Details - Details

Discussion in '2005 Archive' started by Sularis, Jun 6, 2005.

  1. Sularis

    Sularis
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2000
    Messages:
    940
    Likes Received:
    0
    Lets try and make another effort to agree on certain things

    - man starts off corrupt not sinner
    - man then sins (its pretty much guaranteed)
    - this makes man totally depraved and in
    bondage to the law of sin and death
    - God wants to save ALL men
    - God issues a UNIVERSAL call
    - God through that call grants man the ability to choose Him
    - man chooses those who reject Hell - those who accept Christ are regenerated - paliggenesia
    - this brings sanctification hagiazo
    - this leads to justification dikaioo or ek

    Try and post your list if you disagree with this and post why - and the phrase unBiblical is not allowed
     
  2. Monergist

    Monergist
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2002
    Messages:
    1,122
    Likes Received:
    0
    Would it be better if I just insisted that the Doctrines of Grace offend my sensiblities? :rolleyes:


    - man starts off dead in trespasses and sins
    - man then sins (its his nature)
    - this confirms that man is totally depraved and in bondage to the law of sin and death
    - God wants to save the elect
    - God issues a UNIVERSAL call
    - God grants the elect saving faith
    - man chooses Hell (unless God grants saving faith)
    - God justifies the ungodly (this leads to sanctification)
    - this brings Glory to God
     
  3. just-want-peace

    just-want-peace
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2002
    Messages:
    5,503
    Likes Received:
    40
    God created man as a sinner, & thought "it was good"? C'mon!!

    So man is doomed to Hell UNLESS God gives him faith?
    Ole Joe wants to believe, but God refuses to allow him to, so he's condemned? Or ole Joe has not the slightest desire to become a believer, but God COULD change that IF He would!
    "WHOSOEVER" really means those God decides to save, and not what He really said?

    Is this what you're saying?

    Three statements of Christ that you are willing to say He really didn't mean??

    Just trying to understand your perspective re:God's word!

    If God didn'r REALLY mean what He said here, how can I trust the rest of His word as being accurate?
     
  4. BobRyan

    BobRyan
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    30,837
    Likes Received:
    4
    - Adam starts off SINLESS and PERFECT and IN HARMONY with God. God pronounces him "GOOD" and God "gets it right" without missing some "hidden Corruption".

    - Adam sins and is thereby given a sinFUL nature that is OUT of harmony with God -- it is bent toward sin. Depraved. He also adopts a FALLEN nature with eroding physical defects.

    - The children are BORN with that sinFUL nature - with an inner nature OUT of harmony with God and in harmony with SIN. They are SINNERs by NATURE and in need of salvation and a change of nature.
    - this makes man totally depraved and in
    bondage to the law of sin and death
    - God wants to save ALL men
    - God issues a UNIVERSAL call- and DRAWS ALL
    - God through that call grants man the ability to choose Him. SUPERNATURAL enabling!
    - God stands on the OUTSIDE and knocks! Man is ALONE and on the INSIDE is ENABLED to HEAR AND to OPEN the door. He must choose light or darkness.
    - man chooses those who reject Hell - those who accept Christ are regenerated - paliggenesia and are at that moment Justified
    - They then WALK with Christ (1John 2) and By the Spirit put to death the deeds of the flesh (Romans 8) this IS the process of sanctification hagiazo. This is also the source of experiential assurance as the Spirit "Bears witness with our spirit that WE ARE the children of God"
     
  5. whetstone

    whetstone
    Expand Collapse
    <img src =/11288.jpg>

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2005
    Messages:
    852
    Likes Received:
    0
    are we talking about adam or every sinner since adam? The answer is different. I think Monergist was referring to every sinner since Adam, but the Arminians took it as meaning Adam. Clarification would be nice.
     
  6. Sularis

    Sularis
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2000
    Messages:
    940
    Likes Received:
    0
    ok lets use an example - Hrm - BobRyan - lets use BobRyan as our example

    Lets say Bob was born a squalling ignorant bundle of rather messy baby stuff. At that moment of birth he was NOT a sinner - He was a corrupted human being.

    Sometime later Bob decides he wants some candy - and he realizes if he cries and pretends to be sad - His parents will give him candy - Thus the end of Bob's age of innocence - Bob is now going to hell at age three - This act of sin now completely and utterly makes Bob run away from anything good and holy. Bob is now a totally depraved 3 year old. (Not that most arent anyways). Bob goes on sinning merrily for a few years - we'll pick up his story there.

    Bob is now 8 years old - Bob has a friend who goes to church camp - Bob's friend invites Bob - Bob goes - while at this church camp Bob starts to feel funny and guilty (universal call) Bob perhaps not realizing what it is goes deeper into a life of open debauchery - see Bob age 16

    Bob meets a nice Christian girl - Bob goes to church for this girl after all she's cute - who wouldnt - Pastor Larry lays out the elect gospel for Bob - Bob laughs - Larry and the girl are offended - Bob goes his own way.

    Bob is now in college - another cute Christian girl - they just seem to be waiting around corners for non-Christian guys to jump.

    Well this time Bob goes to a different church - he hears the evil gospel that God loves everyone and acts to provide a way of salvation for everyone. Bob's feelings of guilt and shame now coalesce into realization that he's a sinner - Bob does the altar call. Bob's sins are thus washed away - sanctified - regeneration - and thus Bob is now in good standing with God - justified - Bob thus goes on to be a little overzealous against Calvinistic "exaggerations".

    So we have Bob born corrupt not sinner
    Bob then sins - and is totally depraved
    God calls Bob - providing him with the ability to choose
    Bob rejects God
    God repeats
    Bob repeats
    God repeats again
    Bob caves in - hence the pretty much instantaneous and simultaneous sanctification/regeneration/justification

    Btw sorry Bob if yer offended - I would've used Larry - but if I didnt get his life story right - he would just ignore me
     
  7. Pastor Larry

    Pastor Larry
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    21,763
    Likes Received:
    0
    No, quite clearly, Monergist was talking about verses such as rom 3:10 and 23, Eph 2:1, etc. He is not talking about Adam. I think you probably know that, since you have been around a while. That's why I am confused as to why you would question it.

    Right here is where you break down. Ole Joe doesn't want to believe. He is not seeking God. He is dead in sin.

    Breakdown again. God doesn't refuse to allow anyone to believe. In fact, the reason you believe (if you do) is because God gave you a new nature.

    Whoever means whoever. But there is a modifier ... believes. It is whoever believes. If they don't believe, then they aren't saved. You guys keep wanting to leave that out.

    Three statements of Christ that you are willing to say He really didn't mean??</font>[/QUOTE]I don't know any Calvinist who would say that Christ didn't mean those things. I think you have created a straw man.

    Really?? It doesn't sound like it. It sounds like you are framing accusations in terms of questions. That is not wrong, but don't say that you are trying to understand a perspective when you are not.

    That's a great question. It is a major point why the Bible is true and inerrant in all its parts. It is just out of place here, since we are not questioning whether God really meant what he said.

    At some point, you have to accept that the discussion is at a more foundational level that whether he meant what he said. We all agree that he did. Our difference is on what did he actually say.

    I wish these conversations would get less combative, more truthful about people's positions, and more gracious. We all need to take a step back and think before we speak. We need to change the tone of this forum.
     
  8. Pastor Larry

    Pastor Larry
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    21,763
    Likes Received:
    0
    Feel free to use me. I don't care. If you got something seriously wrong, I would correct it. If I ignored you, it would be because I didn't have the time or interest to engage in teh discussion. Don't be so combative.
     
  9. Monergist

    Monergist
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2002
    Messages:
    1,122
    Likes Received:
    0
    I was following Sularis' lead and referring to every person born since Adam (I don't think he meant to infer that Adam was created corrupt!).
     
  10. Monergist

    Monergist
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2002
    Messages:
    1,122
    Likes Received:
    0
    :confused: Where do I state that Christ did not mean what He said?

    1)--whosoever believeth in him should not perish,
    The elect believe in him. None of the elect perish. The non-elect do not believe in him. The non-elect perish. Whoseover believes (the elect) in him shall not perish; there is no contradiction here.

    2)the world through him might be saved. Christ's atonement is sufficient for all-- but since we are looking for points of agreement here, surely we all agree that it is not efficient for all, unless some here want to embrace the heresy of universalism. Let scripture interpret scripture, clearly this verse is not saying that all are saved.

    3)He that believeth on him is not condemned-- If I have disputed this verse then somewhere I must have stated that "He that believeth on Him IS condemned!" Can you show us where I stated that?
     
  11. BobRyan

    BobRyan
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    30,837
    Likes Received:
    4
    No problem. I would argue that the person is Justified at the time they come to Christ and are born-again. Sanctification begins there but sanctification is really nothing more than daily justification in the form of "I die daily" 1Cor 15. It is a daily "choosing" to "Walk as Christ walked" 1John 2 and "by the Holy Spirit to put to death the deeds of the flesh" Romans 8.

    The part I differ with - is your claim that humans do not actually "Get total depravity" until they sin. I would argue that the sinful nature itslef is that "total depravity" that mankind is sadled with from birth. The Drawing of God "ENABLES" sinners to choose salvation and the "new birth" creates a new nature within us that occupies our thoughts along with our sinful nature. It is that battle between the two that we see in Romans 7.

    In Christ,

    Bob
     
  12. Sularis

    Sularis
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2000
    Messages:
    940
    Likes Received:
    0
    I dont disagree that justification occurs directly after choice for salvation as part of the salvation gift - but well my view of sanctification does also take the long view and the short view - it is far different then justification it goes beyond

    Well see for the total depravity we would then have to argue that Christ was totally depraved - and well that just doesnt wash - whatever we were born with - Christ was.

    Ok the atonement lets work on that point - we agree that it is sufficient for all - but not necessarily applied to all

    Here's where we differ

    It could be - IF choice was made which leads us to Larry's post where it says we non-Calvinists seem to leave belief out - Gee I thought that was our whole point.

    God motivated - self will - you Larry have made an erroneous statement!

    Oh lets go in order - we dont say that sinful man searches after God - hes sinful after all - it is after the UNIVERSAL CALL of God - perhaps repeatedly perhaps continuously in one's life that grants one the ability and maybe even the desire to believe

    Woah there Larry election by its very nature is two-fold - double predestination - Pharaoh's heart
     
  13. Pastor Larry

    Pastor Larry
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    21,763
    Likes Received:
    0
    [/qb]My point is that you continually talk about "whosoever" without talking as much about "believes." Calvinism refuses to take them separately. Christ promises salvation to "whoever believes." Therefore, Calvinism believes that "whoever believes" will be saved.

    Who said anything about God motivates -- self will? And what is the erroneous statement?

    You would need to demonstrate this from Scripture. Christ says that the universal calls goes out but "cannot" be heard or understand (cf. John 8 for starters).

    No, it's not. I don't disagree that God has chosen some for damnation, such as Pharoah (and you seem to agree ... which seems to blow your whole point). The fact is that God's predestination to salvation is a positive one. The others, he just lets go. I think your error is in thinking that man is neutral, and that apart from God's Predestination to hell he would simply continue neutral. Man however is a sinner. If God does nothing at all (never predestines, elects, etc), then man goes to hell. In election to salvation, God lets the non-elect do what they want to do and end up where their choices end up.
     
  14. just-want-peace

    just-want-peace
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2002
    Messages:
    5,503
    Likes Received:
    40
    OK Larry, I'll take a cue from your reply to my earlier post!

    Earlier I reiterared what Monergist stated TO MY UNDERSTANDING of his post.

    Re: this from you,
    I'll take a different tack this time and am asking that you give a fuller explanation of what you mean rather than me deciphering it, OK? [​IMG]
     
  15. johnp.

    johnp.
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2004
    Messages:
    3,231
    Likes Received:
    0
  16. BobRyan

    BobRyan
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    30,837
    Likes Received:
    4
    Christ did not have a sinful nature. That is - He did not have a nature that was inclined to rebellion. He took on our fallen condition physcially but not our "desire" for sin and rebellion. The "NEW Creation" does not have that inner desire but lives In the christian along WITH the Christian's sinful nature that DOES desire evil (Romans 7). Christ was not "born again" His nature was like Adam's ALREADY in harmony with God and WITHOUT the love of rebellion.

    So that means that even a newborn infant that dies in childbirth NEEDS a Savior!! (And indeed they have one!)

    Actually - my claim is that the "Atonement PROCESS" as God defines it in Lev 16 STARTS with the sacrifice of the "Atoning Sacrifice" (1John 2:2) and then moves into the work of the High Priest (Heb 8-9) just as Christ did!

    The part that is the "Atoning Sacrifice" is sufficient FOR ALL - but then the High Priestly work comes that applies full atonement to only the FEW of Matt 7.

    In Christ,

    Bob
     
  17. Sularis

    Sularis
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2000
    Messages:
    940
    Likes Received:
    0
    See Bob I actually disagree - Christ was the New Creation after the Resurrection - meaning that He was the old stuff that is fully us - Christ was fully human while also fully God - that means we have to stuff 200 percent into 100 percent without throwing any of it away. You claim no sin nature - you've just thrown away 50 percent of us.

    Besides - I hold the horrible heretical view that Christ was TEMPTED - not TESTED - TEMPTED - big difference in the ole Bible dictionary. The fact that Jesus was TEMPTED leads me to believe He had to have the desires whereby he could be TEMPTED. No sinful nature - no sinful desires - no Temptation. Christ was in all ways TEMPTED as we are - We do not have a High priest who cannot understand our situation - He went through it - conquered it - and ripped the keys of sin and death away from Satan!

    But I actually dont see any disagreement on the atonement - I do not say that it is applied to ALL - Sufficient for ALL - Applied to FEW

    OH I almost forgot Larry - He's my new favourite since Mergel disappeared many years ago.

    I believe that all men are incapable of belief once they become sinners - but even while capable of belief while innocent they lack the capacity to exercise it. Now basically men are depraved - no ability to believe - the God comes and issues a UNIVERSAL call - which grants man the ability to choose - Mankind does - Most of mankind will screw up and go to Hell - However God calls repeatedly - He stands at the door and knocks not once and leaves - but repeatedly - incessantly - fervently He continues to knock because He knows the only way you will be saved is if you ask Him too.

    *rant on*

    NOT THAT THE ASKING SAVES YOU! SAVE ME SAVE ME DOES NOT SAVE YOU IN ANY SITUATION! IM SICK AND TIRED OF READING PEOPLE WHO CANT GET IT THROUGH THEIR THICK SKULLS THAT REPENTANCE DOESNT SAVE! IF GOD DIDNT WANT TO SAVE YOU - THEN REPENTANCE COUNTS FOR NOTHING!

    back to the belief - so GOD grants man the ability to believe - ie we had the capacity within us hardware-wise but we lacked the software necessary to make it function.

    John 8 hrm lets counter with Romans 10:17
     
  18. Pastor Larry

    Pastor Larry
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    21,763
    Likes Received:
    0
    All other stuff aside, what in John 8 contradicts Roman 10:17? I have the benefit of believing both ...
     
  19. BobRyan

    BobRyan
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    30,837
    Likes Received:
    4
    Well then we differ. But I think your logic above provides the answer as to why I am right. [​IMG]

    Adam and Lucifer were ALSO created with NO sinful natures and they WERE tempted and they DID fail.

    So simply "not having a sinful nature" is not some kind of iron clad way to say "can not be TEMPTED".

    So while I agree with you that Christ was in fact TEMPTED -- (really TEMPTED) - He did not ALSO have a sinFUL nature (a nature full of sin that actually DESIRED to rebell against God).

    Mankind NEEDS salvation for TWO reasons.
    #1. We have sinFUL natures - full of SIN, desiring EVIL, desiring rebellion from birth.

    #2. WE actually COMMIT sin.

    BOTH of these problems REQUIRE a Savior to fix.

    Christ did NOT need a Savior!! He did not have EITHER of the problems listed above but coming in the FORM of fallen humanity and in the LIKENESS of sinful flesh He WAS tempted and yet HAD NO sin (not FULL of sin, not sinFUL, not a sinner)!

    And WHAT was he tempted with in Matt 4??? (Turn STONE into BREAD!!). That "can" only be a temptation to one who HAS the power to CREATE life which is the CREATOR ALONE (contrary to the hopes of evolutionists).

    He was TEMPTED by the very fact that HE WAS God and as such -- turning stone into bread to satisfy extreme hunger was a VERY REAL possibility.

    In Christ,

    Bob
     
  20. BobRyan

    BobRyan
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    30,837
    Likes Received:
    4
    The Atoning Sacrifice (1John 2:2) was sufficient for all - but in the Heb 8-9 High PRiestly work that follows (accoring to the Day of Atonement teaching of God in Lev 16) the Atonement is completed only for the saved - the FEW of Matt 7.

    If we ignore His High Priestly "TYPE" work in fullfillment of the ANTITYPE predictions of Lev 16 - then we have Calvinism's limited atonment completed at the Cross.

    I prefer to to just hand that one over to them.


    "New Favorite"?? I thought Pastor Larry was an old timer on these boards!

    Yep that is the Arminian Future Scenario I posted a while ago.

    Agreed! [​IMG]

    However I would argue that mankind is fully "depraved" by virtue of his sinful natur alone. And that it is only the Drawing (John 12:32) and the convicting power of the Holy Spirit (John 16) that restrains him AND that enables him to choose life.

    I think we are pretty close on that one since you basically have mankind sinning as soon as humanly possible and at that point being depraved.

    In Christ,

    Bob
     

Share This Page

Loading...