Who Maketh Thee To Differ From Another

[OldRegular]

I have asked, as have others, several times of those on this Forum who hold the doctrine of Pelagianism, semi-Pelagianism, or Arminianism [all of which I characterize as Freewillism] what distinguishes those who of their own free will believe the Gospel from those who do not believe the Gospel? So far no one has effectively answered this question.

The Apostle Paul in his letter to the Church at Corinth asks a question that gets to the heart of the matter in the following Scripture.

1Corinthians 4:7. For who maketh thee to differ from another? and what hast thou that thou didst not receive? now if thou didst receive it, why dost thou glory, as if thou hadst not received it?

 

[Thinkingstuff]

I'm not sure what you would lable me.

I believe that God is in control of everything. I believe he has elected those who are to be saved. I believe that he desires that all men be saved. I believe that in the context of God being soverign over everything that I still have the ability to choose and that my choices don't suppersede God's will and that non of it is in conflict with the other. I believe if I end up in heaven its by God's grace and yet he will honor me for chosing him. I believe if I go to hell its because my choices landed me there and also because my name was not in the Lambs book of life. Yet I am fully to blame. I believe I was born with a sin nature. Yet I believe I was created in the image of God and that image is not undone by my sin nature.

 

[Winman]

This has been answered many times, Jesus himself answered this question.

John 3:19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.
20 For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved.
21 But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God.

Jesus himself said the reason some people do not believe is because they love darkness. Their deeds are evil, and the light of God's word exposes them. Therefore they hate the light.

Some men do truth. This is not saying they are better than other men, but they do seek after righteousness. Many a man has been broken by sin and sees the destruction and misery it causes. They long for what is good.

Matt 5:6 Blessed are they which do hunger and thirst after righteousness: for they shall be filled.

Cals/DoGs try to teach that unregenerate man has no desire for God, but Jesus himself said otherwise. And personal experience does as well.

This is a photo of a Billy Graham crusade. One only need open their eyes to see that many thousands are seeking God. Will they all be saved? No. But many will.

This doctrine that man is so depraved that he cannot and will never seek God is false. Many thousands of people followed Christ wherever he went, and many today seek God.

 

[OldRegular]

Winman

As usual you are not addressing the question: What is different about you that caused you to believe compared to the person who does not believe?

 

[Winman]

1Corinthians 4:7. For who maketh thee to differ from another? and what hast thou that thou didst not receive? now if thou didst receive it, why dost thou glory, as if thou hadst not received it?

You take this verse out of context. Paul is telling Christians not to be puffed up believing themselves better than other men.

1 Cor 4:6 And these things, brethren, I have in a figure transferred to myself and to Apollos for your sakes; that ye might learn in us not to think of men above that which is written, that no one of you be puffed up for one against another.
7 For who maketh thee to differ from another? and what hast thou that thou didst not receive? now if thou didst receive it, why dost thou glory, as if thou hadst not received it?

And though you will never admit it, Cals/DoGs think themselves better than other men. They believe themselves to be "the elect". Oh, they will be quick to say they were chosen through no merit of their own, but still, they are very proud to think themselves chosen of God. It comes through loud and clear.

The non-Cal does not believe salvation is of himself. If not for the word of God, I would not have known of the true God and Jesus Christ. If not for the conviction of the Holy Spirit, I would not have realized my lost condition and came to Christ. So, I thank God that he was merciful to me, not only providing Jesus Christ to pay for my sins, but also coming to me through his word and Spirit and telling me how to trust in Jesus for salvation.

 

[OldRegular]

I'm not sure what you would lable me.

I am not sure either!

I believe that God is in control of everything. I believe he has elected those who are to be saved. I believe that he desires that all men be saved. I believe that in the context of God being soverign over everything that I still have the ability to choose and that my choices don't suppersede God's will and that non of it is in conflict with the other. I believe if I end up in heaven its by God's grace and yet he will honor me for chosing him.

The above seems to be a collage of contradictions!

I believe if I go to hell its because my choices landed me there and also because my name was not in the Lambs book of life. Yet I am fully to blame. I believe I was born with a sin nature.

I can agree with the above statements!

Yet I believe I was created in the image of God and that image is not undone by my sin nature.

It all depends what you mean by The Image of GOD!

 

[zrs6v4]

I do think it is a reasonable question to ask.

Another way to put it is-

There are 2 twins both raised the same and both did everything together. When they were 25 they both landed in church by invitation. While hearing the gospel one of them was broken and responded in faith while the other was careless and kept on his way. So what was it about the one who turned to God that was different than the one who didnt?

I would say God opened ones heart and the others He did not.

It is ok to say the one who turned to God was wise. Then why was he wise? I would then say because he had the fear of the Lord. Then I would ask why did he have the fear of the Lord? Again, I would then say because the Holy Spirit opened His heart.

 

[OldRegular]

And though you will never admit it, Cals/DoGs think themselves better than other men. They believe themselves to be "the elect". Oh, they will be quick to say they were chosen through no merit of their own, but still, they are very proud to think themselves chosen of God. It comes through loud and clear.

Wrong as usual Winman. Those who believe in the Sovereign Grace of GOD in Salvation understand that they are saved solely by the grace of GOD through no merit of their own.

The non-Cal does not believe salvation is of himself. If not for the word of God, I would not have known of the true God and Jesus Christ. If not for the conviction of the Holy Spirit, I would not have realized my lost condition and came to Christ. So, I thank God that he was merciful to me, not only providing Jesus Christ to pay for my sins, but also coming to me through his word and Spirit and telling me how to trust in Jesus for salvation.

Winman, I posted the following on another thread frpm Spurgeon’s Sermon “"The Warrant of Faith”. You chose to ignore it there. Hopefully you will ead it and learn.

Secondly, to tell the sinner that he is to believe on Christ because of some warrant in himself, is legal, I dare to say it—legal. Though this method is generally adopted by the higher school of Calvinists, they are herein unsound, uncalvinistic, and legal; it is strange that they who are so bold defenders of free grace should make common cause with Baxterians and Pelagians. I lay it down to he legal for this reason: if I believe in Jesus Christ because I feel a genuine repentance of sin, and therefore have a warrant for my faith, do you not perceive that the first and true ground of my confidence is the fact that I have repented of sin? If I believe in Jesus because I have convictions and a spirit of prayer, then evidently the first and the most important fact is not Christ, but my possession of repentance, conviction, and prayer, so that really my hope hinges upon my having repented; and if this be not legal I do not know what is. Put it lower. My opponents will say, "The sinner must have an awakened conscience before he is warranted to believe on Christ." Well, then, if I trust Christ to save me because I have an awakened conscience, I say again, the most important part of the whole transaction is the alarm of my conscience, and my real trust hangs there. If I lean on Christ because I feel this and that, then I am leaning on my feelings and not on Christ alone, and this is legal indeed. Nay, even if desires after Christ are to be my warrant for believing, if I am to believe in Jesus not because he bids me, but because I feel some desires after him, you will again with half an eye perceive that the most important source of my comfort must be my own desires. So that we shall be always looking within. "Do I really desire? If I do, then Christ can save me; if I do not, then he cannot." And so my desire overrides Christ and his grace. Away with such' legality from the earth!

Again, any other way of preaching than that of bidding the sinner believe because God commands him to believe, is a boasting way of faith. For if my warrant to trust in Jesus be found in my experience, my loathings of sin, or my longings after Christ, then all these good things of mine are a legitimate ground of boasting, because though Christ may save me, yet these were the wedding-dress which fitted me to come to Christ. If these be indispensable pre-requisites and conditions, then the man who has them may truly and justly say, "Christ did save me, but I had the pre-requisites and conditions first, and therefore let these share the praise." See, my brethren, those who have a faith which rests upon their own experience, what are they as a rule? Mark them, and you will perceive much censorious bitterness in them, prompting them to set up their own experience as the standard of saintship, which may assuredly make us suspicious whether they ever were humbled in a gospel manner at all, so as to see that their own best feelings, and best repentances, and best experiences in themselves are nothing more nor less than filthy rags in the sight of God. My dear brethren, when we tell a sinner that foul and filthy as he is, without any preparation or qualification, he is to take Jesus Christ to be his all in all, finding in him all that he can ever need, when we dare on the spot to bid the jailor just startled out of sleep, "Believe in Jesus," we leave no room for self-glorification, all must be of grace. When we find the lame man lying at the temple gates, we do not bid him strengthen his own legs. or feel some life in them, but we bid him in the name of Jesus rise up and walk; surely here when God the Spirit owns the Word, all boasting is excluded. Whether I rely on my experience or my good works makes little difference, for either of these reliances will lead to boasting since they are both legal. Law and boasting are twin brothers, but free grace and gratitude always go together.l

 

[Thinkingstuff]

The above seems to be a collage of contradictions!

I only think they are contradictions if understood with our reasoning ability. But scriptures supports it entirely. I don't think Calvin figured it all out no do I think Jacob Arminius did either.
Jesus wasn't constricted by western philosophy and patterns of western thought that Later Christians were. I believe the eastern thought that seems contradictory in reality is not from God's perspective.

 

[MB]

Hi Oldregular;
I've answered this same question from you before too. It's not that anyone gives you the wrong answer. It's just that your not ready to accept the true answer.
MB

 

[Winman]

Old Regular

I saw what Spurgeon said, and I responded that I do not agree. Jesus himself told the parable of the prodigal son who realized his sin and came and confessed unto his father. And the son was accepted and saved. If Jesus showed us this example, how can it be wrong for a person to confess their sin and come to Jesus?

And it is shown with the parable of the publican as well.

Luke 18:9 And he spake this parable unto certain which trusted in themselves that they were righteous, and despised others:
10 Two men went up into the temple to pray; the one a Pharisee, and the other a publican.
11 The Pharisee stood and prayed thus with himself, God, I thank thee, that I am not as other men are, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even as this publican.
12 I fast twice in the week, I give tithes of all that I possess.
13 And the publican, standing afar off, would not lift up so much as his eyes unto heaven, but smote upon his breast, saying, God be merciful to me a sinner.
14 I tell you, this man went down to his house justified rather than the other: for every one that exalteth himself shall be abased; and he that humbleth himself shall be exalted.

Now I don't care what Spurgeon or any Cal/DoG theologian teaches. Jesus himself showed this publican came into the temple and confessed he was a sinner to God and asked for mercy. And Jesus himself said this man went down to his house justified, his sins forgiven.

Jesus has given us an example here that we are to follow. God was not insulted by this man coming to him under conviction and repentance, his prayer for mercy was accepted with God.

This Cal/DoG doctrine is horrible, it teaches you to be afraid to do the very thing the Lord wants you to do, to come to him confessing your sins and asking for forgiveness. And that is all it is, you are afraid to do what God himself has shown you to do because of the false teachings of man.

Forget what men say, come to Jesus and confess your sins and ask for forgiveness today. He is not going to condemn you for obeying him.

 

[Skandelon]

Hermeneutics 101 teaches us not to pluck a verse from its context to try a validate a point, which is what I believe the OP does.

We must always ask ourselves, "What was the intent of the author when writing?" What his intent to prove Calvinism's claim that man has nothing to do with his being regenerated and thus saved? Was Paul attempting to address and prove the Calvinist's point that God has effectually caused us to be faithful and good? Well, let's take an HONEST and OBJECTIVE look at the entire context of this passage and judge rightly:

1 So then, men ought to regard us as servants of Christ and as those entrusted with the secret things of God. 2 Now it is required that those who have been given a trust must prove faithful. 3 I care very little if I am judged by you or by any human court; indeed, I do not even judge myself. 4 My conscience is clear, but that does not make me innocent. It is the Lord who judges me. 5 Therefore judge nothing before the appointed time; wait till the Lord comes. He will bring to light what is hidden in darkness and will expose the motives of men's hearts. At that time each will receive his praise from God. 6 Now, brothers, I have applied these things to myself and Apollos for your benefit, so that you may learn from us the meaning of the saying, "Do not go beyond what is written." Then you will not take pride in one man over against another. 7 For who makes you different from anyone else? What do you have that you did not receive? And if you did receive it, why do you boast as though you did not?

It seems clear that Paul is addressing the issue of some people preferring Apollos over Paul or vice-versa. He begins by speaking of the "secret things of God" that have been "entrusted" to him and the other teachers. Could this be the "things" that he later refers to as what is "received" by God? Doesn't it appear that Paul is addressing a completely different matter than the OP suggests? Read on...

The second verse goes on to show that those who are entrusted with this secret things of God must "prove faithful." Now, why exactly must the unconditionally chosen and effectually called be proven faithful? Wouldn't God perfectly know what he has Irresistibly caused in the life of his elected one?

A Calvinist might suggest that the person must be "proven" to the people by their fruits, but Paul contradicts this in the very next verses saying, "I care very little if I am judged by you or by any human court; indeed, I do not even judge myself. 4 My conscience is clear, but that does not make me innocent. It is the Lord who judges me. 5 Therefore judge nothing before the appointed time; wait till the Lord comes. He will bring to light what is hidden in darkness and will expose the motives of men's hearts." At that time each will receive his praise from God.

Why would God praise man for right motives if indeed God is the one who controls such motives? Shouldn't He praise Himself for effectually making them faithful and with right motives?

I think Calvinists would do well to follow Pauls warning when he writes, "Do not go beyond what is written."

Paul continues saying, "Then you will not take pride in one man over against another. 7 For who makes you different from anyone else? What do you have that you did not receive? And if you did receive it, why do you boast as though you did not?"

This proves my earlier point that the subject being addressed here is believers who are taking pride in one teacher over another. Which brings another interesting question to pose for the Calvinist. Assuming Calvinism is correct, what makes you better than the non-Calvinistic believer? Why are you choosing the correct doctrine of soteriology while others don't?

 

[OldRegular]

Winman

You just can't understand what Spurgeon was teaching: It is wrong to make Salvation the work of Winman rather than the work of GOD.

 

[OldRegular]

Assuming Calvinism is correct, what makes you better than the non-Calvinistic believer?

Where have I said I am better than one who holds the doctrine of Freewillism? My mothers people were Freewill Baptists. I have never known a more loving people, even if their doctrine of soteriology [a word they would not understand] was lacking.

Why are you choosing the correct doctrine of soteriology while others don't?

I have always believed that Salvation is a supernatural act, not just intellectual assent to the fact of the birth, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ. I have not always understood or believed the doctrine of the Sovereign Grace of GOD in Salvation.

In answer to your question my study of Scripture has led me to:

1. Understand to some degree the absolute Holiness of God.

2. Examine myself, even after salvation, in light if that Holiness.

3. And then understand that my Salvation is solely the work of the Triune GOD alone.

 

[OldRegular]

Hermeneutics 101 teaches us not to pluck a verse from its context to try a validate a point, which is what I believe the OP does.

I realize the verse in the OP was taken out of context, however, I believe it truly expresses the question that Freewillers have not been able to answer as I indicated in the OP!

 

[OldRegular]

Hi Oldregular;
I've answered this same question from you before too. It's not that anyone gives you the wrong answer. It's just that your not ready to accept the true answer.
MB

I would be interested in seeing that answer. It is possible that I missed it.

 

[Rippon]

This Cal/DoG doctrine is horrible,

On the contrary, your continual misrepresentation of Calvinism is indeed horrible.

it [Calvinism]teaches you to be afraid to do the very thing the Lord wants you to do, to come to him confessing your sins and asking for forgiveness.

That is utter rubbish. Show me any Calvinist author who have ever said such a thing. You will not get away with your constant lies.

 

[Skandelon]

Where have I said I am better than one who holds the doctrine of Freewillism?

Exactly! Thank YOU! And where have we said that we are better than unbelievers who choose not to follow Christ?

In answer to your question my study of Scripture has led me to:

1. Understand to some degree the absolute Holiness of God.

2. Examine myself, even after salvation, in light if that Holiness.

3. And then understand that my Salvation is solely the work of the Triune GOD alone.

That pretty much corresponds to the reasons why we believed the gospel while others do not.

1. We understand the gospel's claims
2. We examine ourselves and see our need in light of his Holiness
3. We understand that without him we cannot be saved and we need His forgiveness.

So, what is the difference? There is your answer. You gave it yourself.

 

[percho]

Who would dare to boast? One chozen by God or one who decided to choose God.

 

[Skandelon]

I boast in understanding and knowing HIM!

Who would dare to boast? One chozen by God or one who decided to choose God.

Well, the pharisees thought of themselves as chosen by God while the rest of mankind was not and they were known for their pride and boastful hearts.

If I'm going to boast, I will boast in what the Lord tells me to boast in...

This is what the LORD says: "Let not the wise man boast of his wisdom or the strong man boast of his strength or the rich man boast of his riches, but let him who boasts boast about this: that he understands and knows me, that I am the Lord, who exercises kindness, justice and righteousness on earth, for in these I delight," declares the Lord.

I boast in understanding and knowing HIM!