What is meant by Cals when they ask: do you believe "by our own ability?"

[glfredrick]

What is stated above is deficient in understanding theological truths, and basically an attempt to protect the false notion of freewill.

Yes, God has used these other means, but He also reserves the right, and exercises the right to change hearts, harden hearts, cause us to desire, change and direct wills, all for the objective to accomplish His will, purposes and for His ultimate Glory.

God most certainly can and does changes the will of man to accomplish His purposes. He has done this throughout history. He still does so today in thelives of believers.

I recall the story about a particular Pharaoh in Egypt... :laugh:

 

[preacher4truth]

I really should apologize to DHK. Even suggesting to an old fundamentalist such as he that a point of his doctrine might match up with Calvinism is akin to calling him a Catholic. My bad... :laugh:

I looked at where you might have seen some hope akin to George Whitefields famous conclusion "we become Calvinists by the grace of God" and concur that perhaps the process is in motion! :thumbsup: :laugh:

 

[DHK]

Of course... How is that inconsistent with my view? EVERYONE resists God before God draws them via the Holy Spirit. Have you now become a Calvinist? :laugh:

I am what I am--a Biblicist!

 

[webdog]

I recall the story about a particular Pharaoh in Egypt... :laugh:

Oh yeah, the one God judicially hardened after he hardened his own heart.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

I am what I am--a Biblicist!

Ive heard that a few times lately....but what is it actually?

 

[DHK]

Ive heard that a few times lately....but what is it actually?

I am not a Calvinist and did not go to a Calvinistic college.
The same can be said for Arminian. I am certainly not Arminian.
As I study the Bible on my own I arrive at my own conclusions, not those of any one person or system. For example I am a dispensationalist because of my own study. But I may not have as many or as few dispensations as others.

I have come to conclude:

And further, by these, my son, be admonished: of making many books there is no end; and much study is a weariness of the flesh. (Ecclesiastes 12:12)

 

[preacher4truth]

I am not a Calvinist and did not go to a Calvinistic college.
The same can be said for Arminian. I am certainly not Arminian.
As I study the Bible on my own I arrive at my own conclusions, not those of any one person or system. For example I am a dispensationalist because of my own study. But I may not have as many or as few dispensations as others.

I have come to conclude:

And further, by these, my son, be admonished: of making many books there is no end; and much study is a weariness of the flesh. (Ecclesiastes 12:12)

I seriously doubt you're a dispensationalist via your own study alone. I do however embrace your own words that you come to your own conclusions.

 

[Aaron]

Outright lie, but not unexpected considering the source.

No. You affirm it everytime you have the opportunity. You assert that all men are walking about with all sins forgiven, yet one thing is lacking. What is that one thing?

 

[Aaron]

Define "natural aptitude". Did man create the ability to have faith, or God? Isn't everything we deem "natural" in actuality all from God?

See what I mean? Everything is from God so all things are hallowed. They're in effect saying there is no difference between the flesh and the spirit. Mormons say that.

Is the citing of verses necessary to rebut an error so elementary and basic?

 

[DHK]

I seriously doubt you're a dispensationalist via your own study alone. I do however embrace your own words that you come to your own conclusions.

By my own study doesn't mean I exclude the books/works of other men and teachers.

 

[Aaron]

VIII Parrot Disease

Only those who would deny that the Gospel message IS a powerful working of the Holy Spirit would deny the need of it in order to believe. How can they believe in whom they have not heard?

And how do they hear without an ear to hear what the Spirit says?

What ability do you have that you take credit for Aaron? Are you musical, artistic, athletic, or anything that others might consider "gifted?" Do you give God glory for such gifts or do you say of those things, "I get the glory and the credit?"

What good do you have that was not given to you?

And how many do you know who have God given abilities that squander them, or take them for granted, or glory in them without giving praise to the creator?


You have yet to draw any real distinction between "natural" good (good that comes from man) and "divine" good (good that comes from God). I think all "good" is divine, because that is what scripture says. Some may rebel and turn that which is given for good into evil, or not use their God given ability, but that doesn't lesson the credit due to God.

Every day a jailor brought the prisoners their food, and as he laid down the dishes he would say a word to them. If their meal was flesh he would remind them that they were eating corpses, or give them some account of the slaughtering: or, if it was the inwards of some beast, he would read them a lecture in anatomy and show the likeness of the mess to the same parts in themselves. Or if the meal were eggs he would recall to them that they were eating the menstrum of a verminous fowl, and crack a few jokes with the female prisoner. So he went on day by day. Then I dreamed that one day there was nothing but milk for them, and the jailor said as he put down the pipkin:



"Our relations with the cow are not delicate—as you can easily see if you imagine eating any of her other secretions."



Now John had been in the pit a shorter time than any of the others: and at these words something seemed to snap in his head and he gave a great sigh and suddenly spoke out in a loud, clear voice:



"Thank heaven! Now at last I know that you are talking nonsense"



"What do you mean?" said the jailor, wheeling round upon him.



"You are trying to pretend that unlike things are like. You are trying to make us think that milk is the same sort of thing as sweat or dung."



"And pray, what difference is there except by custom?"



"Are you a liar or only a fool, that you see no difference between that which Nature casts out as refuse and that which she stores up as food?"​

—C. S. Lewis, The Pilgrim's Regress​

​

You are like the jailor. You can see no difference between the flesh and the Spirit. Both are from God, but one He does not receive, and the other He does.

 

[webdog]

See what I mean? Everything is from God so all things are hallowed. They're in effect saying there is no difference between the flesh and the spirit. Mormons say that.

Is the citing of verses necessary to rebut an error so elementary and basic?

I wouldn't expect you to get it and you didn't disappoint. Have fun erecting your strawmen not wasting my time.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

By my own study doesn't mean I exclude the books/works of other men and teachers.

So People like Pink, A Rogers, Spurgeon, Luther, Edwards etc have no relevance to you then. I wonder, do you think the HS had enlightened these folks so that they could in-turn do the same for you or do you as a "Blblesist" consider it your responsibility to extract it directly from Scripture.....is that what you mean by biblesist?

Then does any Confessions of faith serve you or do you consider them also as null & void? This is interesting this "Biblesist" moniker ....to me at least. Anybody else care to comment?

OK read it again YOU DONT EXCLUDE other men...my apologies, read it wrong.

 

[DHK]

So People like Pink, A Rogers, Spurgeon, Luther, Edwards etc have no relevance to you then. I wonder, do you think the HS had enlightened these folks so that they could in-turn do the same for you or do you as a "Blblesist" consider it your responsibility to extract it directly from Scripture.....is that what you mean by biblesist?

Then does any Confessions of faith serve you or do you consider them also as null & void? This is interesting this "Biblesist" moniker ....to me at least. Anybody else care to comment?

I have read plenty of Spurgeon's works. I read some of Pink's. The others I don't have. The Holy Spirit works through his word, not through commentaries. That doesn't mean I don't learn through commentaries, but the Holy Spirit speaks to me when I am meditating on His Word.
A Biblicist is simply one who follows the Bible.
A Baptist has as one of his major distinctives that the Bible is his final authority in all matters of faith and doctrine. So it is with me.

I don't normally look at Confessions of Faith. For one, I don't have any to look at. I use my library more than the ones on-line. And secondly I don't find that a Confession of Faith would be particularly helpful.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

I have read plenty of Spurgeon's works. I read some of Pink's. The others I don't have. The Holy Spirit works through his word, not through commentaries. That doesn't mean I don't learn through commentaries, but the Holy Spirit speaks to me when I am meditating on His Word.
A Biblicist is simply one who follows the Bible.
A Baptist has as one of his major distinctives that the Bible is his final authority in all matters of faith and doctrine. So it is with me.

I don't normally look at Confessions of Faith. For one, I don't have any to look at. I use my library more than the ones on-line. And secondly I don't find that a Confession of Faith would be particularly helpful.

What if you find the bible appearing to contradict itself...what do you do to resolve the problem?

 

[DHK]

What if you find the bible appearing to contradict itself...what do you do to resolve the problem?

"Read to reject."
In other words read with an analytical mind.
Most of the commentaries that I have are written by Calvinists when you consider men like Barnes, Matthew Henry, etc. Right now in the thread on the kenosis theory their works are helpful. But when it comes to eschatology I may have to find another source. I have Keil and Delitzch on the OT. They are liberals believing in the JEDP theory and other liberal ideas. I reject those things when I read them. But I know they have an excellent knowledge of Hebrew, so when it comes to the meanings of Hebrew words they are fairly reliable. That is what I mean by "Read to reject." Reject the bad, accept the good. No one is perfect on everything; not even Spurgeon.

 

[DHK]

What if you find the bible appearing to contradict itself...what do you do to resolve the problem?

My turn to not read your post carefully.
There are many places where the Bible appears to contradict itself.
Usually further study clears up any contradictions.

 

[Aaron]

I wouldn't expect you to get it and you didn't disappoint. Have fun erecting your strawmen not wasting my time.

---------------------------------------------

 

[Skandelon]

I don't see that in the text. I see a lot of assumptions on your part.

You need to be specific. Blanket and unfounded accusations serve no one. Reply to a specific quote or point it out and explain why you think its an assumption on my part then we'll be engaging in a discussion rather than senseless banter.

 

[Skandelon]

Of course He uses "normative" means.

Why when the "supernatural" one (regeneration) is the only one that has the desired effect?

If, on the other hand, you mean to say that He can ONLY use some circumstance that can be described in very human terms of cause and effect, then you have neutered the Almighty God of the universe and rendered Him something other than His self-described "all powerful" and "all knowing" state.

If you read what I wrote you will see that I acknowledged that God COULD have simply changed Jonah's will by making his heart obedient, but that God CHOSE to work through normative means, thus showing just one example of God's choice to work through such means.

In what you describe above, it is STILL God doing the action to bring a rebellious individual, who may want nothing at all of God, to repentance!

True, but not through the irresistible "supernatural" means posed by your theological system. And even in the case of Jonah, where God is working to change the will of a believer we see God using such normative means to effectuate change. How can one be expected to believe that God would go to those ends to bring Jonah's heart into submission and then merely flip a regenerative supernatural switch on for those who hear Jonah's message so as to make them willing to believe and repent? I'm not saying God couldn't do that, just that it's never taught in scripture. God works through normative and resistible means.

He may sovereignly intervene to guarantee his messengers preach His truth (as in the case with the inspiration of scripture or the sending of a prophet), but that in no way proves he works through some supernatural regenerative means to guarantee certain members in the audience belief their message.

You do pray in accordance with the Holy Spirit, do you not? Or are your prayers the actions of your own heart? Just wondering, for why else would Jesus teach us to pray in accordance with God's divine will, expressed in heaven and on earth if that were something not possible to achieve?

Was Jesus' prayer to allow this cup to pass from him in accordance with the divine will, or a heartfelt expression of grief from someone living in real relationship and responding to real life circumstances? I think you over systematize some things. We converse with God like a son to a father or a friend to a friend, not like slave to a master who has predetermined all that you are going to say and all that is going to happen. There is no real relationship in that, IMO, regardless of how similar the inner workings might be to that finite understanding of infinite matters.

Now, Skandelon, you know better than this. I even gigged you on this same point in another thread the other day. Elect does not equal "saved." Elect equals "elect." "Saved" is a broad category that describes a number of related events, election being but one of them. Why do you insist on trotting out this defeated argument time after time?

As if the whole "so why do you Arminians pray for the lost" is a new one? Come now. My point in making this argument was to show the same false dichotomy can be set up against your system as well. I thought you were well versed enough in both camps to recognize the correlation. I should have made the connection clearer.

To the greater question above, we pray for lost souls because in God's economy, that is what HE commanded us to do. We are to pray for the elect, and pray that they might be made part of His kingdom. That is precisely because "elect" does not equal "saved" as expressed above.

And there you have it. We can certainly pray for the same reason, if no other. We both believe our prayers are a part of the redemptive process, whether effectually actuated by divine decree or permissively ordained by the same.

I know that you despise Calvinists,

You don't know that because I don't despise you or any one calling themselves Calvinistic. As I've testified numerous times, my brother and my best friend are both Calvinistic believers and I love them both dearly. I simply think they are mistaken regarding this one point of doctrine. Nothing more.

We CERTAINLY would not give man any glory for choosing God.

Nor would I and the fact you think I might only goes to show you've yet to truly understand the doctrine you appear to reject and despise.

I can't find a single place in the Scriptures that indicate that man should have that sort of glory, reserved only for God.

I agree.

I just believe that God gets more glory when He makes genuine appeals for reconciliation rather than fake ones.