Featured Cause and effect, singular versus plural - Jn. 6:44

*sigh* I never said (reformed theology). Don't you understand there are differences between "Calvinists" (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6) pointers? Don't you understand that this is not limited to aspects of savlation but nearly every aspect of theology imaginable???????? The church, the ordinances, sanctification, marriage, you name it. Did not you understand that he chose 12 out of vast multitude to reveal truths to than others and then out the 12 he chose three and out three one to reveal special truth to?????? Don't you understand he has different kinds of vessels in his house suited for different things? Don't you realize that the same measure of grace and faith is not given to all????? Must you be taught the abc's all over again?

So I don't restrict this to just one truth as you imagine!

*sigh* Give me a break! You are pitting one against the other by the very nature of your argument. You IMAGINE that one aspect of my belief is at odds with the aspect you are trying to pit it against! Your understanding of my view is faulty and it shows in how you argue.

I seriously doubt we are going to have any kind of profitable discussion with your approach. But here is your quote that I responded to:


Originally Posted by Skandelon
So, its not really my 'fault' (responsibility) whether or not I believe these particular views? After all, He has to be the one who makes me willing to accept them, so ultimately it is HIS response you are hoping for, not mine.

This whole argument denies personal responsiblity in partaking of sin in Adam. You know that is my view and yet you pervert it with this silly argument. You may not agree with my view but you know it. So all you are doing is building little straw men and burning them.

So the answer is no! Or did you understand my response above?????? You simply built a straw man and burnt it. Hope that was fun for you, but pointless!

Did you understand my response above? Then obviously the answer is no! You are simply building straw men and burning. Hope your having fun but it is pointless in any REAL discussion.

*sigh* Go tell this to physically blinded people. Tell them that when they come into a dark room and you will turn the light on and the light has power to make them see! Good luck! The Spiritual is drawn from the physical analogy!!! One must first have spiritual eyes before one can see spiritual light (truth). The light has no power to make people see. Only God Himself can make the blind see and He does that only through a CREATIVE WORD of Power. Here is the precise point you deny and don't understand. Paul preached the gospel but Satan blinded men's minds to it "lest they should see". But that is the problem - they are blinded and so don't see. Only the gospel when empowered by God as a CREATIVE COMMAND as in 2 Cor. 4:6 and James 1:18; and 1 Pet. 1;25,30 and 1 Thes. 1:4-5 makes the gospel "the power of God" to salvation and all other times it is only the voice of a man calling sinners to repent and comes "in word only" (1 Thes. 1:5a).

I was not trying to avoid anything. I simply gave my interpretation of the text in light of its fuller context and all gospel accounts. Do you understand the meaning of "seeing they cannot see" and "their eyes have closed"???? The first describes the UNREGENERATE STATE while the second describes development in hardening toward what they "see" in the first passage to losing it or closing their eyes to it in the second passage. In neither do they have spiritual life but in the former they at least acknowledge certain truths and claim to see them. However, as the truth of what they claim to see begins to expose them for what they are, they harden and deny even the truths they had claimed to see or Jesus says it this way:

Mt. 13:12b ...but whosoever hath not, from him shall be taken away even that he hath.

How can you take away something from someone when they don't have it in the first place? They think they have it - they profess to "see" or recognize it as truth but when what they profess begins to expose them they harden against that and what they thought they had is taken away from them through the hardening process.

*sigh* I was explaining ONE facet of how God blinds men through the hardening process not ALL facets. Light disorientates and confuses the lost because it simply does not fit within their dark system of thought/theology. It is such a stark contrast that it only confuses them and stops them in their tracks in regard to their thought processes - they can't handle it. Haven't you ever seen the deer in the headlight look in the eyes of a person after you thought you explained something so clearly?

I have a neighbor named John. I have witnessed to John on many occassions and I discovered each time he believed that he must straighten out his life first before coming to Christ for salvation. I have plainly told him he can't do it and that is why he needs to trust Christ to have satisfed all of God's demands against him , he needs rebirth not reformation. Every single time he responds, "yeah, I know I have to get right first" and I respond "no, John, you can't get right first, you must repent of all your efforts and trust in Christ" to get you right and he responds "Yeah, I need to straighten out my life and get right with God." No matter how many times or how many ways I say it and yet what I say goes right over his head and I get that deer caught in the headlight look.

BOTH!!!!!! They were born spiritually blind and cannot see, yet they profess to see and therefore "seeing they do not see." Then as more exposure to the light condemns them they close their eyes to what they had claimed to "see" and reject even that.

They would have continued "seeing but cannot see"

They were without sight due to a fallen spiritually dead nature and yet because they were told from their youth over and over again what they were taught was truth they claimed to "see" when in fact they could not see the truth but only the system of religion taught to them. However, when God gave more light that condemned their system of religion or what they claimed to "see" then their depraved nature responded by rejecting even those things they had been taught which would support light - they began to reject the very things they had claimed to "see" and thus shut their eyes, hardened their hearts toward those things that they were taught that confirmed the new light exposure.

 

It is a GENERAL principle that cannot be limited to one aspect of truth.

Friend, this is not my first rodeo! I know exactly who I am dealing with and you are not looking for truth at all and it is obvious. You are looking to simply win a debate and look good doing it - Period! I have dealt with your type thousands of times in my ministry. Truth is not your concern and it is obvious to me.

This discussion is like many I had in Seminary when people debated just to debate, no objectivity, only one thing in view is twist and turn it to win the debate. It is really a exercise of futility to enter into debate with that kind of person and you are that kind and it is obvious.

No, you are not. YOu are not pitting my view against what scriptures are teaching. What you are doing is attempting to pit my view against my view to prove what you believe the scriptures are teaching BUT the ringer is that you refuse to properly present my view in this three ring circus kind of act.

Don't put words in my mouth especially when I tell you I don't believe what you are claiming I believe - that is a good place to start!

 

Look at the way you are posing this question! You present my position WITHOUT MY EXPLANATION but then complete the sentence assuming your view is true so my position cannot be true. It is like asking a man when did he stop beating his wife as your question assume the conclusion without any consideration of how do I really explain my position. I am pronounced dead before I even get to the examination room.

If you are not sure then why don't you ask instead of assume your own conclusions???????

I explained it completely. Spiritually dead RELIGIOUS men don't believe they are spiritually dead but spiritually alive and they come from that perpsective. Hence, "seeing they do not see." The fallen nature has no spiritual eyes to see but that does not stop it from assuming it does. Jesus approaches spiritually dead religious men from that perspective as they boast they are "seeing" but in reality they "see not." What they claim to see is a system of doctrine they have been taught they call truth. Indeed, there is truth content found within the Phariseeical and Sadduceeical systems of "truth."

Christ confronted the TRUTH SYSTEM of the day and took the actual truths within their system which they professed to see and showed them how it corresponded God's system truth which if they accepted would force them to repudiate their SYSTEM OF TRUTH and exchange it for God's SYSTEM (which harmonizes). Instead of turning against Judiasm as the truth system of the day and embrace the truth system preached by Christ they hardened their hearts and closed their eyes and rejected those truth aspects in their own system rather than change systems entirely.

1. "seeing they see not" refers to their SYSTEM OF TRUTH embraced as Jews which contained elements of truth. Yet it is this SYSTEM of Judiasm they boasted as those above all other mankind to be truth and able to "see" the truth.

2. "they have closed their eyes" refers to Christ taking the elements of truth in their system that harmonizes with God's system of truth and contrasting those elements of truth with THEIR SYSTEM while showing the harmonization with Christ's SYSTEM of truth forcing them to choose between the two contradictive systems. It is at that point they "shut their eyes" and "harden their hearts" against the very elements of truth they had claimed to "see" (as part of their system) rather than follow them to the logical conclusion which would call for a complete repudiation of the JUDIASTIC SYSTEM of soteriology. When they closed their eyes and hardened their heart against those very truths they had claimed to "see" then what they thought they had was taken from their boast of seeing. They boasted they could "see" when in fact they could not see as they hardend their hearts and closed their eyes to the truths they once claimed to see because those truths would require complete repudiation of their whole system.

Therefore, this hardening merely manifested that they were really spiritually blind all along and exposed their boast of "seeing" as false.

I have addressed but you simply rejected my explanation. Let me say it this way. RELIGIOUS lost persons do not believe they are lost persons. That is not their perspective. Jesus did not resort to parables to hide the truth until they had rejected his clear preaching of the gospel and clear teachings as set forth in the Sermon on the Mount and earlier ministry. In the Sermon on the mount he showed the contrast of THEIR SYSTEM with God's SYSTEM OF TRUTH and make it clear and plain without any parables. From Matthew 5 right up to Matthew 12 Jesus taught plainly and clearly showing the contrasts. However, Matthew 12 reveals their reaction - they sought to kill him. Therefore, in Matthew 13 he changed his strategies and taught by parables intentionally hiding the truth from them and from even His disciples as they had to be taken apart privately and taught the meaning.

Hence, his audiances came before his clear contrasts boasting to be the children of Abraham and claiming to SEE from their perspective or SYSTEM OF TRUTH. Jesus contrasted their system with God's system and forced them to choose between what they claimed as the basis for "seeing" to be inconsisten with even the truths found in their system forcing them to either reject their system and come and follow Christ or repudiate the very truths in their system they claimed to "see" by rejecting the system of truth taught by Christ. Hence they went from "seeing" to "closing their eyes" in regard to the very truths in their inconsistent system. The problem was they could NEVER REALLY SEE in the first place and when more truth exposed their inconsistences they then responded by CLOSING THEIR EYES and HARDENING their hearts against the very truths that had claimed to "see."

Do you at least understand my position? Have I explained it sufficiently so you get it from my perspective??

 

He taught the clear contrast between the two systems using what truths the other system provided to force them to a decision to either repudiate the truth in their own system with that system and choose his system or repudiate the truth in their own system but still cling to the system, as well as repudiate Christ. They chose the latter with vengeance.

Thus their claim to "see" was exposed as false. They NEVER could "see" because they were spiritually dead and just didn't know it. That is the condition they came into this world with a fallen nature followed by a religous coating. They claimed to "see" but "could not see."

This interaction with Jesus not merely exposed their real condition but this interaction with Christ resulted in their rejection of the truths contained in their false system as they had to reject it or reject Christ. Thus they "closed their eyes" and "hardened" their hearts against the very truths contained within their false system. The depraved nature will embrace truths as long as those truths are placed in it own perverted context. Hence, the hardening, closing of the eyes was in regard to those truths as Christ put them in the proper context. Hence, the truth they had accepted in the context of their false system was now being rejected in its proper context, thus closing their eyes and hardening their heart against the very things they had claimed to "see." So your view of both is wrong! Hardening is merely the reaction of the fallen nature to truths placed in the proper context it formerly accepted in a perverted context.

He is not describing a POSSIBLE POTENTIAL as you interpret his words, but describing why there is no potential for their salvation. They were not only spiritually dead but their fallen nature's reaction to the truth they once claimed to see removes all potentional for their salvation as they merely hardened and closed their eyes to the truths they once embraced. More light only stirs up the fallen nature to greater rejection (hardening). More light exposed their hypocrisy as it produced greater hardening toward it by their fallen condition. If that was not their condition, but it is, they would have repented and been saved, but this reaction demonstrates who they really are.

So you are wrong about your definition of hardening as hardening is simply the response of the spiritual dead but in this case hypocritical nature to more light.

The fallen nature will accept light, as long as it can place that light in a perverted context. Light can be found in Judiaism, in Mormonism, in Catholocism but never in its proper context. The lost relgious man accepts that light in its own perverted framework or system or context of thinking. Jesus took that light and placed it in its proper context so that it contradicted the context in which the lost state placed it and brought the lost condition directly face to face with God, causing hardening and rejection (Rom. 8:7). The lost nature will always reject the truth when placed in its proper context (Rom. 8:7) simply because it cannot understand the system of truth, since that is not the system operating in their mindset. Since, the framework or system of truth is necessary to really understand truth, see how it fits, the lost nature cannot understand truth (1 Cor. 2:14) because understanding requires the proper system or framework that truth is consistent with.

 

Let me simply:

1. "see...hear...understand" EQUALS their claim
2. "seeing not...hearing not....not perceving" is Christ denial of their claim
3. "closing eyes...hardening" is proof of Christ's denial - Hence, hardening, shutting eyes to the very things they once regarded as truths seen prevents them from coming to Christ at any time IN THIS CONDITION.
4. If this condition and its proof did not exist, they would hear, see, understand and turn and be saved. The potential is based upon the truth of their denial that such blindness exists but such hardness proves it exists and thus denies that potential.

First, there is no possible way you can demonstrate that individuals in this crowd were later saved as no text in scripture says that.

Second, the impossibility of salvation is in regard to THIS CONDITION not to Gods power to overule this condition by new birth.

1. Redemptive only in regard to the primary shift from Israel to Gentile nations as the primary sphere of redemptive work.

2. The caloused condition can never respond to the gospel not not "at any time" as Jesus says clearly. The only solution is NEW BIRTH or change of nature or the act of salvation by God not a partnership between the old nature and God.

3. New creation is God's response to this caloused response of the spiritually blind and deaf fallen nature.

That condition NEVER "at any time" will respond to the gospel. God must give a NEW HEART and a NEW SPIRIT that responds to God (Ezek. 36:26-27; Col. 3:10; Eph. 2:10; 4:24; 2 Cor. 4:6; James 1:18; 1 Pet. 1:23,25; James 1:18; etc.).

Rom. 8:8 But sin, taking occasion by the commandment, wrought in me all manner of concupiscence. For without the law sin was dead.

The law reveals the knowledge of sin and as man attempts to obey the law whether written on paper or on concience stirs up the indwelling law of sin to react and expose itself for what it is. As I stated no religious Jew professes he is blind, deaf and dead spiritually but claim they can "see, hear, understand" and thus ALIVE to God. Every lost man begins with NO CONSCIOUSENSS OF SPIRITUAL DEATH until they are confronted by the Law of God that defines sin instructing the conscience in sin and thus stirs the depraved nature into rebellion and thus exposes the sin nature and brings the man consciously under the condemnation of the law = death at work.

He speaks in parables because direct exposure created the atmosphere of intent to kill him (Mt. 12 before Mt. 13) which intent is their response to the very truths they claimed to see thus the intent to kill is the manifestation of hardeness and closure against the truth. Yes, parable remove truth from them due to their hardening against truth plainly revealed.

Please follow my logic closely now! Have you ever entered into the middle of complex movie and you can understand the words and see the actions but there is no general framework to understand what you are seeing or hearing becuase you don't have the overal framework to make sense of what you are seeing and hearing? Ok!

1 Cor. 2:14 refers to the natural man and his response to spiriutal things because Romans 8:7 describes the "carnal" SPIRITUAL FRAMEWORK which is antagonistic to God and His revealed will. Thus he has not SPIRITUAL FRAMEWORK to connect God's truths with becuase God's truth requires a BORN AGAIN SPIRITURAL FRAMEWORK to connect with. In addition, the perverted religious SYSTEM FRAMEWORK makes it impossible to make sense of God's truth because God's truth requires a TRUTH FRAMEWORK provided by God's Word to connect truth with. The lost man does not have either the SPIRITUAL or RELIGIOUS framework of truth and therefore all the truths they may embrace is intepreted and connected with their DEPRAVED SPIRITUAL and PERVERTED RELIGOUS framework. They can understand the words and interpret the contextual line of thinking but they cannot connect it with any other framework than what they have. If that SPIRITUAL and RELIGIOUS framework is perverted, then they will connect and reinterpret that truth to be consistent with their frameworks and thus pervert it. When you confront them with the same truths but in God's FRAMEWORK of truth (spiritual, Biblical) they cannot understand it, or relate to it, but think it is foolish becuase they have no proper framework to connect with it.

 

What they claimed to "see" is what they ultimately closed their eyes and hardened their heart against! They ended up rejecting what they claimed to see as truth simply because that truth was lifted out of their perverted context by Christ and put into the context of truth. While it was in their framework they professed to "see" it but when it was put in its proper framework they rejected it thus closed their PROFESSED eyes to it. This reaction to the same truth but in its proper context PROVED they could see what they professed to see - proved they were spiritually dead, blind, deaf and without discernment.

First, all jews were not lost as there were saved people among them. Second, hardening is not an obstactle to new birth. Third, you don't know if the same Jews in this crowd were the very same Jews in the crowd that yelled crucify him. That was your original assertion. Your original assertion was not about the same kind of condition in both crowds but the same crowd in both instances. There is no way you can prove that.

You are making an assertion that you have yet to prove. My position is the caloused condition that grew between Matthew 3 and Matthew 13 merely provided the real evidence they could never truly "see" in the first place but were spirtuallly blind, deaf and dead all along. They professed to "see" and closed the professed eyes which they claim could see to the truth that had once professed while it was in their perverted context.

Your formerm Calvinism never taught you to distinguish between "spiritual" and "judicial" life? It never taught you the difference between the relationship with God by new birth - child - and the relationship with God by law - son???? They never taught you that SPIRITUAL life came be new birth but JUDICIAL life came by justification by faith? You did understand that it was judicial condemenation to eternal death and that judicial verdict reversed would obtain eternal life judicially???? Both are eternal life but one has to do with your PERSON (new birth) and the other has to do with your POSITION (justification)????

It is not a presumption as the record is clear that He taught plainly and direct between Matthew 3 and Matthew 12 and it concluded with them seeking to kill him in Matthew 12. In Matthew 13 it is clear he changed to parables. He changed to parables so those claiming to see (those who hardened their hearts against him between chapters 3-12) would not be able to understand the very same teachings they rejected but put in parabolic form. If they had not rejected them (shut their eyes, hardened their heart) they could have been saved but the hardening was proof their hardening heart was a blind, dead and dead heart to God's truth in the very first place and thus they could not see from the very beginning as the unregenerate response to light is hardening, rejecting, resisting, rebelling against it.

 

Back on track!

 

The only way to avoid the conclusions that I set forth above is to change the context. That is what skandelon did with his non-Biblical illustration about the army recruit. He changed the words, changed the context and fabricated a context completely different than the Biblical words and context.

On the other hand, both skandelon and Van must completely misconstrue verse 45 to avoid my position as well. The fact is that the first clause in verse 45 is a scripture quotation while the second clause is Christ's interpretation of the first clause. But more importantly the whole verse is his explanation of what it means to be drawn by the Father.

"ALL" are thus taught by God and "EVERY MAN" thus taught comes to Christ thus all the Father draws comes to Christ.

Skandelon's attempt to use the text concerning hardening and closing of ones eyes can be exposed simply be pointing out that hardening is a changing PROCESS not equal to all the lost but being spiritual dead is a CONDITION equal in all the lost. The former is progressive and the present tense demonstrates that whereas the latter is a condition.