free will to choose?

Ken, the emails are coming in response to what the Calvinists are posting, not what I am saying. They are quoting you folks, not me! So whether or not I am misrepresenting anything has nothing to do with the effect the Calvinist presentations on Baptist Board are having on some folks out there. I'm afraid you can't pass that one off on me!

And yes, some little ones do indeed believe in Christ Jesus. They are taught early in life. There is no context indication, however, that Jesus was talking about anything other than the little one, the little child, He called to Him when He started speaking.

Rev. G, we are to give ANSWERS for the hope that we have. That indicates that we are to live lives that cause others to ask questions... Please do not misrepresent that verse.

Secondly, I see nothing in Romans 5 that indicates those who do not yet know Christ do not have the ability to hope. Not only does the Bible not say that, real life does not say that either! What those verses you referred to DO say is that we rejoice in the hope we have in Christ. THIS hope others do not (and one always hopes one can say 'yet') have, but they are not devoid of the ability to hope altogether and, in fact, hope for a good many things. Why do you take these verses out of context when you know I am going to look them up?

Missions and evangelism can TELL people about the Lord and point the way, but I'm afraid it is the Father and only Him who brings people to Christ -- I think you know the verses in John 6...

I know from what I have seen that some have already been prepared, probably by others who wonder if what they said ever bore fruit, and respond as soon as they hear Barry. Others talk and talk to us and need more time. Others walk away, hopefully thinking. Only the Holy Spirit knows the right timing. We can only do what we have been shown we should do.

Again, as I wrote earlier this evening, John 17:3 refers to knowing in terms of a close relationship. We cannot cause that relationship between any individual and Christ. We can only tell the ABOUT it, and that is a VERY different matter.

Ephesians 1:18 is talking to those who are already believers.

If the term 'anonymous Christians' deals with the present age, then I would dispute it, actually, for the Gospel and name of Christ have indeed gone out into all the world now. I was thinking about people before now. If you were talking about 'now' being, say, one hundred years after the Ascension, before the message had gone out to China or Siberia or Alaska or America, then I would say that although I dislike the term 'anonymous Christians' rather much, that if that is what someone is insisting on calling them, they probably did exist.

Keep in mind, however, that it is a Catholic making that argument, and they claim that all of us believers are default Catholics, which is another thing I will dispute to the wire! So what he was presenting and what I am thinking of might be quite different. I do know that Revelation tells us that people from every nation and tribe and tongue are included among the saved. That means they have been believers. And that means there was something there for them to believe in. I think that part is fairly simple. It was when I got involved in studies that I didn't know would take me there (I have always enjoyed anthropology and ancient legends simply for their own sakes), that I found startling evidence of the knowledge of the true God in every culture, and that is what I found so exciting.

For me, those studies have done the same thing the study of science has done -- affirmed the absolute truth of the Bible start to finish. One doesn't need that to trust Christ, but it sure is fun and rewarding to find out. A friend of mine, Malcolm Bowden, in England, wrote this great book summarizing much of his research in science entitled "True Science Agrees with the Bible." Amen.

I'm not afraid of studies outside the Bible at all, because I know God has left His mark everywhere and I find excitement discovering those marks. If that seems strange to you, then I guess I have seemed strange to you all along, so that's OK...

npetreley, thank you for your confirmation. I don't have much from Fiji at all. I do have the some South Pacific material collected by A.W. Reed, and was loaned his full set of material on Australian Aboriginal dreamtime material, which is fascinating. Was what you read from him or do you remember where you read it? I would love to see it.

On to the kids. It's hard being a single parent. I was there for nine years after my high school sweetheart/husband left after 20 years of marriage, one biologic child and five special case adoptions (Bianca and Chris are the last ones left at home. Chris will always be here). It doesn't matter if you have two or six, single parenting is the pits. It is the hardest thing I have ever done, bar NOTHING else. I don't even remember my forties, actually, except bits and pieces. I would hit the ground running around five or five-thirty in the morning and be unconscious before I was fully horizontal at bedtime.

God's grace? Nothing else would have been even remotely enough. But there were funny incidents, too, that let me know He was right there. I asked Him to be a father for the children because I was no way going husband-hunting! When Bianca, at eight or nine, kept disobeying about stopping at one dangerous corner on her bike before continuing, God arranged for a very large water delivery truck to be stopped at that corner and she rode smack into it. The driver almost had a heart attack, and I was more worried about her than about Bianca, who came out without a scratch but with a totalled bike! Who else but God would have enforced my parenting that way? Who else COULD have???

Hard times, though. Really hard. God bless you.

Chris can be hard, but he can be easy, too. No car pools or schedules except he goes to 'school' at a special county facility everyday that school is in session, including summer school. He gets door to door service and the van picks him up at 7 and drops him off again at about 3:30 or 4. Then Chris comes in and goes straight to his room because school is often overload for him. There he sits and rocks with his Barney stuffed animal for awhile and then goes out to the swings and swings for a long time. He loves to listen to music, so I often have CD's on. He loves the praise choruses, and also Karen Carpenter! Lately he's been big on Strauss waltzes, too...

So in some ways he's very easy. Changing the diapers is not fun, but I've sort of grown up with him, so to speak. We started out when he was 20 months old and a new adopted little one and things just sort of went from there. He was not so retarded when we got him.

So it's do-able. Sometimes I do get restless and wish my time were more my own. I can't be with Barry in Australia right now (we were married two years ago), for instance, because of Chris. But Barry will be home in 1 week and 5 1/2 days (so who's counting???) and then it will be fine. We sure don't take each other for granted!

I think you will understand when I say that one of the things that kind of irritates me is when people blithely misquote the Bible and say that God won't give us anything we can't handle. I tell them baloney -- He does that to me everyday, and that's how I learned to lean on Him so entirely! It's temptations He won't give us that He will not also give us a way out of...

God bless you. I know it's hard. And the hard you have is just as hard as the hard I had, but in a different way. Don't belittle what you are going through. I am just very glad your kids have you. Daddies are big! Very important people, you are! And with the Lord you can do it. With Him anything is do-able -- but aren't you glad we didn't have to know all these paths He would lead us on when we first started out?

I'm glad we only get DAILY bread!

If your kids need help in science at any time, I'm available. I work with several kids via emails who ask questions.

[email protected]

In Christ,
Helen

[ November 23, 2002, 01:55 AM: Message edited by: Helen ]

 

So, rather than dealing with the folks making the posts, they just deal with it in a dysfunctional and unbiblical manner, eh?

I didn't. It speaks of the hope "within us" (Christians). And we are to give a "defense" of that hope to non-believers.

Helen, I haven't taken these verses out of context. Tell me, where in the Bible does it speak of an unbeliever having hope? Hope in what? Hope for what? They may have "hope" that things go their way, etc., but they DON'T have the "hope" that is found only in Christ.

Yes, I know the verses to which you are referring in John 6. However, HOW does the Lord draw people to Himself? What means does He use? How does He bring about the new birth? Through His Word! It seems you are making evangelism and missions extraneous, and that is just wrong!!! God uses means to accomplish His purposes.

You are correct, we can only tell others about Christ, the Gospel, etc. However, we must understand that God uses that telling to bring about His purposes. He uses the Gospel that is proclaimed to bring about the new birth.

Exactly, Helen. HOPE - BELIEVERS. Get it?

No, it hasn't. There are still unreached people groups - people who have never heard the name of Christ (although the number is shrinking rapidly). Don't you remember what Jesus said? The Gospel must first be preached to all the nations (lit. "peoples"), THEN He will return.

Christians existing without the Gospel?

Nor am I afraid of studies outside the Scriptures. But, whatever I study I view through the lens of Scripture.

Helen, thanks for the discussions. I think I'm going to leave the Baptist Board. I've had enough discussion and debate that brings much more heartache than joy. I suppose it's bad when you look forward to reading what someone has posted on "Christmas movies" or "U2" rather than on discussions regarding the Scriptures. Just want you to know (as I've said a couple of times before), I count you as a sister in Christ and have never counted you as an enemy. God bless you. Hope your husband makes it home safely. Please know that I have prayed for his travels.

By His Grace Alone,
Rev. G

 

Helen,

As far as relationship knowledge and intellectual knowledge, any relationshiop is based on intellectual knowledge. Now perhaps you are talking about levels of intellectual knowledge from beginning to advanced, and in that I will agree. But it is impossible to have a relationshipo with Christ without have a basic intellectual knowledge.

As for sin and mentally incompetent, I maintain that Romans 5 blows your position out of the water. We are sinners because we are in Adam, not because we are smart enough to be. Your position destroys the hope of salvation because, according to Romans 5, if we became sinners by our own acts of sin, we can only become righteous by our own acts of righteousness. You would deny the latter and in so doing you would destroy the point of Romans 5. It is here the calvinist position that brings hope to the lost. For when we realize that we did nothing to become sinners, we are prepared to realize that we can do nothing to become righteous. Just as sin came to us, so righteousness comes to us. That is the glorious hope that comes from understanding this passage. It is, by the way, a position that arminians agree with (which is why I said that you are right in not calling yourself an arminian).

As for the lost "savage tribes," God prepares his elect ot receive his gospel. But he does not save them without it.

 

Sorry, Helen, but if I was a neutral in this debate and read the things that you - as a group - characterize Calvinism as(poisoning the well, as the tactic is called), I might be emailing you, too. Plus, you have your picture on your posts, and these people are saying she looks like such a sweet woman, and a bunch of mainly mean men are attacking her position. I ought to put a picture of one of my dogs with my posts so maybe I would get sympathy emails from the dog lovers.

So, okay, those of you are emailing Helen, we Calvinists are calling upon you to show yourselves. Quit hiding behind Helen's skirt and either post your concerns in this forum or email us privately with your concerns. Fair enough?

Ken

 

Oh no! We Calvinists are already pretty much like the defenders of the Alamo in this forum(as a native Texan I just had to use this analogy ).

Ken

[ November 23, 2002, 10:12 AM: Message edited by: Ken Hamilton ]

 

Thanks, massdak. We need all of the help we can get from our Calvinistic brothers and sisters to defend the truth of God's Word in this forum.

I do feel we are at a disadvantage though because we cannot make emotional, sentimental arguments to defend Calvinism as the non-Calvinists do to defend non-Calvinism. Calvinism is based on Scripture, not sentimentality or trying to force American democratic ideas into soteriology.

Ken

 

He constantly gives us things we can't handle on our own. That's one way God teaches us faith, as you already know, obviously.

Yes. I don't know what more to say on that one.

What I have to learn most is to pray for it, and then how to humble myself to accept it when it comes. The Christians at my church and the kids' school are very loving and have offered to help me out a few times, but I usually feel like I don't want to be a burden. Somewhere inside me I know that's pride, not humility, so I could use some prayer in that respect.

I'll let them know, thanks! (See? It's working already. I took a slice.)

I found my Fiji myth book - which forum would be good for posting excerpts from it?

[ November 23, 2002, 02:02 PM: Message edited by: npetreley ]

 

Yes, I know the verses to which you are referring in John 6. However, HOW does the Lord draw people to Himself? What means does He use? How does He bring about the new birth? Through His Word! It seems you are making evangelism and missions extraneous, and that is just wrong!!! God uses means to accomplish His purposes.</font>[/QUOTE]Wow! Do you two realize how much you sound like you've switched positions in this argument? Helen sounds like she's arguing for election and the exclusive power of grace, and Reg G., you are beginning to sound like salvation depends upon our evangelism! Yes, I know that's not exactly what you're saying, but this previous exchange still struck me as very amusing!

Now there's the ol' Rev. G I know..

I could be wrong, but IMO Jesus was not talking about OUR evangelism in this particular case. And it precedes when "the end will come" which includes but is not limited to the return of Jesus:

IMO, Jesus is referring to this:

I'll pray that you do not!

 

In my answer I pointed out that we already believe that we will see people in heaven that did not have "the whole story" and pointed to the "Hall of saints" in Heb 11. Some were even taken to heaven before Christ was born - "Enoch" is given asn an example in Heb 11.

Then I also showed that in Romans 2 the same point held up such that EVEN Gentiles without God's Word at all - were ALSO saved under the new covenant having nothing to go on but "Instinct" "Who Do Instinctively the things of God's Law" Roms 2:13-16.

And the response?

#1. That does not deal with the issue of the Romans 2 NT example.

#2. Your two-different-ways to be saved - is Two ways of salvation, Two versions of Good News, Two Gospels. In Malachi 4 we are told that God does not change. IN Heb 13 we are told that Christ is the SAME yesterday today and forever and in Gal 1:6-9 we are told that there are NOT two gospels - just before Gal 3:7 where we are told that the Gospel (the One Gospel) "was preached beforehand to Abraham".

In Romans 10:11-18 we are told that Nature itself is the teacher that facilitates the sequence "How shall they believe unless someone sent".

So - "To him who knows to do right and does it not - to him it is sin" - for "Whatever is not of faith is sin". Christ is the light that "enlightens EVERY man" John 1:9 - who convicts the WORLD of "Sin and Righteousness and Judgment" - John 16,

Who "DRAWS ALL MANKIND" unto Himself John 12:32

God Himself is the great evangelist - the Lord of the Harvest. Those who also evangelize serve under His leading - we do not limit His reach as many suppose.

In christ,

Bob

 

As I said - Roman 10 shows that NATURE is itself God's tool of evangelism just as Romans 1 makes the same point.

God IS the great evangelist - who Himself "CONVICTS the World of Sin and Righteousness and Judgment".

God alone "DRAWS all MANKIND" to Himself.

It is God - not man that has that ability.

We who evangelize serve in God's employ - but we do not limit His reach as Romans 10, and Romans 1, and Romans 2:13-16 and John 16 and John 12:32 point out explicitly.

It is the model of "Wave after More Explicit wave of invitation" - it is not the model of "The poor human evangelist as your only hope of salvation".

We serve God - we do not limit him.

In Christ,

Bob

 

That really takes the cake!

Now I am making Npetreley's point!! Arrrgh.

I seem to be in Calvinist jail - against my will.

In Christ,

Bob

 

But this, as I pointed out, is different than what you are making it. These people responded in faith to the revelation of God. That is why they were saved. Romans 2 is talking about the image of God in man, not salvation.

I don't have two ways of salvation. There is only way way -- through faith. I think it is you who have more than one way of salvation -- one with Christ and one without Christ. There is not one verse of Scripture from which you can demonstrate that an OT believer was saved by faith in Christ. He was saved by faith in God but the content of his faith (what was believed) was clearly different than in the NT.

Nature is the one sent????? That passage is about hte "word of Christ" that is sent by a messenger, not by nature. I am not sure if you are serious with this or if it is an attempt at levity. I can't see you trying to funny here but I can't see you trying to make this argument from this passage either. I guess its a toss up.

Christ. Yet that passage is often misunderstood. "Mankind" is nowhere to be found in that verse. Christ says that he will draw "all" to himself. All what is the question that you must ask yourself from the whole of Scripture. Based on the context of Greeks wanting to come to him, it is clearly "all kinds of people," rather than "all people without exception." Furthermore, taken in context with John 6, all that are drawn by the father do come and therefore once again, since we know objectively that people go to hell, it cannot be all men without exception that are drawn. That is why I continually say these verses cannot be taken in isolation. They must be read in light of the whole of Scripture.

 

If that is true, then the Calvinist/Non-Calvinist debate is pointless. The Christian Universalists, such as GH(who has directed me to some really interesting information on the Internet), would be correct.

Ken