Total Depravity...

[reformedbeliever]

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.

Calvinist do not deny this. Most all Calvinist would say that they hear with the ears but not the heart. I think we call this the general and effectual call.

 

[Allan]

1 Cor 2:14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

In light of 1 Cor 2:2 ("For I determined not to know any thing among you, save Jesus Christ, and him crucified.") and 1 Corinthians chapter 3, would it be wrong to assume that Paul is saying:

1) Babes in Christ are not ready for the meat of the word.
2) Those who are perfect (grown up christians) are ready.

He says he has to speak unto them as unto carnal (natural).

So, is it proper to use the above verse to prove that unregenerate man is unable to respond to the Gospel? Seeing how the same concept seems to be applied to carnal christians (regenerated)?


Pardon me if what I just posted makes no sense. I happened to be reading in 1 Corinthians tonight and noticed verse 1 of chapter 3:

"And I, brethren, could not speak unto you as unto spiritual, but as unto carnal, even as unto babes in Christ."

Interesting...

Ya know, I never even considered that. :laugh:
But I can see your point and admit you have an interesting one.

It is of import also to note that a Carnal Christian is a contradiction in terms. That was part of Pauls point.
The fact that Paul states he must speak to them not spiritually but naturally, says alot about their spiritual nature to which Paul was addressing and that he obviously thought they could/would be able to hear in a meaningful way or positive way.

 

[skypair]

Calvinists do not have this tendency. In fact, calvinism and most Calvinists do fully affirm the necessity of faith for salvation.

First off, PL, you're not going to change anyone's perceptions and it is not the point of the thread so stick to the topic, please. About the only thing you can accomplish is to say YOU don't agree and maybe state you do not fit other people's preception of Calvinists. You are defending a theology with many "warts," sir. You want the truth to be taught regardless of what it is called, right?

This, as so many have done, confuses salvation with regeneration. To experience salvation, Calvinism believes that man must turn in faith to Christ as his only Savior.

See, you can in no wise "apologize" for Calvinists in this way KNOWING that they see regeneration and election before salvation and that there is NO salvation apart from "election" (ergo, not your faith but God's).

Furthermore, Calvinism does not necessarily hold that the non-elect were created with the sole purpose of "eternal damnation of hell-fire."

This is a perfect example of "drop the labels" and seek the truth. We don't need to rehash what "some" Calvinists do or don't believe.

[/B]Another phrase we love. We believe that "whosoever will" believe shall be saved. No one is omitted from that. Those who beleive will be saved. Those who do not believe will not be saved. There are none who desire to believe who will be turned away, and none who do not desire to believe who will be forced in.

Again, you appear to depart from Calvinism on this (at least from johnp, petrely, rb, etc.) and then to claim that we accuse Calvinism falsely! Basically, if you believe this, then let yourself out of Calvin's "prison!" :laugh:

skypair

 

[Isaiah40:28]

1 Cor 2:14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

In light of 1 Cor 2:2 ("For I determined not to know any thing among you, save Jesus Christ, and him crucified.") and 1 Corinthians chapter 3, would it be wrong to assume that Paul is saying:

1) Babes in Christ are not ready for the meat of the word.
2) Those who are perfect (grown up christians) are ready.

He says he has to speak unto them as unto carnal (natural).

So, is it proper to use the above verse to prove that unregenerate man is unable to respond to the Gospel? Seeing how the same concept seems to be applied to carnal christians (regenerated)?

Pardon me if what I just posted makes no sense. I happened to be reading in 1 Corinthians tonight and noticed verse 1 of chapter 3:

"And I, brethren, could not speak unto you as unto spiritual, but as unto carnal, even as unto babes in Christ."

I haven't read this whole thread, but I did want to comment on this use of this passage.
Problem with that view is that Paul did not say that they were not spiritual as is the case with the natural man. He was telling them that were acting like the natural man even though they had the spirit of God as believers.
That was his beef with them.
He goes on in 3:16 to confirm that they do indeed have God's Spirit living within them, so he obviously did not consider them in the same category as the "natural man", positionally speaking.

 

[Allan]

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.

Good morning as well.

Actaully scripture shows two types of people. Those who flee the light because they love the darkness. And those who come to the light. So it is not just one verdict but two types of people and therefore two types of verdicts.
And yes it does bring us back to whole point of Jesus becoming flesh for man; You must be born-again.

What I was simply showing however is that God so loved the World (wicked sinful mankind) that He gave His only begotten Son (TO the World) that whosoever (of the WORLD) believes in Him, should not perish but have eternal life.

Jesus was given to the world because God loved the world (instead of judically hating it), but only those of the world who believed are the benificiaries of the gift of that love and those who do not believe receive the only other alternitive for their unbelief - Perish/Damnation.

 

[Allan]

Calvinist do not deny this. Most all Calvinist would say that they hear with the ears but not the heart. I think we call this the general and effectual call.

Except most Calvinists deny there is a potential for salvation and that blindness and hardness is what makes a person NOT believe.

I was showing the contrary in each of those posts I showed.

 

[skypair]

No, I don't think that one who is regenerated will fail to come to Jesus. They may resist for a time, but ultimately, if they are given to the Son by the Father, they will come.

So grace is "resistible?" C'mon, rb -- does it make sense to you that one who has the Holy Spirit can yet resist saving grace?

skypair

 

[skypair]

There are two forms of hearing. One is in a saving way..... the other is just accoustic.

You forgot to put "In my humble opinion," rb! :laugh: Or do you find 2 different words in the Bible and in the context for your assertion?

skypair

 

[reformedbeliever]

Good morning as well.

Actaully scripture shows two types of people. Those who flee the light because they love the darkness. And those who come to the light. So it is not just one verdict but two types of people and therefore two types of verdicts.
And yes it does bring us back to whole point of Jesus becoming flesh for man; You must be born-again.

What I was simply showing however is that God so loved the World (wicked sinful mankind) that He gave His only begotten Son (TO the World) that whosoever (of the WORLD) believes in Him, should not perish but have eternal life.

Jesus was given to the world because God loved the world (instead of judically hating it), but only those of the world who believed are the benificiaries of the gift of that love and those who do not believe receive the only other alternitive for their unbelief - Perish/Damnation.

Does He love those who are not His? Those whom He sends to hell?

 

[reformedbeliever]

Except most Calvinists deny there is a potential for salvation and that blindness and hardness is what makes a person NOT believe.

I was showing the contrary in each of those posts I showed.

Well actually I think we would not say that God potentially saved His people, but actually accomplished it on the cross. I agree that blindness and hardness is what makes a person not believe.

 

[Allan]

I haven't read this whole thread, but I did want to comment on this use of this passage.
Problem with that view is that Paul did not say that they were not spiritual as is the case with the natural man. He was telling them that were acting like the natural man even though they had the spirit of God as believers.
That was his beef with them.
He goes on in 3:16 to confirm that they do indeed have God's Spirit living within them, so he obviously did not consider them in the same category as the "natural man", positionally speaking.

Paul was speaking to the Church as whole. There were some who needed admonishment and others needed strengthening due to the corruptness that crept into the Church. Yes, he told them they (as a whole) are the church [built up] as a temple. If any man defile the temple (the church), him will God destroy. For the temple of God is holy, just as ye are the Temple.

 

[skypair]

LOL! Don't forget, let's examine the order of events with prevenient grace. Funny how it will match up perfectly with regeneration....

That's the problem of using terminology that one thinks that everyone understands, isn't it? "Prevenient grace," in my understanding, presumes NOTHING within the person/elect --- regeneration does. PG speaks to the AVAILABILITY of grace through the cross. Does that match with what your understanding?

...the only difference is that if you call it prevenient grace, it leaves salvation in the hands of man instead of God. If you call it regeneration, it's irresistable and monergistic.

This is not helpful, npeterely.

Prevenient grace: A not-so-clever invention to make sure man gets the credit for making the decision.

Very clever. I don't suppose we could all get a good laugh at some of Calvinism's terminology, do you?

skypair

 

[johnp.]

What I was simply showing however is that God so loved the World (wicked sinful mankind)...

The uses of the word 'world' should have (wicked sinful mankind except Israel) Allan.

john.

 

[npetreley]

PG speaks to the AVAILABILITY of grace through the cross. Does that match with what your understanding?

No, it doesn't. Neither does it seem to fit the definition of prevenient grace as defined by true Arminianism (as opposed to free-willism, which is often confused with Arminianism but does not really resemble it).

RB started a new thread on the definition of and scriptural support for prevenient grace. That's probably the best place to address it.

 

[Allan]

Well actually I think we would not say that God potentially saved His people, but actually accomplished it on the cross. I agree that blindness and hardness is what makes a person not believe.

I agree that does not potentially do anything per say.
But the fact remains that scripture states if diverse places those who were/are/or will be lost COULD have been saved. Even Jesus stated this :

Mat 11:21 Woe unto thee, Chorazin! woe unto thee, Bethsaida! for if the mighty works, which were done in you, had been done in Tyre and Sidon, they would have repented long ago in sackcloth and ashes.

Paul also speaks to it in a couple of places but most specifically (since it is one spoke of by me frequently)

Additionally:

How then do you reconsile the verses that state blindness and hardening come AFTER they reject Gods revealed truth. At which point (AFTER their rejection) God gives them over to...the lie and NOT before.

(Romans 1:18-32, 2 Thes 2:2-12, and the parallelsim of Eph 4:17-19 with the other two) For starters.

 

[npetreley]

I found an interesting quote from Wesley in his work on original sin:

" Is man filled with all manner of evil? Is he void of all good? Is he wholly fallen? Is his soul totally corrupted? Or, to come back to the text, is "every imagination of the thoughts of his heart only evil continually?" Allow this, and you are so far a Christian. Deny it, and you are but a heathen still."

 

[Allan]

The uses of the word 'world' should have (wicked sinful mankind except Israel) Allan.

john.

Israel was elected for/to Purpose Not salvation.
Even you state - Not all Israel are Israel. But we know that ALL Israelites are elected in the national sense.

But that aside:
Israel as individuals are also is wicked, sinful, disobedient and a gainsaying people. I think...yep, that falls under the definitions of 'World' Biblically.
So they to fall under the scope of all being in sin and needing a Savior.

 

[skypair]

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.

Hear from God - believe - receive faith is not the basics of salvation?

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

"Man" (general) had already been included in "wickedness continually." God was going to destroy ALL men. (cont.)

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.

Not true. AFTER God thought to destroy all men (6:7), THEN Noah found grace in His eyes (6:8). To me, Gen 6:7-8 parallels 6:12-13. Same pattern. Gen 6:12-13 says God found ALL corrupt (6:12), then He warned to Noah (6:13). Gen 6:13 explains HOW Noah found grace in God's eyes. This tells us when and how Noah believed and received faith. Do you see what I mean?

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.

So now you are appealing to "election??"

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?

I think this is very reminiscent of "the bosom of" as in Abraham and Christ, yes.

skypair

 

[Allan]

I found an interesting quote from Wesley in his work on original sin:

Yep. And your point?

I think we all agree here that man is depraved.

 

[npetreley]

Yep. And your point?

I think we all agree here that man is depraved.

Wesley is saying man is TOTALLY depraved, not just depraved. That's one of the key differences between Arminianism and free-willism (or semi-pelagianism). Wesley goes so far as to say that if you don't agree, you're not a Christian.