A Highly Interesting Article

No, I do not hold to universalism.

Holy Spirit does many things. Some things involve salvation and some things do not.

That Holy Spirit is at work in a person's life prior to salvation seems very clear to me from scripture.

Do you see it otherwise?

peace to youraying:

 

But the thing is, as I have shown, the Holy Spirit is also at work in the lives of the lost as well, which would be "regeneration" in the calvinist model. If one holds to regeneration preceding faith, then regeneration must also precede the refusal of faith, after all a corpse can't reject anything

 

If we apply the same "TERMINOLOGY/DEFINITION" to Jesus as Calvinist applied to Adam, the "whole world" would "AUTOMATICALLY" be saved.

Calvinist says Adam sin condemned all "Souls", even at birth, "AUTOMATICALLY", without them having actually committed a sin,

Jesus died for all sins, blotting out the law, so all souls should "AUTOMATICALLY" be saved by Jesus's death.

If Adam's sin automatically condemns all souls,

Why doesn't Jesus righteousness automatically save all souls??


1Co 15:22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.


In this scenario , both birth/salvation appear to occur without any immediate cognizance on the part of the person, much less having made a choice by which their condemnation or salvation came about.


Condemned at birth, prior to committing a sin, saved by "election", prior to Faith/recognition/confession of sin, negates any purpose in giving the law and man's knowledge of "good/evil".


Adam's sin condemned his soul, but no other souls, each soul must commit it's own sin, to be held responsible.


Jesus death didn't save anyone, unless they have "Faith" in Jesus.


So, Sin or Salvation is a "choice" the person makes, Adam can't condemn you, Jesus can't save you,


except by the "CHOICES" you make.

 

I disagree. Holy Spirit may work upon unbelievers in any number of ways to accomplish God's purpose; to bring them to salvation, or not. Holy Spirit involvement does not necessarily mean Holy Spirit is "regenerating" an unbeliever.

Of course I disagree. The reference to being "dead in trespasses and sins" obviously refers to a spiritual deadness and inability.

peace to youraying:

 

And so, there you have it plainly stated.

You believe every person is the master of his/her own destiny.

I disagree with you.

peace to youraying:

 

Ok, I have to ask you a question here.

Just what is the Holy Spirits purpose for working on the unbeleiver if isn't salvation? To condemn them?

I believe scripture specifically states why..

That purpose as I see it in scripture is God sending forth His Spirit is to convict the world of sin, His righteousness, and the judgment to come - all of which are part of gosple message and all which must be included in it or it is not the gospel. Therefore what else can we say about His purpose than to bring them to Christ?

 

All things work together for good for those who love God and are called according to His purpose.

God is actively at work in the world bringing about His purposes and plans. I believe God, Holy Spirit does just that.

For instance, scripture says the Jews are blinded to the truth of who Jesus is, so that the gospel will go to the gentiles. God was not bringing them to salvation when He blinded them to the truth of who Jesus is.

peace to youraying:

 

Jos 24:15 And if it seem evil unto you to serve the LORD, choose you this day whom ye will serve;

De 11:26 Behold, I set before you this day a blessing and a curse;

27 A blessing, if ye obey the commandments of the LORD your God, which I command you this day:

28 And a curse, if ye will not obey the commandments of the LORD your God, but turn aside out of the way which I command you this day, to go after other gods, which ye have not known.

Jer 21:8 And unto this people thou shalt say, Thus saith the LORD; Behold, I set before you the way of life, and the way of death.

Ro 6:16 Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey; whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness?

Eze 33:11 Say unto them, As I live, (an oath) saith the Lord GOD, I have no pleasure (or glory) in the death of the wicked; but that the wicked turn from his way and live: turn ye, turn ye from your evil ways; for why will ye die, O house of Israel?

Mr 8:34 And when he had called the people unto him with his disciples also, he said unto them, Whosoever will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me.

Ro 6:6 Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed,

Mr 8:35 For whosoever will save his life shall lose it; but whosoever shall lose his life for my sake and the gospel's, the same shall save it.

36 For what shall it profit a man, if he (flesh) shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul?

Predestination doctrine contradicts that found in scripture,

Something close to 98% of scripture is about our ability to obey/disobey and being held accountable/Judged for obedience/disobedience,

The giving of the law, man knowledge of good/evil, obedience/disobedience, man's ability to lose/save his life, 98% of scripture information,

are all "TOTALLY IRRELEVANT", even "WORTHLESS INFORMATION"

if man can't use this information to make a "CHOICE" between Good/evil, obedience/disobedience, being saved/lost.

Theologian make the mistake of thinking since Jesus came everything has changed, but they forget that the God of the OT is the same one who sent Jesus, even being that God.

and he doesn't "change", neither does the "plan of salvation".

Mal 3:6 For I am the LORD, I change not;

God has a "REASON" for giving man a choice, but it's a question with an answer predestination doctrine can't ask, much less answer,

The question/answer doesn't exist according to predestination doctrine.

 

Ro 11:20 Well; because of unbelief they were broken off,

Ro 11:23 And they also, if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be graffed in:

Think about it, what you said "prevents" any "Jew" from being saved until the "fulness of the Gentiles",

two thousand years of people dying and going to hell with "NO POSSIBILITY" of being saved,

Because of "predestination", not their "unbelief".

and this after Jesus died for "their sin" as well as those who are saved, that these "JEWS".... "MIGHT BE" saved.

 

You didn't really answer Allan's question, but how do you reconcile this with Acts 17 with Paul's speech on Mars' Hill?

Doesn't rejecting something take ability? How can a corpse reject anything?

 

No, it takes no ability to reject something. Rejecting something can be as simple as ignoring it, giving it no thought whatsoever.

It takes ability to accept the truth, especially when the truth is so contrary to what the world says.

peace to youraying:

 

By definition of what rejection is, it indeed takes ability (and action, and impossibility for a corpse) to reject something. Without the option to accept, there is no such thing as rejection. Words have meanings

Main Entry:re·jec·tion Pronunciation: \ri-ˈjek-shən\ Function:noun Date:circa 1552 1 a: the action of rejecting : the state of being rejected b: an immune response in which foreign tissue (as of a skin graft or transplanted organ) is attacked by immune system components of the recipient organism2: something rejected

 

I have to agree with Webdog here brother. As much as the will is involved in 'accepting' it is as equally involved in rejecting. In order to 'reject' something there must include the option for the 'acceptance' of said thing. . Therefore the rejection of the gospel is of their own choice by which they were totally able to do. - ability - (which to my knowledge no mainline Reformed/Calvinist denies)

As I understand it - here's the rub.. to state a person rejects the gospel by necessity and logic that person must have been honestly and ligitmately offered it's saving and redemptive purpose. And these people can not have been offered this saving gospel message unless that message actaully can and does include them. That means the atonement is not limited but general because if the gospel be offered to all then God has to have made suffient propitiation to include them or else the offer is a total lie, and if I remember correctly God can not lie.

Now here is where it gets stickier.. If the gospel message is not meant anyone except the elect and therefore only they have the option to believe, then the rejection of the saving gospel message (believing not/not believing) is meaningless and has absolutely no bearing whether a person is damned/comdemned. However scripture is repleat with the statements completely opposite of this.

 

But in order to 'ignore' something, it must make itself known and you must choose to 'ignore' it or choose to give it no further thought. It is an action which of necessity involves both volition and ability when dealing with people.

 

Acts 13:48b

and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed.


Oh the goodness of God.

God bless in Jesus.

Steven.

 

And for everyone of those statements the "scripture is repleat (sic) with", there are more that annul that statement of yours.

Who said "the gospel message is not meant for anyone except the elect"? (your words). Not John Calvin or any of the other reformers that I have read. Not the Puritans who were also reformed in faith. No Reformed Baptist pastor that I have ever met (and we discuss this at length). In fact, it's YOU that are saying that. You build a straw man to blow it down. That is dishonest and beneath the dignity of Christian truthfulness.

If you're going to accuse a Calvinist of what he believes, at least accurately state what he believes. Quit making false assumptions.

 

Actaully there isn't, scripture doesn't contradict itself.

Secondly, if you are admitting there are such passages and that there are others that explicitely constradict them, then I take it you presumably believe the bible must contradict itself on varying aspects.

Thirdly, you will find that scripture is specific as to what condemns a person and that is, not believing and what saves, faith. Nothing else. So the fact remains that these people are in fact damned for not believing and nothing else.

I would suggest you learn more about the Reformed faith and the varying branches thereof. There are some even on the BB who hold to such. It is their belief the gospel is not in fact 'offered' to anyone except the elect and even then it isn't an offer. They hold that the term 'offered' is an incorrect wording and that it is more accurately stated 'to make proclamation' only. Also most in this view they will tell you that God has 'no love' for the non-elect. I can take you to a thread in which these very things were brought up and discussed somewhat . So in fact you do not understand enough of your own view (and the branches thereof) to say I making something up, when I have the very proof here on the BB. The 'fact' is - I'm right.

I built nothing up that is not already there and therefore it is a good example of the dignity of christian truthfulness. If a person rejects something (in this case salvation), then something was offered. If it was offered to the non-elect by God (who is the only one that can offer it) then God has made provision for them in the atonement otherwise it can not in truth be offered - for the offer is to save them. And if this be so, then general atonement is a more accurate view and limited atonement is not. What I gave is a chain of logic (if all things are true). I never made the statement in this that 'scripture states such and such.. The only thing I mentioned about scripture is that it has a multitude of verses which state that unbelief is that which condemns/damns a person.

Did I accuse anyone?? Who is making the false assumptions?? It is apparently you. I know quite well what the Reformed/Calvinist view is and many Reformed/Calvinsts on here will tell you, and what I don't know or have somewhat muddled I am always open to correction on their view so as to not distort it again.

 

Human will is enslaved to sin. Jesus said everyone that sins is a slave to sin. Unless human will is freed by God, it is unable to respond to spiritual things (and that includes salvation).

I Cor. 2:14 "But a natural man does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually appraised."

In this verse we see the truth that spiritual things are not accepted by a "natural man"..... and the truth they are not even able to understand and accept them....... and the reason why they are unable is because they are spiritually appraised.

That seems pretty clear to me.

peace to youraying:

 

Sure, any verse can mean what you want it when you take it from its context for a proof text. I agree the text does have to do the natural man not accepting/understanding but what is the context that helps us to understand WHY they can't?

Paul is comparing the believer who is presently lead by the Spirit of God who is already indwelt by him and the non-believer who presently is not being dealt with by Spirit of God. The context is that man of and by himself can not come to and or understand spiritual things, God must intervene via His Spirit who knows the things/mind of God. That is all Paul is stating and context confirms this not only here but in other places such as Romans as an example.

If you will take notice in vs 12 which many Cals I know state that they have 'received the Spirit' and thus we know spiritual truth, and state this is the regeneration. Unfortunately though tense here for received is not passive (being given something) which they 'assume' but it is actaully Second Aorist Active Indictive, in that the person has done the action - and thus to know/understand those things God has freely given them.

However, all that aside, we were dealing with the fact you believe men can reject the gospel and my discussion on the ability in which that entails. Thus my point: If a person rejects something (in this case salvation), then something was offered. If it was offered to the non-elect by God (who is the only one that can offer it) then God has made provision for them in the atonement otherwise it can not in truth be offered - for the offer is to save them. And if this be so, then general atonement is a more accurate view and limited atonement is not.

 

Ro 1:18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;

19 Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.

Ro 1:21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.

With the law written on our hearts, does anyone have to tell a sinner when they have done something "wrong",

or does their heart/conscience tell them???

Ro 1:28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge,

Obviously, sinners can't eat the "MEAT OF THE WORD", but there's never been a "Natural man" born who couldn't drink the "MILK OF THE WORD",

"IF" they "CHOSE" to drink it.

You'll have to interpret the Natural man in context with Ro 1.