Total Depravity...

Forgive my error, JohnP. I actually did answer every question you asked me -- with Scripture even -- though my inexperience at using the quotes here mixed my answers into your orginal quotes. I apologize. If you'll read closely, the answers are there in #242. Thanks.

JDale

 

Eh, okay npe. Just accuse me of being a heretic and get it overwith. I believe the Bible makes clear that man MUST respond in faith to experience regeneration, justification and all other elements and benefits of salvation.

"Sirs, what must I do to be saved? So they said 'BELIEVE on the Lord Jesus Christ and you will be saved, you and your household!" (Acts 16:30,31).

Faith itself is a gift from God, but He makes us responsible as to our use of it -- whether we believe and thereby experience His abundant and free salvation, or reject His grace and enter eternal punishment. It's called 'free moral agency.'

If that makes me intellectually or spiritually inferior, if it gets me labeled as a heretic, eh, okay. Wouldn't be the first time.

Blessings,

JDale

 

Yes it is the basics of salvation. But God does not give man faith, particulary in the sense you want to qualify it. You have not contexually scriptural support.

Let us look at scripture: First is the general accound:

Second - Is the specifics. Notice something about Noah - He walked with God. BEFORE he built the the ark and BEFORE God warned him. Which means he walked with God when God looked upon Mankind in general and saw their intent.

Noah was already walking with the Lord but in the same manner of favor (or no specific favor) as ALL others. Here God gives a specific and special favor to one out of them all regarding a salvation from destruction.
What has always stuck me as interesting is that Noahs family did not find favor with God, only Noah. Is he archatype of the cumulative salvation seen at fulness of Christ?
Those who followed in obedience to commands (Israel - OT Covenant salvation by grace and continued obedience) and those who took what he said, not having personally seen or heard but only believed (Gentiles - NT Covenant salvatin by grace and faith). Both were saved by grace but different means to them both.
Sorry, just thinking allowed.

 

I thought I said exactly the opposite, that you are a believer. Yup. Just checked the post. That's what I said.

Good for you. Now show me from scripture where it says we get prevenient grace, after which we decide to accept the gift of faith, after which we are regenerated.

Wow, not only can he save himself, he can believe for his whole houshold! Just messing with you.

Of course you have to believe to be saved. I don't know a believer on any side of this debate who would say otherwise. The question is, why does one person believe and another not?

There you have it. It isn't something we decide to have, it's something God gives us. “This is the work of God, that you believe in Him whom He sent.” It's not our work, it's God's. "For it has been granted to you on behalf of Christ not only to believe on him, but also to suffer for him" It doesn't say it's been granted to us to make the decision whether or not to believe, it says it's been granted to us TO believe. How are we born again? Because we are enabled to decide to believe of our own free will? "who were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God."

I don't care what you call it. Just show me the scripture that says we accept or reject salvation of our own free will.

 

Hello JDale. Sorry about that I thought it was just my quote.

I wouldn't dream of saying God is at fault, how do you reach the conclusion I did?
That is what I want answered if you would be so kind.

Surely we are all clay in His Hand but Isaiah beat Jeremiah to it, ISA 45:9 "Woe to him who quarrels with his Maker, to him who is but a potsherd among the potsherds on the ground. Does the clay say to the potter, `What are you making?' Does your work say, `He has no hands'?

Which is more in keeping with the sense of Romans nine. "Who are you to talk back to God O man?" Should read, " "Who are you to talk back to God O Israel?" Not meaning any individual?

And nations are individuals making up a collective. So you believe that God makes individuals for Hell because it only means Israelites? What is a nation or what does nation mean apart from individuals? 1PE 2:9 But you are a chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people belonging to God, that you may declare the praises of him who called you out of darkness into his wonderful light. (Praise the Lord!)

The Church is not responsible for the reprobates as the Body is not Sovereign the Head is. But you say they have not heard and faith only comes by hearing.

Why? Is Ezekiel not just speaking to the nation of the Israelites?

PS 139:13 For you created my inmost being; you knit me together in my mother's womb.

Yes it does. It proves the immediate Hand of God and disproves the mediate creating work of God.

The question was 'Why does He create people for fellowship with Him when He knows they do not want fellowship with Him and He knows He is going to send them to Hell?'

He is not Sovereign then. ISA 45:7 I form the light and create darkness, I bring prosperity and create disaster; I, the LORD, do all these things.

And the scriptures needed to prove this are where?

Are you speaking for all Primitive Baptists? I must refuse the title if you are as I am an evangelist.

There was no inconsistancy in what I said and I will wait with bated breath to hear why you say this. Maybe I will learn something about myself. I didn't see a joke nor did I take offence? What am I missing I wonder? One never knows what one does not know.

john.

 

Ok JDale... I'm ready. Anytime you are ready lets go, i'm excited about learning about prevenient grace. Thanks bro.

 

I ask .... where does your faith come from?

Now web, I know that you don't think you are saved because your speech or mental capacity or reasoning were a little better than one who does not have saving faith. Do you?
Why did you have faith and someone else didn't?

 

No...but you asked where it came from. My faith was part of who God made me... you... and everyone. There is no human being who has not been given the ability to have faith.

A question only God can answer. No systematic theology, teacher, or pastor can answer this question honestly. If they do, they are trying to be God. We can only answer as to why WE do.

 

I wasn't talking about Noah being dead but those who taught him the truths of God.

No, I showed you were belief IS Faith and not turned into faith. You still haven't given any scriptures which state or insinuate God turns the actions that ones does according to belief into faith. Which, btw, goes completely against your view of God giving man faith. If man acts out of belief in a right manner then man does not need faith in the sense you ascribe because man already has a saving belief.

True, but you stated that one believes THEN acts, and after this God gives them faith. Remember, you used Noah as your example.

No, faith is not established on what you do AFTER I believe but is established when I act on what I know to be true BEFORE it is done. Remember, Our faith in action is evidence of things NOT YET SEEN. Truth is established after the fact but faith prior.

No again. You are mushing concepts together like rice and mashed potato's in the same bowl. You are conflagating Trust and Faith. I acted in faith but you destroyed my trust. They are not the same thing. Trust and Hope are considered the same but neither of these are the same as belief and faith in their original definitions.

 

Hello Reformed, Glad to see you came back.

I wanted to comment here on something. (what a shocker - Allan commenting on something) :laugh:

You are correct in that the 'whosoever' has a qualifier and that qualifier is found in the content and context of the scripture in question. The 'whosoever' in John 3:16 has a qualifier as to who it represents, that being the 'World' or all sinful man. It elaborates this qualifier into two catagories of 'perish' and 'eternal life' which are seperated due to another qualifier - believe.
And so the 'whosoever' directly refers to the 'World' who is addressed and in that group (the whole world) whoever believes will have eternal life and whoever doesn't will perish.

You can not get the word 'World' here to mean anything other than all sinful man. Nor can you anywhere else in scripture unless one allows their theology to redefine terms instead of the bible how the bible catagorically and consistantly has defined them.

For instance: the fact that in the entire OT the word 'World' was used to discribe ONLY TWO different things (with varying aspects of their original intent). One was geographical and the other was also the sinful, wicked, and unbelieving world of sinners. There is not one scripture in the whole of the OT to which world ever means or is alluded to as the elect or Gods children. It had an established meaning for 4000 years given by God. Since the OT established the definition of the word consistantly and without execption it is also maintained in the NT since it is a continuation of the OT. This is why we are to be OF the World but not IN the World. SCripture states that "you are NOT OF the World' And it is why we are called children of God, people of God, elect, ext... but never the world. World always means wicked and sinfilled man or a geographic location.

That is my nickle's worth toss in.
*clink*

 

And as a non-Cal, I can do the same. Though like anyone else on this type of medium we can all become flustered.

 

Faith comes by hearing and hearing by the Word of God.
Understanding of the Word of God comes by God the Holy Spirit revealing the truth heard so that they who heard may KNOW the truth that is able to save.

However scripture shows many will reject the truth revealed by God to them which COULD have saved them but now they are eternally damned.

I have delt with this in posts:
106, 116, 128, 130, 177 (177 - most specifically showing the paralles of verses from 3 different NT books about this subject)

But I will share this one again.

 

I have been commanded to "keep you from the fire hating even the garment soiled by the flame," johnny boy. Of course I concern myself for you!

Oh, far from it! :laugh: But I think we both, JDale and I, have an I know-I'm-saved testimony whereas I think it curious that you don't even want to have one.

skypair

 

In context, sometimes these words do require qualification. The problem lies 1) on which occassions and 2) in WHERE you get the qualifications from. Calvinism appears to accept the invitation to insert their theology in every instance

Perfect example! In these contexts, the writer does NOT proport to make any stipulations. But since Christ didn't die for all -- since non-elect are 'dead' and cannot 'hear'/TD -- since God operates monergistically and with total sovereignty in salvation, it would appear to the Cavlinist to be impossible to intepret "open interpretation" for "whosoever" and "all."

skypair

skypair

 

Boy! That didn't take long for the worm to turn! :laugh: I thought you were the LEAST contentious person here. You can hardly contain your sarcasm, can you?!! :tonofbricks:

Look --- either you believe the one or the other unto salvation --> you exercised faith by your own will in salvation or you didn't.

That's is the issue -- not whether you now act like ("exercise faith in Jesus in order to enter into salvation") you were born again. If you merely "act like" you are saved, I am sure you realize by now that is sanctification without justification, right?

skypair

 

I don't see that happening at all. For example, I've shown the scriptural context that defines "all" in 2 Peter so many times I almost can't bear to do it again. Many others have done the same.

There are some cases where the context allows you to interpret things like "all" to mean "all who ever lived, live and will live", but interpreting it that way would force you to contradict other scriptures. That seems to me to be more of a case of inserting one's theology into scripture in spite of the fact that it makes scripture contradict itself.

 

Morning brother. You missed my point. I never denied here that world means world. The point is that God sent His Son so that the world may be saved if they believe. When we keep reading the scripture says that the verdict is that they loved darkness rather than the light for thier deeds were evil. That points us back to the beginning of the chapter (and really the first chapter of John) that you must be born again. That is the context... and exactly what Jesus told Nic.