If "Any Man" Thirst

If you can't see the obvious problem with your logic in the above, how will you understand anything of complex theological concepts regarding the salvation of men?

 

What a condescending attitude. Nothing at all in the message of salvation is complex.

 

Beware of thatbrian's "theology." It will lead you far, far astray. He makes up childish fiction then claims it is what "Arminians" believe. He simply cannot be trusted.


Sent from my Pixel 2 XL

 

Yes, a plain reading of the text will show that. Calvinists cling to that one verse, purporting to show that it says people cannot comprehend the gospel, when the context and the audience clearly shows the subject matter of "the things of God that are not received by the natural man" are things deeper than the gospel, things of God's wisdom given to those that love God.

9 However, as it is written: “What no eye has seen, what no ear has heard, and what no human mind has conceived” — the things God has prepared for those who love him—
10 these are the things God has revealed to us by his Spirit. The Spirit searches all things, even the deep things of God.
1 Corinthians 2:9‭-‬10 NIV

These are the things unregenerate people cannot comprehend.


Sent from my Pixel 2 XL

 

One verse?

Romans 3:9-12 9 What then? Are we better than they? Not at all; for we have already charged that both Jews and Greeks are all under sin; 10 as it is written, “THERE IS NONE RIGHTEOUS, NOT EVEN ONE; 11THERE IS NONE WHO UNDERSTANDS, THERE IS NONE WHO SEEKS FOR GOD; 12 ALL HAVE TURNED ASIDE, TOGETHER THEY HAVE BECOME USELESS; THERE IS NONE WHO DOES GOOD, THERE IS NOT EVEN ONE.”

Romans 8:7 7 because the mind set on the flesh is hostile toward God; for it does not subject itself to the law of God, for it is not even able to do so, 8 and those who are in the flesh cannot please God. (c.f. Matthew 16:23)

1 Corinthians 2:14 14 But a natural man does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually appraised.

Ephesians 2:1 1 And you were dead in your trespasses and sins,

Colossians 2:13 13 When you were dead in your transgressions and the uncircumcision of your flesh, He made you alive together with Him, having forgiven us all our transgressions,

I can provide more, but will it make a difference? Probably not.

You really need to stop this nonsense. We both have to make our points theologically, not through ad hominems or cute little zingers that do nothing other than to prove we have a penchant for sarcasm. Once I see an ad hominem I know the other person has reached the end of their argument.

 

I have answered the "no one seeks God" verse which is from Psalm 14, many, many times. Search BB using search terms "Psalm 14" and InTheLight to read it. I'm on my phone so reposting my same thoughts for the umpteenth times is unwieldy.

The entirety of Calvinist theology hinges on the T in TULIP, the idea that unregenerate man does not even want to hear the gospel, and once that is shown to be fallacious the whole system collapses.


Sent from my Pixel 2 XL

 

Which you, and many others, have failed to do.

 

You're welcome to your opinion.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL

 

And I will take you up on that invitation!

Seriously though, do you really think a centuries-year-old debate is that easily settled? The assumptive close is a great sales tactic when trying to sell refrigerators but it does not work so well when trying to determine a theological truth. What are we really trying to do in a debate? Are we trying to win the debate or determine truth? I think this is a question that everyone who participates on the Baptist Board needs to ask themselves. If we debate just for the sake of debate than I think our motives need to be checked. If we debate to determine truth we have a responsibility to make sure to maintain a high bar for the truth.

I have read your comments on Psalm 14 and its connection to Romans 3. I think you fail to appreciate that Paul's use of an Old Testament reference is in a new context. This is common with many Old Testament references in the New Testament. Many of the messianic references in the Old Testament were not known to be messianic by their original audience. Augustine of Hippo wrote, "The new is in the old concealed; the old is in the new revealed." This is a general hermeneutical principle that is good to remember as it explains why New Testament authors often give a new "twist" to Old Testament passages. For instance, in Psalm 14, the Apostle Paul uses an Old Testament passage that made his point (under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit) that all men are under sin. Paul then goes on to explain the utter sinfulness of sin* and its universal application to all men. Paul uses the psalm in a completely different way than David did when he wrote it. If you need further proof of this, read Spurgeon's take on Psalm 14 in his Treasury of David.

A better approach by you would be to exegete the passages that Monergists use to defend Total Depravity and Total Inability. Look at them in both their narrow and wider contexts. Understand why Augustine, Luther, Calvin, the Puritans, Spurgeon, MacArthur, Sproul et al. came to the conclusion that the Bible does indeed teach Total Depravity and Total Inability. You are not indebted to believe these doctrines but you will be better informed when disagreeing with them.


* Recommended reading: "Sin, the Plague of Plagues" (also known as "The Sinfulness of Sin") by Puritan Ralph Venning

P.S. Edited to correct grammar.

 

You need to look at the passage, "no one seeks God" in the era it was written. Originally, in Psalms it was what, 1500 BC? "No one" refers to the pagan nations outside of Israel. They were not seeking the one true God. The God of Israel. The statement is relevant.

Paul used it in, what, 45 AD? The church was in its infancy. Generally speaking people were not seeking the God of Christianity. Certainly not the Romans who considered the emperor a god. The axiom held true.

But nowadays people willingly go to Christian churches. Or if you prefer, go back 200 years. The people going to Christian churches were seeking Jesus. Calvinists can make contortions and excuses to cram their theology into their box by denying that people seek God. It's a denial of reality. Really, if your theology can't convince me of its truth on step one of TULIP, I can't be convinced to continue.




Sent from my Pixel 2 XL

 

I am not trying to convince you. Personally, it does not bother me whether you agree with me or not. It is not about you. It is not about me. It is about the truth. When you make statements like "Calvinists can make contortions and excuses to cram their theology into their box by denying that people seek God" it proves you are unable to make a theological case for what you believe. All you are doing is throwing shade on your opponent. It does nothing to further the discussion.

 

Just for the record, there is not one Monergist that I know that believes man does not seek God. He does. The qualifier is that the sinner does not seek God of his own volition; He does not seek God separate from God first seeking Him. Man responds, he does not initiate. But now this will bring us back to the beginning stages of the argument of Total Inability, which you deny. So, really, this is where the impasse always comes into play and I am content to let that be.

 

You didn't like the quote by Brother James?

Perhaps Peter says it more to your liking:

1 Peter 3:15English Standard Version (ESV)

15 but in your hearts honor Christ the Lord as holy, always being prepared to make a defense to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you; yet do it with gentleness and respect,

 

It's far worse than I thought. Nevermind.

 

May I ask, is "Pastor Bob" a nickname or are you actually an under-shepherd of God's people?