What happens first?

[J.D.]

You must hang out with a different crowd than I do for I never knew a man who wanted to go to hell!!

He didn't say that people want to go to hell. What he said was that not everyone wants to be saved. Oh, man would love live a life of sin and go to heaven anyway when he dies. But he will not turn FROM sin and be saved from it unless God changes his heart.

 

[Brother Bob]

No man wants to be saved

 

[J.D.]

No man wants to be saved

Yes, they do want to be saved on their own terms (like "just say this prayer")

But no, not on God's terms (believe and repent), unless God changes their hearts.

 

[npetreley]

He didn't say that people want to go to hell. What he said was that not everyone wants to be saved. Oh, man would love live a life of sin and go to heaven anyway when he dies. But he will not turn FROM sin and be saved from it unless God changes his heart.

Thanks for clarifying that for me. That's very much what I meant.

How often have you heard people say things like, "If there really is a God, I wouldn't want to have anything to do with any God who would allow <insert complaint here>."

Yeah, people who believe there is a hell wouldn't want to go there. But that isn't the point. People either don't want a God at all, or they want to make a god in their own image. They don't want to be saved by trusting in the REAL God.

Unfortunately, I see a connection between this attitude and the arguments for free will. "A loving God would not do such-and-such." Translation: I will only trust in the kind of God I envision Him to be. There's no way He could possibly be the kind of God described by Calvinism because that strikes me as unfair and unloving, and God couldn't possibly be like that because I don't like that idea.

I'm not saying these people aren't saved, but I would say there's some leftover flesh in there insisting on having it man's way or the highway.

 

[webdog]

I'm not saying these people aren't saved, but I would say there's some leftover flesh in there insisting on having it man's way or the highway.

And who are you to say that?

 

[Brother Bob]

I don't say that. I believe that God reveals Himself to all men for He said so. "Go ye not from house to house for they shall know me from the least unto the greatest". " The Grace of God which bringeth Salvation hath appeared unto all men, teaching them to deny ungodliness and worldly lust that they should live soberly and righteously in this present world looking for that blessed hope and glorious appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ, etc.
How do you answer that Scripture it seems to include all men?

I don't know about you but when I was a worldly person I feared dying and going to a devil's hell and always said to myself "before I die I will turn to the Lord". I have heard many many people say the same thing. I suspect they were all so called free-willers.

 

[The Archangel]

Webdog, et al.

Webdog, you wrote:

This exegesis has been shown to be false, and has been show before here on the BB. The "gift" is salvation, not faith ("by grace you have been saved by faith", is the "it" referenced), and you are not saved by grace apart from faith.

I’m not sure which post you were reading? Maybe you did not read my post in detail. I never said “it” referred to “faith” only. I said “it” referred to both “grace” and “faith.” I’m assuming, from your post, that you do not agree with my assessment of the passage.

Now, as far as my exegesis goes, I have seen and/or heard that assessment of Ephesians 2:8-9 from numerous sources. I’d really like to see the post that has proven this exegesis wrong.

In the mean time, let’s examine your claim that “it” refers to “salvation.”

Touto (it) is a demonstrative pronoun. The case is Nominative; the number is Singular; and the gender is Neuter

Sesosmenoi (saved) is a verb—perfect passive participle. The case is Nominative; the number is Plural; and the gender is Masculine.

There is an unfortunate error in your theory of “it” referring to “saved.” The error is that “it” and “saved” do not agree in number or gender. So, by the rules of the Greek language itself, your theory is not possible.

The word “grace” is a noun; its case is Dative; its number is Singular; its gender is Feminine. The word “faith” is a noun; its case is Genitive; its number is Singular; its gender is Feminine. “It” is a demonstrative pronoun. The case is Nominative; the number is Singular; and the gender is Neuter

“It” agrees with “faith” and “grace” in number but not gender. This is explained by the neuter being used to express a connection between both “faith” and “grace.” I have heard and read that explanation—it was given by many theologians more famous and smarter in Greek than I will ever be.

Since I am not a Greek scholar, I will continue to research this linguistic issue and I encourage you to investigate it as well. Until then, God bless.

The Archangel

 

[webdog]

Webdog, you wrote:


I’m not sure which post you were reading? Maybe you did not read my post in detail. I never said “it” referred to “faith” only. I said “it” referred to both “grace” and “faith.” I’m assuming, from your post, that you do not agree with my assessment of the passage.

Now, as far as my exegesis goes, I have seen and/or heard that assessment of Ephesians 2:8-9 from numerous sources. I’d really like to see the post that has proven this exegesis wrong.

In the mean time, let’s examine your claim that “it” refers to “salvation.”

Touto (it) is a demonstrative pronoun. The case is Nominative; the number is Singular; and the gender is Neuter

Sesosmenoi (saved) is a verb—perfect passive participle. The case is Nominative; the number is Plural; and the gender is Masculine.

There is an unfortunate error in your theory of “it” referring to “saved.” The error is that “it” and “saved” do not agree in number or gender. So, by the rules of the Greek language itself, your theory is not possible.

The word “grace” is a noun; its case is Dative; its number is Singular; its gender is Feminine. The word “faith” is a noun; its case is Genitive; its number is Singular; its gender is Feminine. “It” is a demonstrative pronoun. The case is Nominative; the number is Singular; and the gender is Neuter

“It” agrees with “faith” and “grace” in number but not gender. This is explained by the neuter being used to express a connection between both “faith” and “grace.” I have heard and read that explanation—it was given by many theologians more famous and smarter in Greek than I will ever be.

Since I am not a Greek scholar, I will continue to research this linguistic issue and I encourage you to investigate it as well. Until then, God bless.

The Archangel

Eph 2:8 -
For by grace (tēi gar chariti). Explanatory reason. "By the grace" already mentioned in Eph_2:5 and so with the article.
Through faith (dia pisteōs). This phrase he adds in repeating what he said in Eph_2:5 to make it plainer. "Grace" is God’s part, "faith" ours.
And that (kai touto). Neuter, not feminine tautē, and so refers not to pistis (feminine) or to charis (feminine also), but to the act of being saved by grace conditioned on faith on our part. Paul shows that salvation does not have its source (ex humōn, out of you) in men, but from God. Besides, it is God’s gift (dōron) and not the result of our work. - RWP

But whether are we to understand, faith or salvation as being the gift of God? This question is answered by the Greek text: τῃ γαρ χαριτι εστε σεσωσμενοι δια της πιστεως· και τουτο ουκ εξ ὑμων· Θεου το δωρον, ουκ εξ εργων· ἱνα μη τις καυχησηται· "By this grace ye are saved through faith; and This (τουτο, this salvation) not of you; it is the gift of God, not of works: so that no one can boast." "The relative τουτο, this, which is in the neuter gender, cannot stand for πιστις, faith, which is the feminine; but it has the whole sentence that goes before for its antecedent." But it may be asked: Is not faith the gift of God? Yes, as to the grace by which it is produced; but the grace or power to believe, and the act of believing, are two different things. Without the grace or power to believe no man ever did or can believe; but with that power the act of faith is a man’s own. God never believes for any man, no more than he repents for him: the penitent, through this grace enabling him, believes for himself: nor does he believe necessarily, or impulsively when he has that power; the power to believe may be present long before it is exercised, else, why the solemn warnings with which we meet every where in the word of God, and threatenings against those who do not believe? Is not this a proof that such persons have the power but do not use it? They believe not, and therefore are not established. This, therefore, is the true state of the case: God gives the power, man uses the power thus given, and brings glory to God: without the power no man can believe; with it, any man may. - Clarke

For by grace are ye saved through faith. Lest they might forget the doctrine that he ever preached, he reminds them that works of the law never saved them; that they were saved by God's grace shown in the gospel; that this salvation was obtained through the faith. The definite article is found before faith in the Greek, showing that the faith, or the gospel, is meant.
It is the gift of God. The salvation is not due to ourselves, but is God's gift. The grammatical construction of the Greek does not allow us to make "faith" the subject of the last clause. It is not "faith," but salvation through the faith, which is the gift of God. So says John Wesley in his Notes: "This refers to the previous clause, That you are saved, etc."
Not of works. The salvation is not due to works of law, or to our own merit; hence there is no ground for boasting. - PNT

For by grace, etc.
This may truly be called exceeding riches of grace, for ye are saved by grace. Grace has the article, the grace of God, in Eph_2:5, Eph_2:7.
And that
Not faith, but the salvation.
Of God
Emphatic. Of God is it the gift. - VWS

For by grace are ye saved - By mere favor. It is not by your Own merit; it is not because you have any claim. This is a favorite doctrine with Paul, as it is with all who love the Lord Jesus in sincerity; compare the notes at Rom_1:7; Rom_3:24, note.
Through faith - Grace bestowed through faith, or in connection with believing; see the notes at Rom_1:17; Rom_4:16, note.
And that not of yourselves - That is, salvation does not proceed from yourselves. The word rendered "that" - τοῦτο touto - is in the neuter gender, and the word "faith" - πίστις pistis - is in the feminine. The word "that," therefore, does not refer particularly to faith, as being the gift of God, but to "the salvation by grace" of which he had been speaking. This is the interpretation of the passage which is the most obvious, and which is now generally conceded to be the true one; see Bloomfield. Many critics, however, as Doddridge, Beza, Piscator, and Chrysostom, maintain that the word "that" (τοῦτο touto) refers to "faith" (πίστις pistis); and Doddridge maintains that such a use is common in the New Testament. As a matter of grammar this opinion is certainly doubtful, if not untenable; but as a matter of theology it is a question of very little importance. - Barnes (calvinist)

 

[Brother Bob]

For once we need more of Eph 2 posted so we can highlight more of what this Scripture means.

Ephesians, chapter 2

1: And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins;
2: Wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience:
3: Among whom also we all had our conversation in times past in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind; and were by nature the children of wrath, even as others.
4: But God, who is rich in mercy, for his great love wherewith he loved us,

5: Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved
6: And hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus:

Here He was talking about the Gentile race as a whole. Not individuals but telling how it was not works of the Law but the Grace of God that give the Gentiles a right to be saved.
7: That in the ages to come he might shew the exceeding riches of his grace in his kindness toward us through Christ Jesus.

8: For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:
9: Not of works, lest any man should boast.
10: For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.

Here He is saying that good works that we should walk in were before ordained and that we are saved by Grace and the means to get to the Grace is "faith".

11: Wherefore remember, that ye being in time past Gentiles in the flesh, who are called Uncircumcision by that which is called the Circumcision in the flesh made by hands;

Here He is telling us what works it was not by that the Gentiles were brought in by. The works of the Law, Circumcisim of the flesh

12: That at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world:
13: But now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ.
14: For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us;

Here once again He is telling us we (the Gentiles) were lost and without God but by the Grace of God, which is the blood of Christ are we brought into the fold.

15: Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace;

Here once again He is telling us what kind of works it is that we (the Gentiles) were not saved by.

16: And that he might reconcile both unto God in one body by the cross, having slain the enmity thereby:
17: And came and preached peace to you which were afar off, and to them that were nigh.
18: For through him we both have access by one Spirit unto the Father.

19: Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellowcitizens with the saints, and of the household of God;

Once again, He is telling us that by Grace were the Gentile nation brought into the household.

The Calvinist keep quoting works but the works Eph is talking about is the works of the Law could not save us or break down the middle wall of partition or bring the Gentile into the household but only by the Grace of God.

The whole chapter is talking about the bringing in of the Gentile nation by the Grace of God and not of the works of the Law!!!!

 

[The Archangel]

Webdog

Webdog,

Please post your sources and enter into a detailed discussion. Really, and I'm not trying to be snotty, I do not have time to read through mountains of jibberish by people I don't know. So, if you'd like to keep discussing this, please be specific and lets talk, you and me, about the matter. Let's not have others talk for us without citing them and let's deal with the finer points. For example: Please explain how "It" refers to "salvation."

Blessings,

The Archangel

 

[The Archangel]

To All

I think I see a pattern emerging from the non-Calvinist persons on this board, especially in this thread. It would seem people think Calvinists believe that one has to do nothing to be saved. Nothing could be further from the truth. Any good Calvinist should, unless he or she has never read the Bible, will affirm that faith is necessary for salvation.

The difference is we believe that God must initiate salvation. To state it another way: The Bible affirms three things 1) The absolute sovereignty of God; 2) The responsibility of man and 3) the inability of man.

Calvinism seeks to take all of the Biblical data into account when describing what happens in salvation.

If man is unable (Romans says that no one seeks after God; Ephesians says we were/are dead in our trespasses and sins) then God must give the ability to respond. Calvinists call this regeneration. When a heart of stone, by the grace of God, becomes a heart of flesh (this is OT language) that heart can and does seek after God.

Both Calvinists and Arminians affirm the work of the Spirit to draw men to Christ. Both Calvinists and Arminians affirm that salvation is by the grace of God. Both Calvinists and Arminians affirm that a person must respond to God in repentance and faith.

As a Calvinist, I see the Arminian idea of “Faith” being the cause of “Grace” as God being put over a barrel, so to speak. It would seem that the Arminians are, in effect, saying: “God, because I have faith, you must save me.” I don’t think that is Biblical. Never do we see God as anything but the benefactor and us (man) as anything but the beneficiary.

I’ve gotta go. More later. Until then, God bless,

The Archangel

 

[Brother Bob]

No we are not trying to put God over a barrel. We are just saying we believe!

Also Archangel; you are not as hard as all the other Calvinist or at least I don't think so. You do not insult us and you are willing to debate. One thing for sure all this study in Eph has made me more understanding on what it is really saying. He was talking about bringing in the Gentile nation by the Grace of God and not the works of the Law such as Circumcisim. blessings,

I suspect the Prodical son returning home must bother the Calvinist?

 

[npetreley]

And who are you to say that?

I'm me. And that is my opinion. Consider it or ignore it.

 

[LeBuick]

One thing for sure all this study in Eph has made me more understanding on what it is really saying. He was talking about bringing in the Gentile nation by the Grace of God and not the works of the Law such as Circumcisim. blessings,

And I thank GOD daily he didn't stop with the lost sheep of the house of Israel. He made sure his Gospel reached the uttermost which is where I live.

I suspect the Prodical son returning home must bother the Calvinist?

I'm sure they'll say he left bread crumbs. :laugh:

 

[Scott J]

Quote:
Those statements are contradictory. How can you say that such a choice in the first sentence is a) not an action/decision and b) not good? It is an act of will and it is good... and according to what you are arguing, it is the critical contribution to a man's salvation. Man's goodness is what you must declare as the difference between the saved and unsaved.

You said that "Salvation is of the Lord" but the reason he is saved is because he makes a good decision independent of the Lord.



God made us that way, amen

Now we are getting somewhere. Yes. Before we will accept Christ, God makes us anew... He instills good will in us.

Quote:
Feel free. I don't even know that it is particularly calvinistic of its own accord. The part I would like you to catch though is that the initiating will to "turn faith on" so to speak... is God's good will, not ours.


Turn faith on, lol. Faith is to believe and when you say all men have not faith is that all men don't believe, but they have a measure of faith, enough to know that is a God and good and evil.

Something turns faith on. It is either our own goodness or God's. Why do you keep avoiding that issue? Were you saved because you were good?

Quote:
I think a much better analogy would have been did you "choose" your mother? Did you choose to be born? But even if you didn't, were those things a "violation of your will"?

Love is most certainly a choice and most certainly influenced... but the initial cause that preceeds any decision made by the child to love or hate was the decision of the mother to conceive.
Well the mother chose to kill her baby and she could of chose not to kill it.

Yes. And in both cases she is still an unregenerate sinner.

Amazes me that man can choose everything in life even to killing himself if he wants, he can choose to do good like giving to the poor, he can choose to do evil like lusting after his neighbors wife but for some reason the Calvinist believe he can't choose God. Amazing!

Actually if you have been paying any attention at all to my posts you would know that I believe man must choose God. The issue is why will one choose God while another will not. There is goodness involved as well as unrighteousness. We agree I think that the unrighteousness comes from man himself both through Adam and the choice of the individual.

The question then is where does the goodness come from? What amazes me is that you all stumble at this question so badly. Either man is saved because he possesses enough righteousness to make the right choice or because God causes a change in the man first that causes him to make a righteous choice.

Answering the question really isn't as hard as you guys make it. Either you were good, God recognized it, and combined that goodness with Christ's sacrifice to accomplish your salvation or else you were not good were wholly dependent on God's grace for salvation.

 

[Scott J]

God allows a man to be lost but will not allow him to be saved. Amazing!!!

God always allows man to be saved. But man will not of his own accord deny self and sin so God graciously quickens some spiritually so that they might accept the truth.

 

[Scott J]

You must hang out with a different crowd than I do for I never knew a man who wanted to go to hell!!

Not the same as being willing to accept Christ to attain heaven. Surely no one wants to go to hell but many think they can devise their own means to get to heaven.

It takes a very different "want to" to repent, accept Christ, and deny self.

 

[Scott J]

I don't say that. I believe that God reveals Himself to all men for He said so. "Go ye not from house to house for they shall know me from the least unto the greatest". " The Grace of God which bringeth Salvation hath appeared unto all men, teaching them to deny ungodliness and worldly lust that they should live soberly and righteously in this present world looking for that blessed hope and glorious appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ, etc.
How do you answer that Scripture it seems to include all men?

Do "all" as in each and every individual hear the gospel? Have all individuals heard the gospel since the ascension?

You believe that God reveals Himself to all men? If that is true then why don't all accept Him? Acknowledging that all do not... why do any? What about them separates them from the damned?

You still need to answer that question. Are they saved by the merit of their choice or by the grace of God?

 

[Brother Bob]

Again, God man made the creature subject to vanity (He could choose evil) but not willingly (is not God's will that man do evil) but by reason of Him (Jesus) subjected the same in Hope. ( He could choose good and live)

God made us all so we can choose good or evil. He left that decision up to mankind. He don't make it for us. He is there is we will choose Him but if we don't He is there to cast us into Hell.

You got a spot in your brain Scott that is blocking out the answer. I have tried to help you but it seems to no avail. Sad too, for I sure have tried.

 

[Scott J]

Again, God man made the creature subject to vanity (He could choose evil) but not willingly (is not God's will that man do evil) but by reason of Him (Jesus) subjected the same in Hope. ( He could choose good and live)

That isn't what "subjected" means.

Here's the quote: 19For the earnest expectation of the creature waiteth for the manifestation of the sons of God.
20For the creature was made subject to vanity, not willingly, but by reason of him who hath subjected the same in hope,

Note "manifestation" of the sons of God. We are to be revealed. God isn't waiting on us to choose... He can "manifest" us because as this passage goes on to explain, He foreknew and predestined us.

It also doesn't say that "God man made the creature"... It says the "creature" or creation was made subject to vanity against its will.

As many have said here, though God did not cause man to sin, He did account for that sin in His plan.

But to the main problem with your interpretation: "subjected" does not mean "He could choose good and live". In fact, in context it seems to relate to nature, not man. Either way "subjected" does not imply in any way the ability to choose one way or the other. It means to put under.

God made us all so we can choose good or evil.

Yes He did.

He left that decision up to mankind.

Yes He did.

He don't make it for us.

In a sense that is true also.

He is there is we will choose Him but if we don't He is there to cast us into Hell.

Right again. The problem is that we will not choose him in our natural, spiritually dead state. "Ye must be born again". New birth is the biblical answer to what separates sinners who choose good from sinners who choose evil. God makes us a new creation with a nature instilled with the goodness to repent and accept Christ.

You got a spot in your brain Scott that is blocking out the answer.

No Bob. I understand what you are attempting to say. But you continue, perhaps because of a spot on your brain, to refuse to accept the direct implication of what you are saying. If you believe that the difference between the saved and lost is a good decision and that good decision must come from the natural, spiritually dead man with no effectual prompting by God then you have just designed a system of salvation where God rewards the merit of men.

I have tried to help you but it seems to no avail. Sad too, for I sure have tried.

Do you know how condescending that sounds? I don't have any trouble following your arguments nor understanding why you don't want to consider certain inconvenient facts. The thing that is truly sad is that you are so determined to find a way to give man some credit in his salvation... without admitting that you are doing it.