Featured The ROSE Acronym

I don't know the context. Obviously he is totally involved in our salvation.

I stand by my statement. God doesn't give faith to the unsaved. This is absurd. This also has to do with the Calvinist's view of regeneration and salvation which is also different than the non-Cal, and even Calvinists differ on this. Some say that both take place simultaneously, or at least so close together that it is all basically one event. Then there are others that, using Cornelius as an example, say that Cornelius could have been regenerated some 3 or more days before Peter got there with the gospel. That position is also absurd. God doesn't give faith to the unsaved. This is a matter of defining what faith is, and how one obtains faith.

Faith comes from hearing and hearing from the Word of God.
God doesn't infuse one with faith. He obtains it by putting his confidence in the Word of God that its promises are true and sure. By doing so he can trust what it says, and thus trust Christ.

Anyone can come to Christ. You are putting words into my mouth.

Many Calvinists make man to be a robot of sorts because of their strong deterministic view of the world which I reject. Like I said, you would disagree with way I defined that salvation is all of God.

 

I am not obsessed...you are over-reacting. I have only ever mentioned it once, and you claim no one else has mentioned it before...So, having to explain its "real" meaning..."numerous" times as you claim is therefore provably false. I also made no commentary about your quote whatsoever, None...zero, I am allowing it to speak for itself. You made a claim, that I agree with about misrepresentation. What I quoted of yours belies some measure of hypocrisy IMO...But I didn't even bother to mention that.
You were veritably splitting-hairs with Van about the nuance of words, as you recall. I merely quoted your own patently obvious misrepresentative quote. I think you know I am right, and are thus overly-defensive.....That seems the only reason for your ultra-defensive reaction here. We can all read....The quote states what it states, and if it isn't misrepresentative, than anyone who can read will see that for themselves, will they not? You may loathe my simple act of quoting your own signature word-for word and un-edited, but I cannot control that. All I did was quote your own statements in context and say "Agreed". It speaks for itself. I don't intend to debate with you about what it "actually" means. I have no need to debate it....and will not attempt to argue with you about what Toplady "actually" meant at all. You can claim, or not claim what it "really" states all you want, or choose not to. I have no intention of "dragging" you into anything. Why do you take umbrage at being quoted word for word? Most of us are annoyed at being mis-quoted, you are miffed at being quoted accurately.

 

.

This is a denial of Jesus being the author and finisher of our faith.

yes...you reject the biblical explanation...for some reason. You substitute you own version.....now...that is an absurdity.:thumbsup::thumbsup:

 

Faith is defined in three different ways in the Bible.
1. It is a fruit of the Spirit (Gal.5)
--Does God give the fruit of the Spirit to the unsaved?

2. It is one of the spiritual gifts mentioned in 1Cor.12.
--Does God give spiritual gifts to the unsaved?

3. It is obtainable by hearing, and spiritually obtainable by hearing the Word of God.
--This is the only way that an unsaved man can obtain faith. It is when he hears the gospel and is able to put his confidence in its message; when he can trust it.

You can believe otherwise, but it won't be a scriptural belief. These are the only ways that faith is spoken of. A man may obtain faith in one of these three ways. Which way is it Icono? Is it your way--God taking a big hypodermic needle and infusing an unsaved man with supernatural faith. That is a myth. It is not taught in the Bible as much as you may want to believe it.

I am not the one that believes in myths.
The Bible says over and over again:
"whosoever will may come."
If you reject that, then you reject the promises of God.
God in his infinite wisdom and sovereignty has given mankind a limited amount of freedom of choice. He knows what the outcome will be, but man is obligated to make the choice. He must take responsibility for the choices he makes in this life. He is not a robot. He is made in the image of God. That makes him a responsible being, responsible to an Almighty God, responsible enough to choose between good and evil; to choose between receiving Christ and rejecting Christ.

 

Personally, I don't think "faith" in Galatians 5:22 is referring to the faith involved in salvation. The gifts of the Spirit are clearly given to saints. This "faith" is something different than that of salvation and most versions read "faithfulness" instead of "faith". I think this is a more accurate word.

I believe that we are all able to have faith to believe unto salvation but that God must first open our eyes and reveal Himself in order to exercise it. The natural man is not even able to understand the gospel apart from God's direct intervention. That probably makes me different from most Cals.

 

That is a pretty good way of putting it Amy. We are able to have faith. When it comes to salvation, the Holy Spirit opens our eyes to the truths of God's Word. Often he uses men. Is that not what happened with the Ethiopian Eunuch. By himself he could not understand what he was reading. He said to Philip, "How can I understand except some man show me?"
Then Philip began at the same passage and preached unto him Jesus.
All three were important: the man (preacher), the Word, and the Holy Spirit.

 

I am not searching as to whether the future is fixed or partly open. As you know, there are at least two ways to establish this view as consistent with scripture. One is called "inherent omniscience" where God knows whatever He has chosen to know, but He has chosen not to know our future choices so that our choices are autonomous. This view has been ruled as unorthodox and anyone advocating it may be banned from this forum. The other view, held by some Arminians, is that somehow God knows the future exhaustively, but this truth somehow does not predestine our choices. They say it is a mystery. Sort of like the Calvinist mystery of God predestining everything, but somehow is not the author of sin.

A wriggle view is that God arranges the circumstances that result in us freely choosing the outcome God desires. But at the end of the day, this makes God the puppeteer and therefore the author of sin.

What I am allowed to say, as far as I know, it that the future is not totally fixed and therefore exhaustive determinism is false doctrine.

As far as God giving up His power to His creatures, no I believe that is not true. But God can choose not to exercise His power, at His discretion, because He is sovereign. He can allow people to act contrary to His desired action, i.e. to sin of their own volition. And He can allow people to act autonomously according to His desired action without deterministically causing that action.

In summary, Closed theism where God is the author of sin, is false doctrine. But to describe just how far the door may be cracked open, based on scripture, has been ruled as unorthodox. Many of the views of Open Theists clearly go beyond what is soundly based on scripture, and I have posted numerous times what they are.

 

DHK

The fruit of the Spirit is produced in a sinner that God has saved.If a man does not have the Spirit...he is not saved DHK.:wavey:

You are proving my point DHK....here is how....

All men are born unsaved. God saves some men...scripture calls them elect sheep. they are given the gift of salvation which includes repentance and faith. They get this at regeneration....then and only then do they exercise it.
Jesus spoke of this as being born from above in jn 3......I did not notice a big needle being mentioned by Jesus as you suggest:laugh: No...just the unseen work of the Spirit.....like LYDIA...whose heart the Lord opened, or then has God granted to the gentiles...REPENTANCE.

So.....yes God has to give unsaved persons the gift os salvation,or they will not be saved.

A dead man cannot hear unless God enables him to.Without the work of regeneration by the Spirit, men cannot hear savingly..

What you describe here is a mere human trust....he can do this,and he can do that...yet scripture says he cannot.

Anyone who does believe otherwise, like the man who left your church, has to leave if they want to hear the whole counsel of God.If you are teaching human trust, and the carnal christian heresy, no wonder he fled for refuge in the presbyterian church up the road:wavey: You say it is not a scriptural belief....yet keep watching...as soon as new members find romans or ephesians in their bible they will flee out also. yeah...they will walk the aisle alright...right out the door.

It is God's way DHK....

6 Being confident of this very thing, that he which hath begun a good work in you will perform it until the day of Jesus Christ:

yes DHK...God saves unsaved men ...supernaturally. Sad you think this to be a myth????

Sadly....according to your teaching...you do not believe in Pneumatology.
maybe you could start a thread on how exactly , in any way does the Spirit work in salvation......I saw where earlier you said that salvation was of God...and yet you describe man believing and trusting by what the man does.
Rippon asked if you have recanted.
Calvinists believe a sinner repents and believes when the Spirit enables him to ,making him willing to do so. No myth there DHK...just bible 101.

It actually says everyone believing and continuing to believe....but yes...that is a wonderful promise that God in mercy declares

Why would anyone reject that? No one rejects that. We preach to all men everywhere.

men make choices...but their will is not free

God knows the outcome because he has ordained it...yes:thumbs:

All men are responsible to obey God at all times. bbgod has commanded all men everywhere to repent.

men being responsible. yet fallen, is unable and unwilling to come. That is why God in love and mercy took action to redeem a multitude in space and time. That is why eph 4-5 describes the Image being restored in man,after God saves him supernaturally.

 

Trying to plow through Calvinism's misrepresentation of scriptural truth is difficult but necessary.

1. After God spiritually puts us "in Christ" then we are sealed with the Holy Spirit. Thus we are not indwelt until after we have been transferred from the realm of darkness into the Kingdom of His Son.

2. Regeneration means to be born anew and occurs after we have been placed spiritually into Christ, baptized if you will into Christ's death, undergone the circumcision of Christ, and arisen in Christ a new creation.

3. The Bible is full of examples of spiritually dead unregenerate men who are separated from God. They are made alive together with Christ, so no one is made alive separated from Christ. Therefore "spiritually dead/separated" unsaved persons respond to the gospel of Christ as taught in Matthew 13:1-26.

4. Over and over we see the chestnut, that men of flesh cannot understand the milk of the gospel, yet 1 Corinthians 2:14-3:3 teaches that while limited to spiritual milk, and unable to understand spiritual meat, Paul spoke to new born Christians as men of flesh because they too could not yet understand spiritual meat.

So the order of salvation starts with God providing the gospel, which includes Christ as the propitiation for our sins. Then, when we hear the gospel and respond fully, from the heart, holding nothing back, God credits our faith as righteousness and spiritually places us in Christ. Then we are born anew and indwelt with the Holy Spirit forever.

This is the only view that is fully consistent with Romans and Ephesians. For example Romans 9:16 says an unsaved man can will to be saved. Yet Calvinism claims because he is spiritually "dead" he is unable to will to be saved. On and on, verse by verse, Calvinism is obviously false doctrine when actually studied.

 

Icon..

One thing to remember is that not all in the Reformed view agree that regeneration precedes faith/repentance. Due to this I would like to toss something your way to 'CONSIDER'.
Your statement that God saves a man then man believes and repents. However this model flies in the face of what Christ Jesus stated .. Believe and be saved. Now I doubt that Jesus was mistaken when he says this or other things like believe and have eternal life (which according John 17:3 is a relationship with God the Father and the Son, since Jesus Himself defines Eternal Life), and other like verses.

That this verse for example:

.
Note in context the person to whom Paul is speaking of (sent to) where the Gentiles and to them he was sent that - their eyes be opened YET what is their status or state of being (nature) when their eyes are opened... and for what purpose is their eyes opened.

They are IN darkness when their eyes are opened.
WHY?
So they MAY turn FROM darkness to light..
FROM the power of Satan to God
to receive forgiveness and an inheritance who by faith has be been sanctified

IOW - they were still slaves, in their trespasses and sin, when they believed.

Thus what we have are their eyes being opened while they are in darkness and under the power of Satan.. so that they might turn from such a state to God and be forgiven and sanctified by faith in Him.

As well as others also like these, like one from John:

He came as a light in the world (to unregenerate lost men) that they might believe and no longer abide (live, dwell) IN darkness. They are IN darkness. If they have Life then they ALREADY have and are IN the light because Christ Jesus IS Life. You CAN NOT have spiritual life unless you are IN a relationship with Christ. Nor can a person be IN the Light (In Christ) and be IN darkness.

And another from Paul himself:

NOTE: They were slaves 'when' called. The Greek bears this out more clearly.. basically put - they were still in chains when God called them to faith, not that they were set free.. then called. It specifically depicts what state they were in when God called them to Himself.
Yet not all come who are called...see above. as well as the parable of the marriage feast to be noted among these.

FOR ME - to be honest it is this view which states that if one is regenerate one is no longer in darkness because one is in Christ therefore with regard to logic one can not turn from darkness/sin since one is no longer in it. And as such if one is regenerate then one is no longer under the power of Satan but under the power of God and again, therefore there is not turning from the Power of Satan/sin/.

Here is a portion of an ariticle by J.I Packer on Regeneration:

Regeneration is the "birth" by which this work of new creation is begun, as sanctification is the "growth" whereby it continues (I Pet. 2:2; II Pet. 3:18). Regeneration in Christ changes the disposition from lawless, Godless self-seeking (Rom. 3:9-18; 8:7) which dominates man in Adam into one of trust and love, of repentance for past rebelliousness and unbelief, and loving compliance with God's law henceforth. It enlightens the blinded mind to discern spiritual realities (I Cor. 2:14-15; II Cor. 4:6; Col. 3:10), and liberates and energizes the enslaved will for free obedience to God (Rom. 6:14, 17-22; Phil. 2:13).

The use of the figure of new birth to describe this change emphasizes two facts about it. The first is its decisiveness. The regenerate man has forever ceased to be the man he was; his old life is over and a new life has begun; he is a new creature in Christ, buried with him out of reach of condemnation and raised with him into a new life of righteousness (see Rom. 6:3-11; II Cor. 5:17; Col. 3:9-11). The second fact emphasized is the monergism of regeneration. ....

Thus the above verse I was speaking of relating to opening their eyes 'while in darkness' in fact says the opposite of many Reformed postulations. Their eyes were opened so they might turn .. turn from their darkness and the power of Satan TO God. It does not state that their eyes opened and being freed from the power of Satan they came to God. NO. It states that they would 'turn FROM the power of Satan', meaning that is where they 'were at' TO God.

Scripture says we are made righteous through faith, we are justified through faith, the indwelling of the Holy Spirit is through faith, the propitation is applied to us through faith, and we are united with Christ through faith.

All of these are noted scripturally as various aspects of what regeneration IS or has done toward us. Therefore logically, I believe it should be conceded as factaul that according to scripture faith precedes regeneration (better all that makes up regeneration or all that regeneration entails).

And other passages as well.

 

Hello Allan,
I was thinking of you when I passed through SD this morning....3am,lol did not think you would want a visit at that time,lol i am in Montana now,lol.

My position is that it happens similtaneously. The work of the Spirit being unseen, involves the whole package.
Where i think some of the difference comes in,is that a person can be drawn over a period of time, being convicted of sin,and the word addressed to the conscience.

I am on the same page with most of what you posted.I just do not think we can chart it, like with a stop watch.....you know
4pm...convicted by conscience
4:02 being drawn,

6:37pm hearing a sermon
6:41 starting to think he better repent....
I think God works these things out....we see the result. Sometimes I think scripture is giving the overall picture,sometimes specific.

With DHK--- I understand we do not agree, but when i read many of his posts he seems to ignore the work of the Spirit....this concerns me:thumbsup::wavey:

 

Sorry you are concerned with DHK's understanding of the work of the Spirit, but I expect he is also concerned with your rewrite of scripture to put regeneration outside of Christ when we are made alive together with Christ.

 

Hi Allan, when are we "given the right" to become children of God? I say when God puts us spiritually in Christ. When we are born again spiritually in Christ, that makes us spiritual children of God and gives us the right to become physical children of God in glorified bodies at His second coming. That is how I understand John 1:12-13. So (1) we receive Him by believing fully in the Gospel, (2) God credits our faith as righteousness and spiritually places us (the work of the Holy Spirit) in Christ, where (3) we are regenerated/born anew/made alive, and (4) indwelt with the Holy Spirit such that we are in Christ and Christ is in us. Saved forever by the blood of Christ.

 

I have never denied the work of the Holy Spirit in salvation. I have denied that the Holy Spirit gives faith to the unsaved, and that is all. What does the Bible say about the Holy Spirit:

John 16:8 And when he is come, he will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment:
9 Of sin, because they believe not on me;
10 Of righteousness, because I go to my Father, and ye see me no more;
11 Of judgment, because the prince of this world is judged.

There is the work of the Holy Spirit.
Without the conviction of the Holy Spirit how can there be salvation?
Concerning the new birth, one is born again of the Spirit. He is definitely involved. I never said he wasn't.
I only maintained that faith comes first, and that faith is not a gift of God given to the unsaved. Alan made that case very well. I appreciated his post.

 

:thumbsup::thumbs::jesus:

Icon....
I think that Allan is well worth listening to here:
What he is asserting is the difference between "logical" priority and "temporal" priority....I know that use of such words often gives you pause, inasmuch as you rightly disdain foolish surmisings of corrupt men...but the issue with the ordo salutis is a logical one, not a temporal one...No amount of argumentation about milliseconds with the regeneration process is of signifigance here. No one is trying to argue anything other than the idea that "regeneration" is predicated upon a logical priority of believing in faith...One can (I would think) remain a Calvinist and not generally accept the ordo salutis as generally described by most Calvinist thinkers...I think that most of your beliefs would be perfectly consistent with it. I may have some mistaken notions of what Allan was trying to convey....and my apologies if that is the case....But to make an issue of logical priority one of temporal priority will always be a failing notion...it is immaterial to a timeless deity whether there are centi-seconds or milli-seconds involved in the regenerative process. It is an issue of logical, not temporal priority....Forgive me, if I have posted in error of what my fellow posters were trying to convey...

 

I can basically agree with that. What I have a problem with is those here who put great time differences between regeneration and salvation, and then put faith after regeneration, thus saying that faith is given by God to an unsaved man, but the unsaved man is miraculously regenerated before salvation without faith, and this could happen days or even a week or longer before he is saved.

For example, Cornelius was "regenerated" when God spoke to him, but not saved until Peter got there with the message.
I call that bunk! But that is what I have heard here from some, as an example of what I am trying to express.

 

have to realise that we have to go back a step before this regeneration/faith discussion, to the very nature of a sinner!

is he really unable to come to jesus to get saved apart from the will and work of God or not?

 

Interesting, never heard that before!

Would say that we still though have the same problem, as sinners to even exercise their inate faith MUST be quickened and enabled by the Holy Spirit to be able to turn to Christ, place faith in him, and get saved!

 

Well, I've never been called normal! :laugh:

The fact that we can have faith in all sorts of things proves to me at least that faith is something we're all capable of. The thing we can't do is understand spiritual things while we are in the "natural". We must have God open our spiritual understanding. A good example of this is the 2 walking to Emmaus. Cals call this "regeneration". I call it "opening our eyes". God chooses who's eyes will be opened, He does it, we cannot do it ourselves. We cannot "will" ourselves to believe in God. Maybe I'm wrong. Wouldn't be the first time and probably won't be the last either.

 

You are right to say that "the Lord opened their eyes." Who would say that that is when they were "regenerated." I believe they were saved (and thus "regenerated") long before then. They were disciples of our Lord. They were already believers, but confused as to the death and resurrection of Jesus, as were they all. "Their eyes were opened" refers to what is called "illumination," also a work of the Holy Spirit, described in 1Cor. 2:12,13