The Reformers - The Doctrine of Drawing - And Serious Error?

[DaveXR650]

Except the scriptures do not say the Spirit draws men. You assume he does.

If you have read the scriptures very much you will see that the Godhead is one but each of the three members have different roles in redemption.

It is the word that does the work in the heart through the conscience. No mention of the Spirit in this context.

Forget the fact that this is showing some major problems with understanding the Trinity, look at what you are saying. How can "the word" do anything but be words. To have an actual effect on the heart there must either be a heart that is totally capable of getting it together by itself - or, God must be effecting some type of work. If everything needed was already there other than the provided information then that is the Pelagian view. Or the Spirit does something. Which is it?

This is not a personal blinding, but a national blinding. Those ruling men could have individually repented and been saved but they were no longer speaking for the nation.

Sorry. But a nation is made of individuals. Those blinded had to be individuals. You would be alright saying some individuals were still being saved - but you cannot get away from the fact that those blinded were individuals too.

Let me just say Dave that just because we don't accept the Reformation believers doctrine of drawing does not mean that we do not think the Spirit of God is not involved in our salvation. He is a person and he IS salvation when he enters into our mortal bodies by faith. He comes and saves us when we believe from the heart the gospel of Jesus Christ which is delivered to us in words.

I'm perfectly ok with that understanding. It just seems to me you are saying that for some reason the Holy Spirit has to stand back and watch, and then if we on our own, decide to believe, then and only then will the Holy Spirit jump in a from then on use supernatural power to save us and keep us saved. Why, with all the verses indicating something goes on in people before they believe do you insist that? I understand the concern that some have that because of too much emphasis on God determining everything you end up falsely making God the author of sin. I applaud such a motive. But the other reason seems to me to be an inordinately high view of the state of our human free will, which without God's grace acting upon it, to me it seems, is not likely capable of what you think it can do based on a broad reading of all scripture.

 

[DaveXR650]

Then, in a moment, I saw that God was at the bottom of it all, and that He was the Author of my faith,”

Hi Martin. Good to see you posting. Yes. Spurgeon knew that once you are a Christian, the more you look into it the more you realize what part God played verses what you did. Most of the conflict is meaningless but I just think John 6:44 means what it says - and applies to us too. I think God is at work on a person long before they decide to believe. Whether some Calvinists explain this in too much of a deterministic fashion is another question but I do think the drawing and the work of the Spirit is prior and it is decisive to our salvation.

 

[JD731]

Forget the fact that this is showing some major problems with understanding the Trinity, look at what you are saying. How can "the word" do
POINT #1 anything but be words. To have an actual effect on the heart there must either be a heart that is totally capable of getting it together by itself - or, God must be effecting some type of work. If everything needed was already there other than the provided information then that is the Pelagian view. Or the Spirit does something. Which is it?

Point # 2 Sorry. But a nation is made of individuals. Those blinded had to be individuals. You would be alright saying some individuals were still being saved - but you cannot get away from the fact that those blinded were individuals too.

Point #3 I'm perfectly ok with that understanding. It just seems to me you are saying that for some reason the Holy Spirit has to stand back and watch, and then if we on our own, decide to believe, then and only then will the Holy Spirit jump in a from then on use supernatural power to save us and keep us saved. Why, with all the verses indicating something goes on in people before they believe do you insist that? I understand the concern that some have that because of too much emphasis on God determining everything you end up falsely making God the author of sin. I applaud such a motive. But the other reason seems to me to be an inordinately high view of the state of our human free will, which without God's grace acting upon it, to me it seems, is not likely capable of what you think it can do based on a broad reading of all scripture.

Point #1- Guilt is the work done in the heart. Sinners have a conscience and emotions. Sinners have intellect. They have a will. They know when they do wrong because of their consciousness of good and evil. Sinners would feel the guilt but without the gospel they would not know that God will hold them accountable or that he has provided a sacrifice for the penalty of their sins. Sinners who have never heard of the true God can and do suffer shame. When a man is saved from his sins he has the promise that God will keep him in perfect peace whose mind is stayed on thee because he trusteth in thee. This is another problem with the Reformed. They pervert the doctrine of man.

Point # 2 - You are missing understanding the ways of God. Israel is always the son of God collectively. When God completes his purpose on the earth every single Israelite with a blood line back to Abraham through Jacob and Isaac will be saved. The promised kingdom of God will not be established on the earth until that is accomplished. It is obvious that you have missed the memo that tells us that truth. Until Jesus Christ this nation was governed by the law of God that was perfect and was the instrument of God to establish the guilt of this son so he could be saved. There are several ways in scripture to prove this and I have used Ex 4 a number of times and never get a response. That passage says this:

Ex 4:22 And thou shalt say unto Pharaoh, Thus saith the LORD, Israel is my son, even my firstborn:
23 And I say unto thee, Let my son go, that he may serve me: and if thou refuse to let him go, behold, I will slay thy son, even thy firstborn. This son was born in Egypt physically. a type of the world, but he will be born again collectively by the Spirit. They had this opportunity in Acts 2 & 3 but failed because of unbelief.

Ac 2:38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.
I have underlined the key in this statement.
Ac 3:23 And it shall come to pass, that every soul, which will not hear that prophet, shall be destroyed from among the people.

Consider this statement;
Joh 3:5 Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.

Point #3 If you and I would write out what it means to be saved I am sure that we would not be saying the same things. We all use the same terminology but the meaning of our terms are never defined the same way. I doubt seriously that you would agree with me that salvation is defined by the renewal of the divine image by receiving the Spirit of God into our bodies by faith, which requires an act of the will. I really cannot guess how you would define salvation. Body and soul is a two part man, which for the first 4 thousand years of human history described the human condition of all men separated from God by inherent sin, which is an act of the will.. Jesus Christ came and was born a trinitarian man, the only man ever born in this fashion, and poured out his soul and Spirit for the sake of redeeming man by enduring the sin of all men on the cross as a once forever sacrifice, being buried, and then raised bodily from the dead by the Spirit, never to die again. The omnipresent Spirit of Jesus Christ and God the Father, the judge of all the earth, then graciously poured out the Spirit on all the earth as the gift of God and declared all the earth reconciled to himself, the sin problem being effectively dealt with and put away. Because of the action of Jesus Christ and the proclamation of God the Father that he accepted his sacrifice, no man is under the judgement of God while they live. The sin problem has been fixed by God and gives him the justification for acting graciously to all men on the earth if he wants to. And he does want to.

Heb 9:27 And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment:

Reconciliation is a two way deal and sinful men are called upon to be reconciled to God while they live. God will turn no one away who comes to him through Jesus Christ and he will give them his Spirit, who is life and who is eternal and who is promised to never leave or forsake them. With the Spirit of God in our mortal bodies we need not fear death and the judgement. Nothing can separate us from the love of God which is in Christ Jesus the Lord.

Having said all that, it is not the Spirit who regenerates men before they believe so they can be saved. The idea is no where near the truth. They do not have to be "given" faith to believe. I have given you exact promises from God that faith comes first before the Spirit in verses I quoted from Ga 3. In order to have faith in Christ and that God saves all who believe in him, it is clear that the knowledge of him and his reason for coming on the earth must be acquired from some source. One cannot believe in something he knows nothing about. So God has chosen preaching from one who has experienced this salvation to make it known to those who do not know about it. There will of course be different reactions to this news but those who willingly receive it as the truth of God and believe are the ones whom God gives his Spirit, making him a born again son of God with the renewed trinitarian image of Jesus Christ, the God man, who is the express image of God..

There are several things that must be present when a sinner gets saved, not the least of which is his willing repentance and faith in the gospel that alone can save.

Any other way of salvation and any limitations of God that is attached by religion or others is not the true gospel and should be abandoned.

1Co 1:21 For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe.

12 For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him.
13 For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.
14 How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher?

Consider these things Dave and let's be careful to not add or take away from the gospel of Christ.

 

[DaveXR650]

Regarding point 1 my belief is similar to yours but I think the main problem is actually with our will and our heart and it goes beyond the need to hear the true gospel message and then rely on our natural conscience to motivate us. And I think that is amply described in scripture. I would agree with what Martin quoted from Spurgeon that your perception is that you are indeed making the choice with your will. Nothing wrong with that but there is more going on if you think about it. As scripture says our conscience can accuse or excuse and everyone does what is right in their own eyes.

. When God completes his purpose on the earth every single Israelite with a blood line back to Abraham through Jacob and Isaac will be saved.

I just disagree with you here. I don't think that there is any difference in the way Jews are saved compared to gentiles since Christ has come. Any Jew that gets saved from Christ on will get saved the same way as gentiles do. There is now no difference.

If you and I would write out what it means to be saved I am sure that we would not be saying the same things. We all use the same terminology but the meaning of our terms are never defined the same way.

Honestly JD, this is what really bothers me. And some of the Calvinists on here dish it out just as well so I'm not singling you out. I would hope we would all believe that you are saved by grace through faith, that our justification is imputed, and that our faith will be the type of faith that will result in works of righteousness that are motivated by a truly changed nature because we have been born again. All Spurgeon was saying was that the more you look back at our faith and how we came to have it, the more we tend to realize all that God did both in arranging circumstances to changing our hearts.

 

[DaveXR650]

Having said all that, it is not the Spirit who regenerates men before they believe so they can be saved.

I agree with this. I think the Holy Spirit's work prior to faith, though essential, is not regeneration.

They do not have to be "given" faith to believe.

That's debatable because "given faith" can mean a lot of things from direct instilling to "working" faith in a person by a lot of different means under the direction of God's providence.

God will turn no one away who comes to him through Jesus Christ and he will give them his Spirit, who is life and who is eternal and who is promised to never leave or forsake them.

This is very near the exact words from a sermon by John Owen, the high Calvinist. Do you know of any Calvinist who said that this is not the case? I'm serious. This is almost word for word from a sermon by John Owen.

There are several things that must be present when a sinner gets saved, not the least of which is his willing repentance and faith in the gospel that alone can save.

Yes. Good people have differing opinions of how this happens though.

I've about said all I know to contribute here. Maybe someone else can bring in some additional information. Thanks JD for all the thoughtful replies though.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

Saving faith does not come by reading. Someone should have told C.H. Spurgeon. There are several people in the hall of faith, Hebrews, chapter 11, who lived before a single word of God was written. Twenty five hundred years passed before Moses wrote Genesis. Maybe Job was written earlier but if it were it was not by much.

Faith cometh by hearing and hearing by the word of God. This must mean that there were words of God to hear before they were written.

It doesn't seem to me that your post either proves or disproves what Spurgeon wrote.

 

[JD731]

Regarding point 1 my belief is similar to yours but I think the main problem is actually with our will and our heart and it goes beyond the need to hear the true gospel message and then rely on our natural conscience to motivate us. And I think that is amply described in scripture. I would agree with what Martin quoted from Spurgeon that your perception is that you are indeed making the choice with your will. Nothing wrong with that but there is more going on if you think about it. As scripture says our conscience can accuse or excuse and everyone does what is right in their own eyes.

Point #1
I just disagree with you here. I don't think that there is any difference in the way Jews are saved compared to gentiles since Christ has come. Any Jew that gets saved from Christ on will get saved the same way as gentiles do. There is now no difference.

Point # 2
Honestly JD, this is what really bothers me. And some of the Calvinists on here dish it out just as well so I'm not singling you out. I would hope we would all believe that you are saved by grace through faith, that our justification is imputed, and that our faith will be the type of faith that will result in works of righteousness that are motivated by a truly changed nature because we have been born again. All Spurgeon was saying was that the more you look back at our faith and how we came to have it, the more we tend to realize all that God did both in arranging circumstances to changing our hearts.

Point #1
Salvation is a NT doctrine and you are right, Dave, there is no difference in how salvation is defined between races and ethnicities.

Peter speaking here in the context of gentiles being saved. Context is very important here.
Ac 15:11 But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we (Jews) shall be saved, even as they (Gentiles).

> If all sins are washed away by the blood of Christ and the Spirit can then indwell the body of the believer, cleansing him of the sin that separated him in first place, then OT believers had to wait for that occurrence. However, the Judge knowing that payment will be made for their sins, imputing their faith in his word for righteousness and justified them, counting them as though they had never sinned. After the cross, we are told that Jesus is our righteousness in actual time because he indwells our body and is present with us from the moment we believe.

Ex 34:6 And the LORD passed by before him, and proclaimed, The LORD, The LORD God, merciful and gracious, longsuffering, and abundant in goodness and truth,
7 Keeping mercy for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, and that will by no means clear the guilty;.....

Ro 4:25 Who was delivered for our offences, and was raised again for our justification.
Ro 5:16 And not as it was by one that sinned, so is the gift: for the judgment was by one to condemnation, but the free gift is of many offences unto justification.
Ro 5:18 Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life.

Dave, meaning no disrespect but I am not sure that you will understand my point with these verses seeing as how you have been so influenced with Reformed teaching and doctrines. You need to ponder the wisdom of God in this.

Point #2
Grace is an attribute of God as well as a character trait. If you are a gracious and giving person then you are like God in that respect. Grace is giving and in the context of God it is giving to the undeserving. That is the reason that the grace of God is so attached to him in the NT scriptures after he had given his only begotten son for the benefit of the whole world, beginning with his own family, the Jews. He gave something to be a part of men so they can be a part of God. That is the Spirit of God, the person of God, who indwelt the physical Jesus during the entire time of his time on the earth, and still does in his resurrection body. It was the Spirit who raised his body from the dead and gave it life. This is the reason Jesus had to go to the cross. The Spirit cannot indwell the body unless the inherent sin is removed. The very definition of death, separation, took place at the first sin that came into the world. It was sin that separated the man from God and death was the result of his sin. He suffered spiritual death, separation from the life of God, the Spirit, immediately and physical death, the separation of the life force, his own soul from his own body, some 930 years later. Because God created a man to have personhood through the soul, the definition of his personality, and his body, the tabernacle of the soul and Spirit, it is impossible for reconciliation to take place between the soul and body of a man who has sinned and God as long as sin dwells in the body.

Now, all the offspring of Adam were not guilty of the sin that Adam committed but his offspring was born of him in his image. That is his generation was like himself in that they were born a soul and body but obviously absent the Spirit of God. The only man ever born in the earth after Adam who had the Spirit of God as well as a soul and body was Jesus Christ. Unlike every other man who has ever lived, born of Adam, Jesus Christ had a mother born in the family of Adam but he had a different father, Jehovah, and was in the image of his Father and not in the image of Adam. The Spirit of God that he received from his Father at birth gave him power over the flesh, the world, and the devil and sin. He was tested in the same exact way that Adam was tempted while he was in the image of God, yet Jesus Christ did not sin. You can read about this temptation in both Matt 4 and Luke 4.

The Spirit of God is two things in man, one, he is the life of God, and two, he is eternal, and when a man has the Spirit dwelling in his body, he has eternal life and because the willing and substitionary death for all men was accomplished by Jesus Christ and the Spirit of God was separated from his body on that cross and his body went to the tomb and laid there lifeless until the third day, and his soul and his body were separated afterward and his soul, which is his personality, went to paradise in the heart of the earth until his physical resurrection when his whole person was reunited and taken to the Father's house in heaven.

There is now no way for sin to condemn a person who has eternal life dwelling in him because God did not deal with the sin of the individual only when he died on the cross, but he died for the sin of the whole world. God said he punished Jesus Christ, his own son for the sins of the whole world. He said he made Jesus Christ to be sin for us who knew no sin so we might be made the righteousness of God in him. The body of every man still comes from Adam and is weak, even with the Spirit in it. It is a body from the earth, a body with a curse on it. (the soul that sinneth it shall die) that is the separation of the soul and body will occur even for the redeemed. It was certainly true of Jesus Christ. The Spirit of God had to leave it before it could die but that is what spiritual death is, the separation of the life of God, his Spirit, from the body. Therefore Jesus Christ died both spiritually and physically on that awful cross. He died there for me and he died there for you, whoever you are.

God testifies that Jesus Christ "put away sin by the sacrifice of himself." God is not looking down from heaven on a world full of sinners who have the condemnation of eternal death on them but he is looking down on a world full of sinners who have been reconciled to himself by the death payment of his own innocent son in their stead and his arms are wide open to any and all who will come and claim his pardon from their guilt. We have until the day of our death to do so .All that do so will be given the gift of his Spirit to indwell their bodies, the Spirit, who is the life of God and is eternal. It is true that God has been reconciled to sinners by the death of Jesus Christ and now it is the duty of sinners to be reconciled to God through the death and in the name of Jesus Christ.

1Ti 2:5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;

Dave, we must get this one thing right. The work of God for the 6000 years since Adam's sin has been to renew men and restore the relationship between God and man that sin took away. That relationship is Father and son. That will be accomplished soon and his house (family) will be filled and he will enjoy a sabbath of rest for a whole day on this earth.

Joh 5:17 But Jesus answered them, My Father worketh hitherto, and I work.

Tit 3:4 But after that the kindness and love of God our Saviour toward man appeared,
5 Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost;
6 Which he shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour;
7 That being justified by his grace, we should be made heirs according to the hope of eternal life.

Re 1:5 And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood,

Joh 3:7 Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again.

 

[DaveXR650]

Dave, meaning no disrespect but I am not sure that you will understand my point with these verses seeing as how you have been so influenced with Reformed teaching and doctrines. You need to ponder the wisdom of God in this.

Since you have not offered even a suggestion that reformed theology teaches something contrary to what you are saying above in post 67, I don't know how to refute you. So yes, saying that I need to ponder what you have not stated is somewhat disrespectful but you are entitled to give your opinion.

God is not looking down from heaven on a world full of sinners who have the condemnation of eternal death on them but he is looking down on a world full of sinners who have been reconciled to himself by the death payment of his own innocent son in their stead and his arms are wide open to any and all who will come and claim his pardon from their guilt.

That's a completely confusing statement with elements of universalism and even hyper-Calvinism in it. It's not a big deal, unless you are going to assume the right to instruct others. You are lost until you get saved. You are not automatically saved and only lost if you refuse to accept the pardon. Hyper-Calvinists say you are saved already and the discovery of this is all that follows. Universalists do the same thing except for everyone, not just the elect. Calvinists, Armenians, Wesleyans, and Catholics all believe that everyone is lost until they are born again and believe (and yes they may not agree on the process or order of that). There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus. And no one else.

Dave, we must get this one thing right. The work of God for the 6000 years since Adam's sin has been to renew men and restore the relationship between God and man that sin took away.

Yes. That is why I responded to this thread which starts on a wrong premise. The work of God has been that and one of the means is to draw men to himself. These mini-sermons you have gone into are fine, but don't do anything to support the case you tried to make in the OP.

 

[JD731]

Since you have not offered even a suggestion that reformed theology teaches something contrary to what you are saying above in post 67, I don't know how to refute you. So yes, saying that I need to ponder what you have not stated is somewhat disrespectful but you are entitled to give your opinion.

That's a completely confusing statement with elements of universalism and even hyper-Calvinism in it. It's not a big deal, unless you are going to assume the right to instruct others. You are lost until you get saved. You are not automatically saved and only lost if you refuse to accept the pardon. Hyper-Calvinists say you are saved already and the discovery of this is all that follows. Universalists do the same thing except for everyone, not just the elect. Calvinists, Armenians, Wesleyans, and Catholics all believe that everyone is lost until they are born again and believe (and yes they may not agree on the process or order of that). There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus. And no one else.

Yes. That is why I responded to this thread which starts on a wrong premise. The work of God has been that and one of the means is to draw men to himself. These mini-sermons you have gone into are fine, but don't do anything to support the case you tried to make in the OP.

Dave, our conversation is winding down and I am glad we were able to discuss these issues. I come away with the opinion that you are not a hyper Calvinist like many, or most Calvinists who post here. But I have been careful to not use the word Calvinist but rather "the Reformed" because some Reformed do not like to be called Calvinist even though they all seem to be five point TULIP identifiers. Maybe there are some lesser issues on which there is disagreement but not on those which would challenge the flower.

Concerning your charge that I have not read the Calvinist high profile writers, my answer is I don't have to. For years I have read those whom they have taught on these forums. This is the fruit of that teaching. They believe what you believe and have demonstrated here though they may be louder and more boisterous and willing to go much farther with it than you. The Reformed do not need to have the Bible say what they teach. I have pointed out that the word in John 6 which is one of the main teachings of the Reformed, is that God draws all men in some fashion that you have not made clear and have rejected my argument from the context that he was not speaking to anyone but to those of his own people and family, the Jews. There is nothing in the passage, or in any passage in the Bible that suggests that God draws you and me as gentiles in the same way he was drawing those Jews in Capernaum during the days of the earthly ministry of Jesus Christ. I challenged you to find the word being used in that context in any other place in the NT scriptures. You could not because it is not there.

I chose for my op the doctrine of the draw in John 6 to make my point because it was so easy to demonstrate that the Reformed are presenting a false doctrine on which they have built their theological system. I could have chosen a number of other false doctrines such as limited atonement, faith as the gift of God, the sovereignty of God in all the affairs of men, that men are dead intellectually, meaning they cannot believe unless they are regenerated first, any one of the five petals of the TULIP, covenant theology, sovereign grace, irresistible grace, and the list goes on and on. I do not believe there are any true doctrines taught by the Reformed. That is not to say that I believed there are no saved Reformed because I do believe there are some that are saved in spite of all the false doctrines they teach. Most Reformed that I have read giving their testimony is that they were saved in other kinds of churches and then converted to the Reformation doctrines. They seem to not have many converts of their own. The appeal is through pride of being special and above the ordinary joe.

You have been honest with me in this conversation. (I have never before been accused of teaching Calvinism) and I have been honest with what I think of your positions. Thank you again for taking the time. It has been helpful to me.

 

[DaveXR650]

. (I have never before been accused of teaching Calvinism)

Even John R. Rice described himself as a "moderate Calvinist". In truth, the idea that you are totally in charge and come to Christ by your own free choice but then as soon as you do you are kept by the Holy Spirit no matter how you live and even if you decide to leave the faith - that is actually a hyper-Calvinist, antinomian teaching and is inconsistent with free will and Calvinism. Free willers need to decide whether they believe in free, autonomous will or not.
The fact is the Spirit is a decisive factor in the drawing of anyone who comes to Christ. Again here's Rice, "In fact the unpardonable sin is surely the sin of a lost man or woman, greatly enlightened or convicted, who comes to a final and irrevocable choice so that God's Spirit gives them up". If this happens because God's Spirit gives them up it is because the enlightening or conviction is the work of the Spirit like Rice said. It can be called a "drawing" and it is not the result of youe own, innate conscience that we all have. It is a work of the Spirit, a "drawing" and if withdrawn, you are lost with no chance of coming to Christ. I was in the fundamentalist movement, at the height of it's influence and they taught that. So I don't agree with the premise of this thread. I know when I was in the movement, we would separate over whether someone used a New Scofield or the old one or whether you believed in a mid or post trib rapture. And I understand the constantly morphing prophesy interpretation. I am suggesting you look into this one more carefully though.

 

[JD731]

In truth, the idea that you are totally in charge and come to Christ by your own free choice but then as soon as you do you are kept by the Holy Spirit no matter how you live and even if you decide to leave the faith
.

Mt 25:41 Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels:

What a strange statement Dave, If it was not the will of God to save all of us. It is the word of God that comes to us first and Calvinistic teaching that equates that men are just dead lumps on the earth whom God is unconcerned about (except a few that he has decided to show special favor to, which of course includes you) is antichrist doctrine and should be abandoned.

Intellect, reason, and will and a consciousness of good and evil and right and wrong along with the law of God which is the moral equation of it all is what prepares any man to receive God's free salvation.Here is the application of my reasoning, and it does not include the Spirit of God until after the word of God, his law, has done it's work. This is concerning the tenth commandment, Thou shalt not covet.

I am not going to deal with a sound bite on this. See what it is that brings this man Paul to Christ and if you read it with understanding you will admit it was not the Spirit but it was something from God.

Rom 7:1 Know ye not, brethren, (for I speak to them that know the law,) how that the law hath dominion over a man as long as he liveth?
2 For the woman which hath an husband is bound by the law to her husband so long as he liveth; but if the husband be dead, she is loosed from the law of her husband.
3 So then if, while her husband liveth, she be married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress: but if her husband be dead, she is free from that law; so that she is no adulteress, though she be married to another man.
4 Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ; that ye should be married to another, [even] to him who is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto God.
5 For when we were in the flesh, the motions of sins, which were by the law, did work in our members to bring forth fruit unto death.
6 But now (since they were saved by having Christ in them by the Spirit) we are delivered from the law, that being dead (separated from God) wherein we were held; that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter.

I hope you can follow the logic that a perfect law is trying to be kept by imperfect men.

7 ¶ What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet.
8 But sin, taking occasion by the commandment, wrought in me all manner of concupiscence. For without the law sin was dead. (separated from Paul)
9 For I was alive without the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived (revived means came alive), and I died.
10 And the commandment, which was ordained to life, I found to be unto death. (it was death to Paul but life to Jesus because he kept it perfectly and he is alive today)
11 For sin, taking occasion by the commandment, deceived me, and by it slew me.
12 Wherefore the law is holy, and the (10th) commandment holy, and just, and good.
13 Was then that which is good made death unto me? God forbid. But sin, that it might appear sin, working death in me by that which is good; that sin by the commandment might become exceeding sinful.

That is the purpose of the law according to Ga 3. It will convince us how sinful we are even if we are concerned about keeping the law of God.

14 ¶ For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin.
15 For that which I do I allow not: for what I would, that do I not; but what I hate, that do I.
16 If then I do that which I would not, I consent unto the law that it is good.
17 Now then it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.
18 For I know that in me that is, in my flesh, dwelleth no good thing: for to will is present with me; but how to perform that which is good I find not.
19 For the good that I would I do not: but the evil which I would not, that I do.
20 Now if I do that I would not, it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.
21 I find then a law, that, when I would do good, evil is present with me.
22 For I delight in the law of God after the inward man:
23 But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members.
24 O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death?
25 I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin.

Can't you see that Paul is not claiming he does not have a will but he does have a will in V 18. The will is in the mind and his desire to keep it sprang from his intellectual reasoning. He has a desire to keep the law but what hinders him is sin in his members, his body. Sin is a sovereign over all men through the weakness of the flesh.
Look at these things;

7:24 who shall deliver me from the body of this death?
8:10 ¶ And if Christ be in you, the body is dead because of sin; but the Spirit is life because of righteousness.
11 But if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you.

God has dealt with sin in the body and he says there is no more condemnation for them that be in Christ and who walk not after the flesh but after the Spirit. We as saved people must receive our power from the body of Christ through whom the Spirit now works and of whom we are functioning members.

Think on these things and understand that it is the word of God and the law of God that is the instruments of God to bring us to himself and God does not over ride our will..

 

[DaveXR650]

I do not think it can be proven by sound bites or by attacking those who ask you to defend it.

From your opening post.

What a strange statement Dave, If it was not the will of God to save all of us. It is the word of God that comes to us first and Calvinistic teaching that equates that men are just dead lumps on the earth whom God is unconcerned about (except a few that he has decided to show special favor to, which of course includes you) is antichrist doctrine and should be abandoned.

From your post above. So you start off saying how you don't want sound bites or attacking those who disagree and what do you do? Call Calvinism an antichrist doctrine and include me in it too. I think we should at least agree that the animosity seems to go both ways - especially when you are out of anything meaningful to say.

Intellect, reason, and will and a consciousness of good and evil and right and wrong along with the law of God which is the moral equation of it all is what prepares any man to receive God's free salvation.Here is the application of my reasoning, and it does not include the Spirit of God until after the word of God, his law, has done it's work. This is concerning the tenth commandment, Thou shalt not covet.

This is the problem. Most of Christianity, and even most of Fundamentalism, especially before the modern Pelagian drift rejects this statement of yours. Yes, those things should be enough for us to forsake sin and come to Christ but we have a fallen nature in all areas, even our precious free wills. (Especially our wills, actually.) We would actually be better off if we were just "dead lumps on the earth" but in truth we are by nature enemies at heart and actively oppose God to some degree or another. When I was in the Fundamentalist movement you can bet they preached that for sure. I keep trying to tell you - the inability we have is moral and therefore we are guilty for it, just like someone who just can't stop lying or can't stop lusting is still guilty. You refuse to see that and instead are trying to get rid of a verse clearly teaching this inability to come rather than accepting it. Once again, no one is trying to say we don't have a will. The will is part of the problem. And no one is saying that the word, the law, life circumstances, and all similar things are not indeed involved in bringing a person to salvation. The Holy Spirit uses those things to draw you.

 

[JD731]

From your opening post.

From your post above. So you start off saying how you don't want sound bites or attacking those who disagree and what do you do? Call Calvinism an antichrist doctrine and include me in it too. I think we should at least agree that the animosity seems to go both ways - especially when you are out of anything meaningful to say.

This is the problem. Most of Christianity, and even most of Fundamentalism, especially before the modern Pelagian drift rejects this statement of yours. Yes, those things should be enough for us to forsake sin and come to Christ but we have a fallen nature in all areas, even our precious free wills. (Especially our wills, actually.) We would actually be better off if we were just "dead lumps on the earth" but in truth we are by nature enemies at heart and actively oppose God to some degree or another. When I was in the Fundamentalist movement you can bet they preached that for sure. I keep trying to tell you - the inability we have is moral and therefore we are guilty for it, just like someone who just can't stop lying or can't stop lusting is still guilty. You refuse to see that and instead are trying to get rid of a verse clearly teaching this inability to come rather than accepting it. Once again, no one is trying to say we don't have a will. The will is part of the problem. And no one is saying that the word, the law, life circumstances, and all similar things are not indeed involved in bringing a person to salvation. The Holy Spirit uses those things to draw you.

As I have demonstrated before, he doesn't say it. It must be read into the texts of scripture.

All uses of Strong's <1670>

Joh 6:44 No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw <1670> him: and I will raise him up at the last day.
Joh 12:32 And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw <1670> all men unto me.
Joh 18:10 Then Simon Peter having a sword drew <1670> it, and smote the high priest’s servant, and cut off his right ear. The servant’s name was Malchus.
Joh 21:6 And he said unto them, Cast the net on the right side of the ship, and ye shall find. They cast therefore, and now they were not able to draw <1670> it for the multitude of fishes.
Joh 21:11 Simon Peter went up, and drew <1670> the net to land full of great fishes, an hundred and fifty and three: and for all there were so many, yet was not the net broken.
Ac 16:19 And when her masters saw that the hope of their gains was gone, they caught Paul and Silas, and drew <1670> them into the marketplace unto the rulers,
Ac 21:30 And all the<1670> city was moved, and the people ran together: and they took Paul, and drew<1670> him out of the temple: and forthwith the doors were shut.
Jas 2:6 But ye have despised the poor. Do not rich men oppress you, and draw <1670> you before the judgment seats?

The Father has only drawn men to Christ in one short subset of one age, from the showing of Jesus at his baptism until the rejection of Jesus as the promised Messiah of Israel and son of God by the rulers of his own nation.

Mt 17:5 While he yet spake, behold, a bright cloud overshadowed them: and behold a voice out of the cloud, which said, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased; hear ye him.

Joh 10:20 And many of them said, He hath a devil, and is mad; why hear ye him?

The them identified.

Joh 9:40 And some of the Pharisees which were with him heard these words, and said unto him, Are we blind also?

 

[David Lamb]

As I have demonstrated before, he doesn't say it. It must be read into the texts of scripture.

All uses of Strong's <1670>

Joh 6:44 No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw <1670> him: and I will raise him up at the last day.
Joh 12:32 And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw <1670> all men unto me.
Joh 18:10 Then Simon Peter having a sword drew <1670> it, and smote the high priest’s servant, and cut off his right ear. The servant’s name was Malchus.
Joh 21:6 And he said unto them, Cast the net on the right side of the ship, and ye shall find. They cast therefore, and now they were not able to draw <1670> it for the multitude of fishes.
Joh 21:11 Simon Peter went up, and drew <1670> the net to land full of great fishes, an hundred and fifty and three: and for all there were so many, yet was not the net broken.
Ac 16:19 And when her masters saw that the hope of their gains was gone, they caught Paul and Silas, and drew <1670> them into the marketplace unto the rulers,
Ac 21:30 And all the<1670> city was moved, and the people ran together: and they took Paul, and drew<1670> him out of the temple: and forthwith the doors were shut.
Jas 2:6 But ye have despised the poor. Do not rich men oppress you, and draw <1670> you before the judgment seats?

The Father has only drawn men to Christ in one short subset of one age, from the showing of Jesus at his baptism until the rejection of Jesus as the promised Messiah of Israel and son of God by the rulers of his own nation.

Mt 17:5 While he yet spake, behold, a bright cloud overshadowed them: and behold a voice out of the cloud, which said, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased; hear ye him.

Joh 10:20 And many of them said, He hath a devil, and is mad; why hear ye him?

The them identified.

Joh 9:40 And some of the Pharisees which were with him heard these words, and said unto him, Are we blind also?

Sorry, but I don't understand what your basis is for saying that the Father has only drawn men to Christ in one short subset of one age, from the showing of Jesus at his baptism until the rejection of Jesus as the promised Messiah of Israel and son of God by the rulers of his own nation. In John 6:44, the first bible verse you quoted, we see Jesus saying that no man (not "no Jew", or "no person between my baptism and my rejection by the Jewish leaders) could come to Him unless the Father drew them.

 

[DaveXR650]

All uses of Strong's <1670>

You do realize don't you that all those uses of "draw" you listed above are what the strict Calvinists use to prove that "draw" is a lot more forceful of a word than the way I'm using it. The fish were not "persuaded" to go into the net, were they.

The only thing I have been trying to assert in this is that the verse is there and it means what it says. I thought that's how Fundamentalists exegete scripture, with the obvious meaning being primary. I have heard some Calvinists who seem to camp on the idea of that passage as more of a gate keeping passage, where the idea is don't think you can just come any time you want because you can't. It all depends upon you being drawn. But here's where theology comes in. Other verses promise that if you come you will not be cast out. So this necessity of being drawn must have a meaning of it affecting your will or desire to come. This goes along with all the other verses suggesting the idea of "seeing" or "hearing" in a spiritual sense or of having one's eyes opened verses still being in bondage, and so on.

Bottom line is that you guys that run around looking for "gotcha" verses, without putting the teaching together with other scripture go a great disservice to Biblical teaching. You didn't answer my question above and I imagine it's because you don't actually use any kind of verse by verse commentary by anyone. Strong's is not a commentary. There is no body of theology anywhere, including Fundamentalism, that you can site that uses your private interpretation of John 6:44. Yet you will come on and act like you are going to singlehandedly demolish Reformed theology.

 

[JD731]

You do realize don't you that all those uses of "draw" you listed above are what the strict Calvinists use to prove that "draw" is a lot more forceful of a word than the way I'm using it. The fish were not "persuaded" to go into the net, were they.

The only thing I have been trying to assert in this is that the verse is there and it means what it says. I thought that's how Fundamentalists exegete scripture, with the obvious meaning being primary. I have heard some Calvinists who seem to camp on the idea of that passage as more of a gate keeping passage, where the idea is don't think you can just come any time you want because you can't. It all depends upon you being drawn. But here's where theology comes in. Other verses promise that if you come you will not be cast out. So this necessity of being drawn must have a meaning of it affecting your will or desire to come. This goes along with all the other verses suggesting the idea of "seeing" or "hearing" in a spiritual sense or of having one's eyes opened verses still being in bondage, and so on.

Bottom line is that you guys that run around looking for "gotcha" verses, without putting the teaching together with other scripture go a great disservice to Biblical teaching. You didn't answer my question above and I imagine it's because you don't actually use any kind of verse by verse commentary by anyone. Strong's is not a commentary. There is no body of theology anywhere, including Fundamentalism, that you can site that uses your private interpretation of John 6:44. Yet you will come on and act like you are going to singlehandedly demolish Reformed theology.

Dave, I was glad to be able to interact with someone I thought was honest and reasonable. But now you have accused me of singling out gotcha verses, obviously meaning out of context verses, and this simply is not true. It was you who went to verses like Jer 31 to single out two verses that had absolutely nothing to do with the subject we were speaking of and I took the trouble and space to post the entire chapter to prove it to you.

There is a reason men move from fundamentalism to Calvinism. It is because they were never fundamentalist at heart. Their is no agreement on any of the major Bible doctrines between the two groups because each group defines the Christian faith differently. God himself is defined differently. Rarely does anyone go from Calvinism to fundamentalism and it is because of the teachers of the two. Calvinism depends on intellectualism and gravitates to men who are charismatic and hold high degrees in education. Calvinists prove their beliefs according to the interpretations of these teachers. You have referenced several of them.

Calvinism, or Reformed theology is one the places where men go to be taught of other men because God has not taught them. The light is simply not on for these fellows. There are all these verses in the 4 gospels that says that Jesus Christ did not come to anyone but his own people during his earthly ministry. In his parables, everyone of them, he teaches us that his coming is at the end of the day. In one place he says it is harvest time because the age has come to an end. In another he says the wedding is ready and he sends out his servants to inform those who have been bidden that all things are ready and for them to come. In another he pays those who have endured the heat of the day the same amount as those who only labored the last hour of the day. It is the "marriage supper" of the Lamb. That is at the end of the day. In Hebrew 1 we are told that God spoke to the Hebrews in the last days of the age by his Son. In the following place he said this, and I believe him.

Lk 24:44 And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me.
45 Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures,

This conversation between Cleopas and another disciple and Jesus Christ took place on Sunday, the day of the resurrection of Christ as they traveled to Emmaus. They had left town because they knew nothing of the resurrection of Jesus Christ, though they had been with him ministering for 3 1/2 years. Most of the Reformed believers do not know that his 12 apostles and his 70 chosen prophets, and the disciples and women that were closest to him did not know or understand about his death, burial, and resurrection and did not believe it when they heard about it. I know this to be true because each of the four gospel writers clearly says it in their books. I have read them saying it and can quote them. I have quoted them to the Reformed in the past and there has not been one of them that has believed it yet.

Luke 24:44 - 45 that I quoted I think is written to confirm that one must have a divine teacher of spiritual truth and one must be spiritual to have light. Three and one half years walking with Jesus Christ after the flesh and on the day he rose from the dead because all hope was lost for them and they were found walking away. Once they received the truth from the resurrected Christ the lights came on and they went back to Jerusalem because that is where he was going to be. This is an important lesson, Dave. Jesus Christ was not preaching to Israel about his death, burial, and resurrection during his earthly ministry, he was preaching about his kingdom, his office as King, and his person as son of God and man. God the Father was doing the teaching of previously told truth to men without the Spirit and without the capacity to understand it, and none of them did, not even his apostles who heard it all. Therefore, the few men who came to him did not come because they understood but they came strictly by faith in what he said. Read the text again, Dave.

Joh 6:44 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.
45 It is written in the prophets, And they shall be all taught of God. Every man therefore that hath heard, and hath learned of the Father, cometh unto me. (note the use of the verbs)
46 Not that any man hath seen the Father, save he which is of God, he hath seen the Father.
47 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me hath everlasting life.

The divine teacher here is the Father. The Father is teaching through the OT prophets, the miracles, he sent John the Baptist, and he testified that Jesus was his son in a voice from heaven. One must believe what the Father says before he can believe what the son accomplished for us. This is the lesson. The Father says he has sent out his preachers with the news of his son and whoever believes in him he. the Father, will give eternal life. Everyone who gets saved is like a child in understanding and God only requires that we believe a few things from the heart. Every one who hears can do it. Think about this.

 

[DaveXR650]

. It was you who went to verses like Jer 31 to single out two verses that had absolutely nothing to do with the subject we were speaking of and I took the trouble and space to post the entire chapter to prove it to you.

They showed God working in and affecting people's will. But we already discussed that. And I do realize that there are entire chapters around every verse in the Bible.

You have referenced several of them.

Yes, and I also referenced John R. Rice. The fact is the case for God having to draw us or we will not be saved is believed by a much larger group than just Calvinists. You seem to site no one else who teaches this passage like you do. Can you even list a modern active preacher who says what you are saying? This looks like a type of hyper-dispensationalism but I am just guessing. Surely someone else is teaching this that you can reference.

Calvinism, or Reformed theology is one the places where men go to be taught of other men because God has not taught them. The light is simply not on for these fellows.

I guess they did the best they could, not having the opportunity to sit under fundamentalist teaching. Seriously JD. If you get on the Bob Jones University web site under theology, even they say that the Spirit must quicken someone. This is what all those, not just Calvinists are referring to when they speak of a drawing, even though there are of course differences in how they believe this works and to what extent it is resistible.

So. In summary, because this is my last post on this, the only thing I have argued for is a "drawing" work done by the Holy Spirit, prior to a person coming to Christ. And this is in addition to natural conscience, sovereignly arranged circumstances, witness to miracles, hearing of the gospel message and so on. True, the Reformers taught this, but so did the Arminians and all the groups that follow their theology, and even fundamentalists like John R. Rice and BJU. Now, I am aware of the belief that we get the information and we have all the natural ability we need to make the right decision. That I am at least familiar with. But I have never heard of anyone trying to dodge plain scriptures by claiming such a specific dispensational interpretation - and you have not mentioned anyone else who does this so far.

 

[JD731]

They showed God working in and affecting people's will. But we already discussed that. And I do realize that there are entire chapters around every verse in the Bible.

Jer 31 is a prophecy about Ephraim, who during that time had been dispersed from her land for several years. It was about them, not us.God's promise is to restore them.

Yes, and I also referenced John R. Rice. The fact is the case for God having to draw us or we will not be saved is believed by a much larger group than just Calvinists. You seem to site no one else who teaches this passage like you do. Can you even list a modern active preacher who says what you are saying? This looks like a type of hyper-dispensationalism but I am just guessing. Surely someone else is teaching this that you can reference.

I am no expert on John R Rice. I bought three of his commentaries when I was young. One was the book of Acts commentary. They were not helpful and my assessment of his scholarship is that he is one half mile wide and only one quarter inch deep.

I guess they did the best they could, not having the opportunity to sit under fundamentalist teaching. Seriously JD. If you get on the Bob Jones University web site under theology, even they say that the Spirit must quicken someone. This is what all those, not just Calvinists are referring to when they speak of a drawing, even though there are of course differences in how they believe this works and to what extent it is resistible.

I have made it clear that I believe the Spirit indwelling the body of believers quickens them when they believe. We have the scriptures saying exactly that to every one who believes the gospel. We do not have the scriptures saying the Spirit draws any one but if they do, I am guessing you would have quoted it.

Ro 8:11 But if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you.
Ga 3:2 This only would I learn of you, Received ye the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith?
Ro 1:16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.

So. In summary, because this is my last post on this, the only thing I have argued for is a "drawing" work done by the Holy Spirit, prior to a person coming to Christ. And this is in addition to natural conscience, sovereignly arranged circumstances, witness to miracles, hearing of the gospel message and so on. True, the Reformers taught this, but so did the Arminians and all the groups that follow their theology, and even fundamentalists like John R. Rice and BJU. Now, I am aware of the belief that we get the information and we have all the natural ability we need to make the right decision. That I am at least familiar with. But I have never heard of anyone trying to dodge plain scriptures by claiming such a specific dispensational interpretation - and you have not mentioned anyone else who does this so far.

You have not made your argument from the scriptures, Dave. You will not accept that one must understand Bible doctrine through context. You have a philosophical viewpoint. The ministry of the Spirit is not under consideration in John 6.


Joh 16:7 Nevertheless I tell you the truth; It is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you.
8 And when he is come, he will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment:
9 Of sin, because they believe not on me;
10 Of righteousness, because I go to my Father, and ye see me no more;
11 Of judgment, because the prince of this world is judged.
12 I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now.
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.
14 He shall glorify me: for he shall receive of mine, and shall shew it unto you.
15 All things that the Father hath are mine: therefore said I, that he shall take of mine, and shall shew it unto you.

Jn 17:6 I have manifested thy name unto the men which thou gavest me out of the world: thine they were, and thou gavest them me; and they have kept thy word.
7 Now they have known that all things whatsoever thou hast given me are of thee.
8 For I have given unto them the words which thou gavest me; and they have received them, and have known surely that I came out from thee, and they have believed that thou didst send me.
9 I pray for them: I pray not for the world, but for them which thou hast given me; for they are thine.
10 And all mine are thine, and thine are mine; and I am glorified in them.

The Spirit has a work that is future to John 6.

 

[JD731]

So. In summary, because this is my last post on this, the only thing I have argued for is a "drawing" work done by the Holy Spirit, prior to a person coming to Christ. And this is in addition to natural conscience, sovereignly arranged circumstances, witness to miracles, hearing of the gospel message and so on. True, the Reformers taught this, but so did the Arminians and all the groups that follow their theology, and even fundamentalists like John R. Rice and BJU. Now, I am aware of the belief that we get the information and we have all the natural ability we need to make the right decision. That I am at least familiar with. But I have never heard of anyone trying to dodge plain scriptures by claiming such a specific dispensational interpretation - and you have not mentioned anyone else who does this so far.

Dave, if you were sent by someone specifically, (and you agreed to go) to give them some instructions about this or that subject and you defined who it was you were sent to, would it be incumbent upon the hearers to understand that when the word "all" is used, it would mean all those to whom you were sent and not to the whole world? And, if your message to that particular subset of people would generally be helpful to others that might hear it with the caveat that some of the instructions could not be applied to the general population because of the specificity of the message and the priorities of that particular subset? Would you have the capacity to process information like that if it were not a religious message? Don't you do it on a regular basis.

That is what Jesus did. He was sent by the Father, he said, and he agreed to go. But he said also who the Father sent him to.

Mark 1:1The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God;

That good news can and will bless every one in the world. This is the showing of Jesus, who had been in the world for several years already.

But look what he says about his coming. Try to process this.

Matt 15:21 Then Jesus went thence, and departed into the coasts of Tyre and Sidon.
22 And, behold, a woman of Canaan came out of the same coasts, and cried unto him, saying, Have mercy on me, O Lord, thou son of David; my daughter is grievously vexed with a devil.
23 But he answered her not a word. And his disciples came and besought him, saying, Send her away; for she crieth after us.
24 But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house (family) of Israel.
25 Then came she and worshipped him, saying, Lord, help me.
26 But he answered and said, It is not meet to take the children's bread, and to cast it to dogs.
27 And she said, Truth, Lord: yet the dogs eat of the crumbs which fall from their masters' table.
28 Then Jesus answered and said unto her, O woman, great is thy faith: be it unto thee even as thou wilt. And her daughter was made whole from that very hour.

That was a gentile woman. She could not properly address Jesus as a gentile by the title, thou son of David." David is the figure of Jesus Christ as the KING. Gentiles must receive him in their proper time as Lord..

Nothing in the Bible modifies his proclamation to this gentile woman. Israel must receive him first as King, because that is the reason he came. He was crucified by Israel because he claimed to be the King, not because he claimed to be the savior although we can understand by his words that he indeed came to be the savior as well.

Jn 1:10 He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not.
11 He came unto his own, and his own received him not.
12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:

The important thing to God is his earthly kingdom with Jesus Christ ruling over it. He wants all the citizens to be saved and eventually when it is established in righteousness they will be. The end of the work of God through Christ is to have heaven and earth to be perfectly in tune. If John Rice or the teachers at BJU were aware of this it does not seem to be important enough to put much emphasis on it. Generally speaking, BJU are heavily influenced with amillennialists who deny an earthly kingdom of Christ. believing to to be a figurative proposition only. I am going to guess that is where you are in your theology.

This answers the question of why Jesus has been away for so long and the kingdom we realize now is a mystery form of it and has no physical boundaries, being populated by all those who will receive him as Lord. But he will return as King, he says, and will kill all those who have refused his lordship and his kingdom right to rule, leaving a saved population though few in number. He is ready to return now and I think it will be very soon.

Rom 10:13 For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.

 

[DaveXR650]

JD. You're all over the place. Your views on "all" are that of strict Calvinism, your knowledge of BJU and fundamentalism leads me to wonder if you really are one, and your continued refusal to answer as to who else teaches this stuff makes me wonder about your seriousness. For all I know you might be some kid sitting in the dorm at BJU and pulling everyone's leg!