Featured Easy-Believism and False Converts...

Where did this come from? I am simply asking why one tract would be better than another if Irresistible Grace is true. If God has chosen this moment to regenerate a person, how can a good tract or a bad tract affect the outcome? That person is going to be irresistibly regenerated no matter what the tract you give them says.

Certainly you do not believe God's power to regenerate depends on whether a tract or sermon is presented well by men do you?

That was the confusing part of this whole thread, if salvation is all of God, what difference does a good or poor tract make? That seems to be a contradiction and nonsensical to me.

 

If God loves everyone the same and if Christ died for everyone in the world, why preach, why witness to the lost because they will go to heaven anyway. After all nothing Christ did was done in vain. Either there is power in the blood or there is not.

 

I don't think there is any such thing as "easy-believism".

Believeing on Jesus Christ is one of the easiest things I know how to do.
In fact I always do it - rain or shine or tornado, I can't help myself.

But without the grace of God to believe on Jesus Christ is impossible and any theological position would agree with that.

One either believes on Him or they don't.
We are either born again or we are not.

Now I would agree and say that there is a "phony-believism" - that's the job of the tares (Matthew 13).

HankD

 

That is the inner workings of the Lord we do not fully understand. Regardless of which is true, you, me, the pastor, the deacon, all Christians are told to go, teach, and baptize.

Basically I believe tracts to be worthless. We are told to go and tell. The miracle of the Lord is the person that goes being at the same point of time and space as the person that is lost, and the Lord using us to tell them about Jesus. That has NOTHING to do with Calvinism, free will, or all the positions in between.

Again, confusing or not, you are told to go.

 

That is not what the scriptures say, the scriptures say over and over that you must believe. Yes, Jesus died for everyone, but if you do not depend on that payment it is not applied to you.

I have used the example of Super Bowl tickets. I could go out and purchase every single member of BB a Super Bowl ticket, then come here and post a thread telling every member if they will PM me their personal address I will mail it to them.

The ones who believe and send me their address will receive a free ticket.

Those who do not believe me, or those who do not care enough to PM me with their address will not receive a ticket.

That doesn't mean I didn't purchase a ticket for each member here.

And this is how salvation works, Jesus died for you, but you must personally receive that payment by faith. If you do not come to Jesus in faith you will die in your sins.

 

And I think this is a ridiculous answer. Of course, in Calvinism you must resort to this nonsensical answer, for if Calvinism were true, it wouldn't matter what you do. You could hand someone a blank tract, and if God desired to regenerate that person at that time it would happen. If the person was not elect, no matter how good the tract or the personal message, that person will never get saved.

So if you do not go and tell, does that prevent God from regenerating someone he has chosen to regenerate? Does God have to wait for you to go before he can regenerate someone?

Not so much confusing as nonsensical. You folks repeatedly tell folks that man plays no part in salvation, but then insist you must go. Why?

If God simply regenerates a man when he chooses, why does man need to be there? And if the man is not there, is God prevented from regenerating that person?

I don't really think you believe that answer you gave, I certainly don't buy it.

 

Actually Winman that's exactly what Calvinists believe. When I attended a Calvinistic church for a couple of years the pastor would say, in response to why the church should send out missionaries was because, "there are people God has elected that have not yet heard the Gospel and we've got to get it to them."

 

I am not surprised. Calvinists have to preach like they are Arminians or no one would get saved, and no one would go out and witness. :laugh:

 

And getting back to the OP, how does one know that a person who says a prayer and asks Jesus to save them was not genuinely regenerated by God?

Isn't it possible God could regenerate a person and that person would kneel down and pray for Jesus to save them? Or does God refuse to regenerate someone this way?

 

No, He doesn't "have" to but He has chosen to include us in His work. And what a privilege that is!

 

Of course this is true - be it Calvinistic thinking or Non-calvinistic thinking. Both groups generally support that without the direct intervention of the Holy Spirit "to awaken the person to the need of Christ" no person is saved.

That you use it as some evidence against calvinistic thinking would also have to apply to all others who acknowledge that without that work of the Holy Spirit no salvation is granted.

If the Eunuch was not approached by Philip would he be saved, or would God have selected another to bring understanding?

The point being that God has decreed that the sharing of the Word is what is necessary for the Holy Spirit to conduct business. Certainly, a specific messenger such as was sent to Saul/Paul may be appointed to the task (as are missionaries called to a certain place), however the commission was for all believers to be messengers.

Because that is God's plan. It does not diminish that all of salvation from the first impulse of Godly conviction to the final estate in Glory. Your desire to dismiss a view based upon speculation and innuendo does not support your thinking. The believer is to be totally controlled by God through the Holy Spirit.

It is unrealistic for God to appoint a believer who is both skilled in understanding and experience to cross the path of a person in whom God has selected for salvation. Was it just happen chance that Paul was in prison with a jailor who had a family? Was it just happen chance that Paul sang in the midst of sorrow, and the jailor's heart was no doubt pricked with Godly conviction?

See answer above.

When one is holding a faulty bias, one must always make assumptions that are incorrect toward one they contend.

Is it true that God states that Christ is the "author and finisher" of the believer's salvation?

Do you actually deny that God does not through the work of the word shared by the believer impress upon the lost the need of Christ?

I thought all views supported that statement, both cals and non-cals.

 

The problem is not so much doubting one's salvation, for that is to be put into the judgment of God (only God knows the heart).

Those who exercise such judgment are trolling into God's sphere and need to butt out.



The problem is that some would state that unless one prays a certain set of words there is no guarantee of entry into heaven. It is commonly called "the sinner's prayer."

I don't find that thinking in any statement of Scripture.

Rather, I find that the reaction to belief of the heart is to proclaim acceptance and trust. It cannot be contained, and is as spontaneous as a newborn's cry at birth.

"Remember me when you get to Paradise" is just as acceptable when true belief is in the heart.

 

You just do not get it. Every verse in the Bible is not a Calvin debate. It is not a free will debate. It is a fact. The only thing nonsensical is your conclusions and tunnel vision to put everything in the Bible from Genesis to Revelation in the context of this one issue.

How many if questions are you going to ask............if a frog had wings..............what would possibly entice you to attach questions to the verses of the Great Commission?

You do not buy it? Well, whoop tee do.

 

And that's called obedience.

 

And he was correct in believing that because it's Scriptural.

 

Have you never read the story of the ten lepers that Jesus healed? How many came back and thanked him?

Luk 17:11 And it came to pass, as he went to Jerusalem, that he passed through the midst of Samaria and Galilee.
12 And as he entered into a certain village, there met him ten men that were lepers, which stood afar off:
13 And they lifted up their voices, and said, Jesus, Master, have mercy on us.
14 And when he saw them, he said unto them, Go shew yourselves unto the priests. And it came to pass, that, as they went, they were cleansed.
15 And one of them, when he saw that he was healed, turned back, and with a loud voice glorified God,
16 And fell down on his face at his feet, giving him thanks: and he was a Samaritan.
17 And Jesus answering said, Were there not ten cleansed? but where are the nine?
18 There are not found that returned to give glory to God, save this stranger.
19 And he said unto him, Arise, go thy way: thy faith hath made thee whole.

How many of these lepers returned and thanked Jesus?

How many were healed of their leprosy?

Do you believe everything some Calvinist tells you? Do you really believe that non-Cals believe a prayer saves them?

And just how do you tell if a person is living good enough to be saved?

Can a person who drinks and listens to Rock music be saved? Can a man who lives with a woman when they are not married be saved?

Better be careful how you judge folks, you will be judged with the same judgment you judge others.

 

There are several there who'd like to oust him. Funny thing is when he raised an argument for his easy-believism nonsense several older women who know their Scriptures rebutted him -- bless their hearts!

 

So, you Reformed/Calvinists who constantly criticize non-Cals because you say we teach that God must wait on a sinner to repent (which is scriptural), now say that God must wait on a Calvinist to go out and preach before he can save the elect?

My, that seems very hypocritical.

 

Exactly!:thumbs: