Featured Coming to God

You would be hard pressed to find anywhere that I have ever used Romans 9.

and your point? The sky is blue too btw.

Of course man doesn't have an excuse. But man in his sinful state cannot understand that things of the Spirit of God. Anyone that says anything different is denying Scripture.

 

Acts 16:29 Then he called for a light, and sprang in, and came trembling, and fell down before Paul and Silas,
30 And brought them out, and said, Sirs, what must I do to be saved?
31 And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house.
32 And they spake unto him the word of the Lord, and to all that were in his house.
33 And he took them the same hour of the night, and washed their stripes; and was baptized, he and all his, straightway.
34 And when he had brought them into his house, he set meat before them, and rejoiced, believing in God with all his house.

What did the Philipian jailer ask Paul and Silas? He asked "What must I do to be SAVED". Now what does that mean, SAVED?

Obviously this man realized he was a sinner and was in danger of eternal damnation. He wanted to be forgiven his sins, he wanted to be reconciled with God, he wanted to escape punishment.

The Philipian jailer was sincere, he wanted to be saved, and he wanted to be reconciled with God. He did not turn away, he believed as well as all his house.

You insist this fellow only wanted to know how to escape judgment. I would like to know how you know that? Do you believe that because some Reformed theologian said that because this passage absolutely refutes Calvinism? Probably. But the fact is, he wanted more than just to escape punishment, he wanted to be reconciled with God, and the proof is that he believed.

Cornelius is another example. He was devout, he feared God. He gave much alms and prayed always. Yet he was not saved, because the angel that appeared to him told him to send for Peter where he would hear words whereby he and his household would be saved.

You would probably argue again that Cornelius simply wanted to escape judgment. Well, if so, then he fooled God himself, because God sent an angel to him to tell him how to be saved.

You will go to any extreme to hold to Calvinism, even rejecting scriptures that clearly refute your pulled from context proof texts. Cornelius sought God, and he was sincere. So sincere that God sent an angel to him. But he was not regenerated until he heard the gospel from Peter and believed on Jesus.

Believe whatever you want, but it is not scriptural to say the unregenerate cannot seek God, both Cornelius and the Philipian jailer refute this false doctrine. They were not only able, they in reality sought God and found him.

 

"saved" from what? exactly. Saved from the penalty of sin.

It just says he wanted to be saved. Anything else is you reading into the text.

We don't seek God, God seeks us. You deny Scripture when you say otherwise. "There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God." You either believe it or you don't. I believe it. You read into texts things that are not there. There are thousands of people that want to be saved but don't want to come to Christ. People try to work for their salvation instead of believing. There will always be people trying their own way to be saved from their punishment of sin. You read seeking God into the text when it actually says seek to be saved(and of course we know saved form the punishment of sin.)

 

Are you saying you disagree with the common use of Romans 9 by scholarly Calvinists, or are you just attempting to avoid the issue?

The point is that you ignored the argument and you still are...

In your system he most certainly does. Tell me what better excuse is their for unbelief than being born unable to willingly believe? What better excuse for having no faith than the fact that God didn't grant you faith? There is no better excuse than that.

Sounds like an excuse for man to me. Romans 1 says the natural man knows God and understands his attributes but may trade the truth in for lies. The very fact that he understands is why he is said to be 'without excuse.' Men have all they need to respond to God's revelation of Himself.

 

NOTE: Just so others know, I am not the one who closed this thread. I try to avoid doing that when I'm the last to post as it tends to aggravate others, and rightly so. JHB, you are welcome to start a new thread on this subject and sorry for the inconvenience.