Featured Has God determined all things?

JOHN 3:3-8
3. Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.
4. Nicodemus saith unto him, How can a man be born when he is old? can he enter the second time into his mother’s womb, and be born?
5. Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.
6. That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.
7. Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again.
8. The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit.

Jesus Christ is telling Nicodemus what happens in the new birth or regeneration. Now show me where Jesus Christ states that Faith or belief is a prerequisite. The New Birth is solely the work of the Holy Spirit.

Ephesians 2:1-7, NASB
1. And you were dead in your trespasses and sins,
2. in which you formerly walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, of the spirit that is now working in the sons of disobedience.
3. Among them we too all formerly lived in the lusts of our flesh, indulging the desires of the flesh and of the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, even as the rest.
4. But God, being rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us,
5. even when we were dead in our transgressions, made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved),
6. and raised us up with Him, and seated us with Him in the heavenly places, in Christ Jesus,
7. in order that in the ages to come He might show the surpassing riches of His grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus.

The Apostle Paul in the above passage discusses what takes place in the New Birth or Regeneration. Note in particular verses 4 and 5 which I have emphasized. When we were dead in our transgressions God made us a live. This is exactly what Jesus Christ has told us in John 3:3-8 which we would expect since He is the author of both. Now Winman dead men don walk, talk, breath, believe. Similarly those who are spiritually dead are unable to believe!

Yep whoever believes in Jesus Christ has eternal life. I have tried to tell you repeatedly over the years that we who believe salvation is only by the Sovereign Grace of God believe in Jesus Christ. However, again you read something into the passage which is not there. The passage says nothing about the New Birth.

Yep whoever believes in Jesus Christ has eternal life. I have tried to tell you repeatedly over the years that we who believe salvation is only by the Sovereign Grace of God believe in Jesus Christ. However, again you read something into the passage which is not there. The passage says nothing about the New Birth.

ALL SCHOLARS, ALL SCHOLARS? Really Winman where did you get that nonsense!

No one who believes in the Sovereign Grace of God in the Salvation of His elect would deny what we are taught in John 3:36. We honor the Word of God. I would remind you Winman, not that it will have any impact on your blindness, what Jesus Christ tells us in His letter to the Hebrews:

Hebrews 5:9. And being made perfect, he became the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him;
Hebrews 12:2. Looking unto Jesus the author and finisher of our faith; who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame, and is set down at the right hand of the throne of God.

Please note that Jesus Christ is not only the author but the finisher of our faith.

Perhaps one day in this life Winman you will come to truly appreciate the marvelous Grace of God.

 

Benjamin,

well...in post 19 I said this:

this is exactly what you have done in most of this thread.like this:

their Determinist doctrines:will begin with Ad HominemIn a cult-like fashion, with what appears to be an Archie Bunker type of phikosophy many Determinists continue to use their invalid arguments for the “Doctrines of Deterministic Pre-selected Grace”
alleged Deterministic characteristics ,
The Determinists clearly deny these Truths of God’s Divine attributes
In logically voiding the Goodness
The Hyper-Determinist
The doctrines of Calvinism/Determinism unavoidably logically lead into theological fatalism
Strawman
for Libertarian Free Will and not exhaustive determinism
to believe through your determinist system
in repeating this strawman and thereby it was also disingenuous,
I was wrong on your motive for repeating this strawman, I'm truly sorry…
have no desire to deal with your ignorant determinist dogma nor spend the time dealing with your common Calvinist ploy here of making that accusation
how you come to those conclusions of determinism concerning Divine foreknowledge. I’ve been over and over this point in the "Molinist Differentiated from Calvinist" tread
I compared your philosophy of Determinism to that of true Creaturely Volition in post #29 and spelled the problems of holding to such a doctrine as Determinism. I don't expect you to prove anything I said there against determinism to be false
but that's all (Determinist logic
I don't expect you you refute what I said as like I said said in that post your system of Determinism has no valid argument against my claims which I made in post #29.
hat you think fits to support your Determinist System but I’ve been there, done that, dealt with the logic of your system’s interpretations and I’m not really interested in chasing all those rabbits again.
Me thinks you got this defense straight out of the "Calvinist/Hyper-Determinst Tactics Book" on how to attack those who disagree with the Determinist view


In post 70..I tried to cut off your nonsense here:

It turns out that I was prophetic....you continue on in your cocoon-

e you "logically" what would be considered a Determinist? Then we can begin to look at the conseqences of involved with Determinist and where they lead, okay?
Again concerning whether or not man has free will/volition which I have shown to be logically mutually exclusive to Doctrines of Determinism
Well, as you can see on this board one can “try” and stick to subject but others/most here have no respect whatsoever to debate ethically
so they continue in their childish unethical debating ways.
w the Doctrines of Determinism become Theologically Fatalistic
It is interesting to note how quickly Determinists will resort to A-D to defend their doctrines.
otally destroy the Determinst conclusions on responsibility!

Same old, same old, don't know why I bother here!
I’ve established a logical definition for Determinism and it fits your view like a second skin; doesn’t matter whether you like the term or not.
he fact remains your view is that God fore determined all things and that defines the "Determinist" view adequately.
You are a Determinist, like the term or not this term has meaning as established with a simple bit of logic that even a child could understand as truth.

You're not going to get out of this "logical web" of truth which is merely a tool to support the argument by defining terms. Admit it...You're trapped again!
There is not a bit of logic to the Calvinist conclusion that man is responsible for his sins if his choice is not freely made
Do you, or do you not believe God fore determined all things? All we need here is an honest answer from you. If yes, I will describe your view as a view of Determinism, thus you as a Determinis
Otherwise people might think you are using disingenuous debate tactics to avoid this simple issue of establishing a definition for your view.
Your statement has no validity to it no matter "what man's faultly Deterministic interpretations" it echoes!
while referring to his "Calvinist/Hyper-Determinst Tactics Book":
hese types of fallacious debate tactics being used on this board.
Your Ad Hominem does show my "philosophical expression" to be false. Does it? Yet another boneheaded fallacy!
You two should be ashamed of presenting such non-sensible gibberish and the logical fallacies
I believe anyone not brain washed into the Doctrines of Determinstic Pre-selected Grace can plainly see how you have disingenuously avoided getting to the truth in this debate and and is aware of the tactics you've used to do so.

Determinism is a terrible doctrine.

Your own words condemn you....

You are not trying to learn, but argue....you never address the scripture like I s!aid in post 19......the funny part is it is..it is you that build the determinist strawman and are guilty of the strawman fallacy////lol// You are too much


deut 32:4 does not cover this nonsense

 

So, your argument is that regeneration and salvation are not the same thing? Are you saying a person can be regenerated and not saved?

Are you saying a person can be regenerated and afterward be lost?

Explain in detail the difference between regeneration and salvation, and please provide scripture that clearly shows these differences.

Jesus said that whoever has believed has passed from death to life. This is regeneration, regeneration mean to be alive again.

Jhn 5:24 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.

If a person who believes is passed from death to life, then it is impossible to be regenerated without belief, because before you believed you had not passed from death to life, you were still dead.

You cannot be dead and alive at the same time! This shows your great error. No man is regenerated or alive until he first believes!

And if a person has passed from death to life they are saved. That is salvation.

This is the problem with your false doctrine. You must redefine the words regeneration and salvation, which really are the same thing. To be regenerated means to be passed from death to life, to be saved. You attempt to make this into two separate events, but Jesus clearly said the moment a person believes they are passed from death to life. That person is now saved.

What are we saved from? Our sins!

Mat 1:21 And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins.

Salvation means to be saved from our sins. It is to no longer be under condemnation for our sins. No person is forgiven or justified until they first believe. No person is ALIVE until they believe, no person is regenerated until they believe, because until you believe you are dead in your trespasses and sins.

Because you and others pervert the scriptures, you go deeper and deeper into error.

Jesus was telling Nicodemus how to be born again John chapter 3. He was telling Nicodemus he must believe to have his sins forgiven so he can be born or made alive again.

Your teaching is false.

 

​

Well, some will say that believing and regeneration happen at the same moment (while insisting that regeneration occurs first), while others will go so far as to say a person can be regenerated for years, even decades before they believe.

The problem with Calvinists is that they do not understand why a person is "dead" in the first place. A person is spiritually dead because of sin, the moment a person sins they are separated from God and spiritually dead.

No person can be spiritually alive while they are still dead in trespasses and sins. Only when a person believes and is justified can they be spiritually alive/regenerated, therefore logically faith MUST precede regeneration.

It is actually a very simple concept, but no Calvinist will admit this truth.

 

Perhaps one day in this life Winman you will come to truly appreciate the marvelous Grace of God.

 

I would hardly call the doctrine you believe in marvelous, like Charles Wesley I would call it HORRIBLE.

Perhaps someday you will come to know [what is in my opinion] the true gospel.

 

Winman,

I did not call the doctrine marvelous, I called the Grace of God marvelous!

There are none so blind as those who will not see!

I have experienced the true Gospel of Grace!

 

I agree HT that God has given us the faculties of reason and the ability to use logic and so we must in learning and communicating the Word of God. I agree with your statement. However, we would do well to recognize that there is a reasoned or logical understanding that we can get but there is also a kind of spiritual understanding that does not come about merely by mental effort. I'm sure many of us have had the experience of understanding some scripture logically but not REALLY spiritually understanding it; then God giving us a spiritual understanding of it which does not do away with our reasoning but does I think operate in a different sphere and provides a far deeper and solidified understanding than what we previously only understood mentally. Does that make sense?

I suppose I would have to say I try to trust my reasoning with the caution of my fallibility and imperfection and the recognition that the more I learn, the less I seem to know.

 

sorry Ben, but I am not impressed with your own quoted definition of free will. Your concept that volition can only actually be volition if it is free from influences and compulsions upon it is absurd. If you eat chocolate and like it, this experience will most likely influence you to "will" to have more chocolate. According to your definition any subsequent choices to eat chocolate are not volitional, your will is no longer involved and volition is void because you have been corrupted by the good taste and compelled by the fond memory to have more. It is no longer a choice to eat because the influences on your will have predetermined your eating…

This illustrates the whole point between distinguishing the term "free will" from the term "will" (or volition) . The adjective actually denotes something and its absence is not the logical anti-matter that you think it is. We will things according to a number of influences and compulsions and conflicting desires and this range of internal and external influences inform - dare I say determine (!) - our choices. We do not make our choices in some kind of hermetically sealed clean room of evenly balanced and equally choosable options.

If the causal means which determine creaturely response act upon the will of man then by definition that response is STILL volitional.

I didn't want chocolate until I tried it, then I wanted it. The causal means which determined my eating chocolate is that I had a taste and I liked it and then I wanted it (ie. my will changed due to the causal means of tasting it) Tasting it didn't force me to eat more, but it did change my will and determine my choice. My will was not free, but my will was still a will. My choice was constrained and compelled but it was still by my volition (exercise of the will)

 

You have clearly presented truth as in many times past.Some who are reading will enjoy the good verses and learn,Others come to resist and trample on clear truth,they have not been allowed to welcome it.

No matter who proclaims truth they will always resist and turn from it:

 

So you agree with me that God acts upon the will of man and does not fore-determined all things, including man's nature that that his will would be so pre-determined and under his sovereign control???

 

WITBOTL, this is good. I'm enjoying this... maybe in a less distracting thread we could expound and elaborate more... I think I agree and understand what you are saying. Let me ask you this: Is the 'epiphany', if you will, of your spiritual understanding explainable? Is it still logical? It is not the case that it is illogical in retrospect, correct? So, what I'm thinking is that the spiritual epiphany is always logical - at least from God's perspective. Once we have God's perspective then it can be explained and the explanation would be logical. For instance, I feel that I have a personal obligation to care for the poor. I can see how in some particular instances that would appear to be illogical. It may be the case that God is impressing upon me to give a certain 'posession' to someone in need. It may appear to be an illogical action but from God's perspective it is very logical. So, in this case a spiritual matter may conflict with my estimation of what is a logical action and, in this sense, I must surrender my mental faculties to the spritual.

It seems to me that the readings of scripture that are illuminated due to spiritual 'epiphany' are the readings that the Spirit prompts us to exercise our faith. This seems to be a personal issue, since we cannot point to a passage of scripture and say something to the effect of, "If someone doesn't understand that this passage means this then it is because their eyes have not been opened spiritually.". Jesus could say that about specific people with definite knowledge and authority. We can speculate at best.