Featured Power to choose

Do you, or do you not agree with what Reformed said in post77? Make up your mind.
Either you want to deny what you said earlier:"What I said and what you said are the same thing."

Or, you agree. You are a moving target. You mind changes very quickly.

 

My posts are there for all to see. I have not done what I am being accused of. When discussions hinge on these kinds of attacks in order to win a debate rather than have a loving discussion then we have lost sight of what it is to be a Christian.

 

Not at all. I am "seeking" clarification. Have you ever heard of the law of contradiction? "Two antithetical propositions cannot both be true at the same time and in the same sense."

 

You have only been "accused" of being indecisive. Don't make a mountain out of a molehill. What a cruel attack. ;-)

 

RM took umbrage with my last sentence. Yet he has done the same thing a number of times.

"This short form was released and again you continue to dance." (9/23/2009)
"Those who do not want to deal with real concerns simply dance around the issue..." (8/11/2009)
"Pro-Choice is Pro-Abortion no matter how you try to dance around the issue." (6/4/2009)
"I have grown impatient with your continual dance." (3/30/2009)
"Nice dance." (12/3/2008)
"You have to tap dance to make this about generosity to the poor at all." (5/3/2008)

Should you take your own advice?"Ok, this is the kind of unnecessary language on this board that inhibits real discussions."

 

I Sought The Lord --First Verse

I sought the Lord.
and afterward I knew
he moved my soul
to seek him, seeking me;
it was not I that found
O Savior true;
no, I was found, was
found of thee;
It was not I that found
O Savior true.

 

Brother, I disagree. Your comment about Calvinism indicates that we view all men's ability to respond as equal. We do not. Calvinists see a categorical difference between unregenerate sinners and those who are effectually called. If you believe we are saying the same thing then you must be agreeing with the Calvinist explanation. Not that you believe the Calvinist explanation, but that you agree both us are saying the same thing.

One additional note -- perhaps it is the way I am wired, but when it comes to theological discussion I believe it is necessary to get granular in our explanations. After all, we are stating what we believe scripture teaches. That is a heady thing. I am confident that neither of us wants to be misunderstood. That is why some recent posters have taken exception to things I have written. It is not that I know everything (I do not), but it is because of the gravity of offering opinion on God's word. I am not alone in this opinion. I have no doubt you have similar feelings.

 

That is not what I meant.

 

Rm

[/QUOTE]

Paul is explaining why the heathen are the heathen.

God used to speak to man directly...from creation to the fall, from the fall to the flood, after the flood to the tower of Babel...

After the fall into sin they were separated from God by sin.....they know God existed, he spoke with some of them.

but Paul explains why in romans 1 they lost the ability to commune with God..

They became truth suppressors, unable to correctly grasp simple commands because of sin

18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;19

they suppress the truth

Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.

20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:

21 Because that, when they knew God,

a]they glorified him not as God,

b]neither were thankful;

c]but became vain in their imaginations,

4]and their foolish heart was darkened.

5] Professing themselves to be wise,

6]they became fools,

7] [COLOR="[COLOR="DarkOliveGreen"]Orange"]And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God [/COLOR]

8]into an image made like to corruptible man,[/COLOR]

9] and to birds,

10]and fourfooted beasts,

11]and creeping things.



God took action against rebellious man;


24 Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves:

25 Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.

26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:

27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.

28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;

This is the current condition of all men outside of Christ.:thumbs:

 

The question is not "Can he choose?" but "Does he?" The whole point of Romans 1:18ff is that people do not seek God. Creation and providence makes it glaringly obvious that there is a God (vs. 19-20), and deep down people know it, but they don't want to know, or if they do, they invent their own gods (v.23). Nowhere does Paul say, 'some people seek and others don't;' his condemnation of man is universal. Just a page or two further down, he declares, 'There is none who understands; there is none who seeks after God. They have all turned aside' (3:11-12).

As I wrote elsewhere, man's inability is not physical, but moral and spiritual. There is no one saying, "Oh, how I wish I could seek God, but I just.....can't.....seem..... to do it!" No! If they truly sought they would find (Matt. 7:7-8; John 6:37b), but they will not do so (John 3:19; 5:40). It is only when God opens a man's heart that he will seek and find (Matt. 11:25-27; Acts 16:14; Gal. 1:15-16; 1 Thes. 1:4-6).

 

Hi Agedman, this is a response to your post #42.

1) If a main point comes with sub-points in scripture, it is unsound to nullify the sub-points because they are not the main point. Thus Matthew 23:13 does indeed teach fallen men were entering heaven but we blocked. Thus they were seeking God but were not under irresistible compulsion.

2) No question that the power to become the "sons of God" (to be born anew) rests totally with the Father. But to whom does God grant the right to become a child of God? Those who believe!! Thus the lost believes before they become a "son of God."

3) John Chapter 1, or anywhere else, does not teach all fallen people have an inability to seek God and trust in Christ. Instead, it says the Light came into the world, but the darkness did not comprehend the light. However, John the Baptist came as a witness, thus some living in the realm of darkness could comprehend. Then John 1 says the true light enlightens every man. It does not say some do not reject Christ after being enlightened, but does indicate some ability to hear and respond in some manner to the gospel of Christ. Finally, verse John 1:12, as many as received Him (or believed in His name)were then given the right to become sons of God.

4) Sequence matters and your sequence does not mesh with scripture. We are chosen through faith in the truth, thus we are believers before we are chosen. We are believers before we are given the right to become children of God. We are saved by grace through faith again teaching if God credits our faith in Christ as righteousness, then God places us in Christ where we are born anew as a new creation.

5) Here is the key question which your view answers incorrectly, "Why are those fallen able to respond to the message while others do not?"

a) Those that hear and learn have not been hardened by God.
b) Those that hear and learn have not been hardened by the practice of sin.
c) Those that hear and learn are "of God" or "of My Sheep" i.e. they believe God and are open to His promised Messiah. They are not "unwilling." They are those that make the field "white for harvest."​

6) Your bottom line yet again denies the sequence clearly taught by John 1:12. We are saved by grace through faith, thus faith comes before salvation. We are chosen through faith in the truth, thus faith comes before election. We are given the right to become sons of God after we receive Christ (trust in His name). The evidence is overwhelming.

 

Hi Martin, this is in partial response to your post #43.

1) Your view mistakenly claims the idea of "see" refer to an awareness of the existence of the kingdom of God, yet using the parallel John 3:5, we see the idea is entering or seeing the kingdom after entering. Therefore John 3:3 does not support the inability of fallen people to be aware of God, His kingdom and His promised Messiah.

2) Your view again mistakenly claims "the things of the Spirit of God" refers to "all the things" rather than some of the things. But, contextually 1 Corinthians 2:14-3:3, fallen people cannot understand spiritual meat, but can understand spiritual milk. Just read it folks.

3) Your view yet again mistakenly claims 1 Corinthians 15:22 being dead in our sins means we are unable to seek God. But scripture shows us dead fallen people seeking God again and again. To be spiritually dead means (1) to be separated from God, in an unholy sinful state, and (2) to be unable to do anything that would merit salvation, as all our works of righteousness are as filthy rags. On the other hand, Matthew 23:13 shows men in Adam actually entering heaven. True, they do not enter, they are blocked, but give them an "A" for effort, they were seeking God and perhaps at least willing to trust in Christ if they had heard the gospel.

Bottom line, all four verses teach some fallen men in Adam and spiritually dead do some of the time seek God. And, Romans 11 teaches some people have that ability taken away (God hardened the unbelieving Jews) and Matthew 13 teaches some, the first soil, cannot understand because of the trampled down soil, but the rest can understand.

 

Do you believe the Corinthians were "fallen"? How do you define that? You might possibly like to read 1 Corinthians 1:2-9 before answering. Just read it, folks.

 

What did you mean?

 

I would be hesitant in using that phrase. It has been copyrighted.

 

What Did Luke Tell Us Was The Basis Of The Antioch Gentiles Being Saved?

In Acts 13, Luke recounts Paul's and Barnabas's confronting the Jews of Antioch in Pisidia with the gospel of the forgiveness of sins through the resurrected Christ.

When these two missionaries presented their message of salvation via God's grace, most of the Jews accused them of blasphemy. As a consequence, Paul and Barnabas turned to the Gentiles with the same gospel message that the Jews rejected. Unlike the Jews, the Gentiles gladly received this gospel message.

In the last part of Acts 13:48, under the HS's inspiration, Luke tells us that, "as many as were ordained to eternal life believed."

This is the key to our understanding the basis of whether or not a person has the ability to receive Jesus Christ as his personal savior: The Jews of Antioch weren't ordained to eternal life, thus they rejected the gospel of salvation by grace in the resurrected Christ.

OTOH, the Gentiles of Antioch received the gospel of salvation by grace in the resurrected Christ. What made the difference between one group of people being born again and the other group NOT being born again?

Simple--the gospel rejectors were NOT ordained to eternal life!

Ephesians 2:1-7 clearly states that it was God who took the initiative to give life to people who otherwise would have remained in their spiritually dead condition--IOW, a spiritually dead person has no innate capacity in and of himself to choose to be saved because he's spiritually DEAD!

In Christ's great prayer that John records for us in 17:2, Jesus Himself declares that it is He who is the one to "give eternal life to as many as thou [God the Father] hast given him [Jesus Christ]."

Earlier in John's gospel, he states that the Jews began to insist that Christ couldn't have possibly been the eternal Second Person of the Trinity, thus denying Jesus's deity. How did He respond to these complaining Jews?

John 6:44 gives us Christ's reply to these murmuring Jews by saying to them, "No man can come to me, except the Father draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day."

To bring home Paul's point that, while God saw the fallen Jews without God's taking the first step in our salvation. As spiritually dead people, we were neither righteous no even good in God's eyes.

Paul comes right out and boldly states in Romans 5:6,9-10 that, "When we were utterly helpless, Christ came at just the right time and died for us sinners....And since we have been made right in God's sight by the blood of Christ, he will certainly save us from God's judgment."

God's Word is quite clear that when it comes to a person's salvation, it's all in God's hands--Jesus in John 6:65 says so.

While others may incorrectly attribute to fallen, spiritually dead people the capacity to inherently "come to life on their own, apart from God, I prefer to line up with what the Lord Jesus Christ Himself says about man apart from God taking the initiative in his salvation. :thumbs:

 

That's how people end up in quicksand. :thumbsup:

 

Just read it folks