What is "good" in God's sight?

[The Biblicist]

Sure if I follow you cherry picking selections you have a case. However, what you don't show is that you are merging two different discussions we were having and that the second quotation you give in your list refers to the second line of discussion instead of the "supposition" claim. Take that out of the scenario and you don't have a case at all.

Originally Posted by The Biblicist
You can't be serious??? Do you understand that little of the Calvinistic position to ask such a question??? We believe that "repentance" is inseparable from "faith" and both are fruits of regeneration and you know that. So obviously, we do not believe that repentance is a "meritorious work of righteousness."

Ok, allow me to reword that...are you under the impression that repentance done as a free responsible act (as in our system) somehow merits or earns forgiveness and eternal life? If so, why? On what basis do you draw that conclusion? - Skandelon

Thus this response by had nothing to do with the "supposition" claim or the quotation by me you first give. You are merging two different lines of discussion to make yourself look good when in fact the true order reveals your second quotation had NOTHING to do with the first quotation in the order of your listing. Your arrangement of posts is skewed to simply make yourself look good.

Let me make this clear to our readers becuase you are intentionally trying to misrepresent our conversation by the cherry selection of posts you have picked which really do not have anything to do with our disagreement.

You should have listed the posts in the following order if you want to rightly represent the true order of our conversation without skewing it:

1. Post #85

So, do you believe that our broken humiliation, by which we cry out to God to rescue us, trusting only in Him because we have no other hope, is a 'meritorious work of righteousness?' - Skandelon

2. Post #89

Quote:
Originally Posted by Skandelon
So, do you believe that our broken humiliation, by which we cry out to God to rescue us, trusting only in Him because we have no other hope, is a 'meritorious work of righteousness?'

You can't be serious??? Do you understand that little of the Calvinistic position to ask such a question??? We believe that "repentance" is inseparable from "faith" and both are fruits of regeneration and you know that. So obviously, we do not believe that repentance is a "meritorious work of righteousness." - The Biblicist

3. Post#91

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Biblicist
You can't be serious??? Do you understand that little of the Calvinistic position to ask such a question??? We believe that "repentance" is inseparable from "faith" and both are fruits of regeneration and you know that. So obviously, we do not believe that repentance is a "meritorious work of righteousness."

Ok, allow me to reword that...are you under the impression that repentance done as a free responsible act (as in our system) somehow merits or earns forgiveness and eternal life? If so, why? On what basis do you draw that conclusion? - Skandelon


NOTE: Note that Skandelon's requrest to "allow me to reword that" has nothing to do with our argument over "supposition" versus what I "believe" but over an entirely different subject. We had not even entered into any disagreement over whether he asked for me to respond according to his "supposition" or according to what I "believe" yet. However, in Skandelon's order of posts he makes it look like he is asking "allow me to reword" in regard to our disagreement about "supposition" verus "belief" WHICH IS IMPOSSIBLE BECAUSE THAT DISGREEMENT OCCURRED LATER AFTER THIS POST. However, he is taking this earlier post and attempting to make it look that this was his request DURING our argument whether he had asked me to respond according to what I "believe" or according to the "supposition" that his view was correct. Pure dishonesty in the arrangement of this post to infer that idea!

If you can't understand what I am saying, then let me put it this way. He is taking a post PREVIOUS to our argument and making it look like it was his request DURING our argument over "supposition" versus "belief" thus making it appear that I was not even charitable enough to allow him to correct his wording but intentionally attempt to misrepresent and mischarge him. He is intentionally doing this and thus again being openly dishonest.

 

[The Biblicist]

Mt 12:34 O generation of vipers, how can ye, being evil, speak good things? for out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh.

Here is a parallel text with the one that Winman has been repeating over and over again trying to prove that those "being evil" are capable of doing "good."

The rhetorical question by Christ implies they cannot speak "good" things but only have that appearance in the sight of men but as we shall see the nature of the heart dictates the nature of what is expressed in words and actions.

Notice, that Christ defines their nature as "vipers....being evil." The very same description "being evil" found in Winman's proof text. Here this refers to the condition of the heart as verses 34-35 proves this and "things" in verse 35 refer to external manifestations of the heart (words, deeds).

Second, that this description of their nature is in the form of a question "HOW can ye....being evil SPEAK GOOD THINGS"?

Third, notice his explanatory assertion that the source of speaking is from the heart - "for out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh." In other words, "vipers, how can ye being evil" in regard to YOUR HEART speak "good" things as it is the nature of the heart that determines the moral value of what comes out of the mouth. Then he says,

35 A good man out of the good treasure of the heart bringeth forth good things: and an evil man out of the evil treasure bringeth forth evil things.

In other words, the nature of the words must be judged by the nature of the heart. In other words, what appears only to be "good" things coming from the mouth to men is not "good" in God's sight as God judges the moral value of the words by the heart not by the nature of the content of the words. God looks on the heart and in God's sight nothing good can come forth from an evil heart as an "evil man out of the EVIL treasure bringeth forth evil things."

Notice that these two verses are the conclusion of the following Matthew 12:33:

33 Either make the tree good, and his fruit good; or else make the tree corrupt, and his fruit corrupt: for the tree is known by his fruit.
34 O generation of vipers, how can ye, being evil, speak good things? for out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh.
35 A good man out of the good treasure of the heart bringeth forth good things: and an evil man out of the evil treasure bringeth forth evil things

Notice that "things" in this passage refers to EXTERNAL manifestations of the heart (words, actions). So also, in this passage "the tree" and the "heart" are one and the same. The words "being evil" refers to the condition of their heart which can only bring forth "evil" and cannot bring forth good because it requires a "good man" with a "good heart" to bring forth "good" things.

The phrase "make the tree" in this passage does not refer to changing the nature of the tree as no tree can do that. Jesus is rebuking their hypocrisy. Be one thing or the other, but don’t pretend to goodness!" Their evil hearts were being concealed by words with "good" content because their works did not match their words. Stop being hypocrits by your "good" mouth when your heart is evil by the inconsistency between your words and works. Be consistent with your heart and stop speaking hypocritical words that imply to men that that you are "good" instead of "being evil" in heart. In regard to Christ, "make the tree" means be consistent with what you say about Christ. How can you claim Christ is empowered by the Devil when his words and works are in keeping with God's Word, so be consistent with yourselves and with Christ as you speak one thing and do another whereas Christ's word's match his works.

Again, irrefutable Biblical evidence has been given to show that man is by nature a sinner and he can do nothing good as nothing "clean" can come out of an "unclean" heart just as Jesus said in Matthew 7:16-17; 12:33-35. It is irrefutable because my distractors have nowhere to go and so must reduce the conversation to personal attacks rather than Biblical interpretation.

 

[Skandelon]

There are numerous discussions going at once and maybe you felt that you were responding to one line of arguments while I felt I was responding to another, who knows? But a simple re-read reveals very clearly that all the discussions up to that point in the thread melded into one key point (at least that is the way I was reading it)...below are the posts where the real contention started:

You had said, "Since your system is not Biblical but antibiblical in regard to salvation, then that kind of repentance would be Biblically termed "worldly sorrow" and is of the flesh - 2 Cor. 7:10"

See, you are talking about OUR SYSTEM. You are addressing what you believe are OUR PRESUMPTIONS about repentance. But you really straw-manning us because you were NOT accepting our actual suppositions....which is why I said...

If you are going to presume our system then presume IT, and not the straw-man. We believe humility and repentance is exactly what scripture says it is even if is an actual free response of man...so you still haven't answered the question. You've only straw-manned us..

You replied saying...

You asked my opinion not your opinion of your position, as a theological position. Of course you do not see your position as I see it.

That is when I brought up the 'supposition' comment because I was attempting to reflect back on your straw man above..

A supposition is to suppose something IS true. I asked you to suppose OUR position is true and then answer that question under that supposition. Instead you supposed your straw-man was true and replied accordingly.

Does someone who asks for forgiveness, even if they are asking 'freely', deserve to be forgiven? In your eyes, does asking for forgiveness, in our system, merit one not only being forgiven but given eternal life in glory with God? Do you think the request itself is so valuable, so meritorious in and of itself that it earns eternal life?

You then replied to another point in the thread but it was dealing with the same topic of repentance which is why I thought we were still on the same line of debate, apparently you weren't...

This exactly what I am saying. One must first be "created" in Christ Jesus, which is the impartation of righteousness by a creative act of God BEFORE they can DESIRE or DO works of righteousness. Lost people do not righteously pursue righteousness because they have NO HEART for righteousness and their pursuit is for SELF-JUSTIFICATION which is disobedience to God's Word.

This lead to my rebuttal about OUR view of humiliation and repentance and then the 'rewording' of that statement.

So, it was clearly a misunderstanding as I was following one line of discussion and you another...both of which were about humility and repentance. So for you to accuse me of intentional dishonesty is absurd. That is what is making me leave. I was just as frustrated with you and your unwillingness to stay on my line of discussion as you were with me, but did I infer you were a liar and start saying things like...

... He is intentionally doing this and thus again being openly dishonest.

Now, if you can stop presuming the worse about people and try to 'work with others' and not make things so personal then maybe, just maybe we won't have to go through all this crud in order to have a decent discussion!!!

 

[Skandelon]

Ok, let's start over... Try this...

Suppose, just for sake of argument that the non-Calvinistic perspective is accurate and men are responsible (response-abled) and free to respond to God's gracious appeal to be reconciled. Here is a question for consideration:

Do you believe that a man who 'freely' (of his own RESPONSE to God's gracious revelation) humbles himself and asks for forgiveness deserves to be forgiven and to spend eternity with God in heaven? In other words, do you think the free agent earns or deserves or merits his forgiveness and salvation simply on the basis of his freely requesting it?

If someone killed your entire family and then felt remorse and humbly approached you to ask for forgiveness of his own accord, and you decided not only to forgive him but you gave him everything you owned too, would you believe that he deserved or earned that from you simply because of his remorse and request? I ask because some Calvinists seem to think that man's humiliation in asking of forgiveness somehow merits or earns what God does for us simply because we are free to ask or refrain from asking.

 

[The Biblicist]

There are numerous discussions going at once and maybe you felt that you were responding to one line of arguments while I felt I was responding to another, who knows?

No feelings are necessary as your request to let you reword had nothing at all to do with our LATER discussion on suppositional versus my own belief - period!

It is true that we were on the way to entering into that debate but had not yet reached it.

 

[The Biblicist]

Ok, let's start over... Try this...

Suppose, just for sake of argument that the non-Calvinistic perspective is accurate and men are responsible (response-abled) and free to respond to God's gracious appeal to be reconciled. Here is a question for consideration:

YOu are asking me to entertain a supposition that REQUIRES ME to repudiate all that I believe in regard to the fallen human nature IN ORDER to even entertain that supposition. Since that is the prerequisite to entertain this supposition, then of course you are correct as there can be no other logical outcome.

 

[Yeshua1]

YOu are asking me to entertain a supposition that REQUIRES ME to repudiate all that I believe in regard to the fallen human nature IN ORDER to even entertain that supposition. Since that is the prerequisite to entertain this supposition, then of course you are correct as there can be no other logical outcome.

For it to be as Skan sees it being, Billy graham would hold crusades in a cementary, and dead bodies would rise up to acceptjesus!

How can those spiritually dead bring themselves back to spiritual life?

 

[Squire Robertsson]

This thread is closed.