets him go. What a fall is that, when the drawing power is taken away, and the man falls backward into a destruction which he himself has chosen, having refused eternal life, and resisted the Saviour's power! Unhappy is the wretch who strives against his own salvation. Every man that hears the gospel feels some measure of its drawing power. ... Does not Jesus sometimes tug hard at your conscience-strings, and, though you have pulled back, yet has he not drawn and drawn again? ... Do not pull back, lest his drawing should cease, and you should perish.

http://www.spurgeongems.org/vols28-30/chs1717.pdf

 

[InTheLight]

Oh...and don't change!!! You represent yourself, and many of us who disagree with "reformational theology" in one degree or another very well and quite articulately.

I second (and third) this sentiment. Skandelon does a great job.

BTW, no one has rebutted his take on 2 Tim 2:20-21. Nor has anyone taken on Winman's view on quickening.

I suppose one should place "Would you please address the OP" or "Would you please address the topic" on one's clipboard so it's handy to reply to Calvinists.

 

[Herald]

I agree and know many others who feel the same way, conditioned by experience, which is why they stay out.

Agreed. Although they do a good job of coming to each other's defense. I honestly do admire that.

 

[InTheLight]

Agreed. Although they do a good job of coming to each other's defense. I honestly do admire that.

"Would you please address the topic?"


(see what I mean)

 

[Herald]

"Would you please address the topic?"


(see what I mean)

Do a search of my posts and you will see that I have absolutely no aversion to addressing topics. As I go through this particular thread I see the OP answered. Maybe not to the author's or your satisfaction, but it is answered. That you cannot realize that is a problem you need to deal with.