depravity from another angle

Aki,

My oldest son, Brian married a Philippino woman. Our prayers go with you as your nation trys to find the 'insurgents.' God bless you and yours including your church family.

It is fraudulent for people to teach that God sends all sinners to Hell except His Personally chosen ones, the elect.

Ezekiel 3:19 reminds us that when we witness to sinners it is their responsibility to turn from their wickedness. Jesus says in John 5:40 -'Ye will not come to Me, that ye might have life.' This is not a God Who autocratically chooses some and damns the rest of sinners.

The Holy Spirit calls sinners to repentance and faith, but they must respond or He becomes merely the Eternal Puppeteer. John 3:16 clearly suggests that a sinner has to make his own choice to become one of His elect ones.

 

Aki,

I also reject 'Limited Atonement;' it's a no brainer. [I Timothy 2:5-6 & I John 2:2]

Ray

 

Ali writes:
"in other words, one is born condemned with no regards to his volition. thus, even if he does not sin all his life, he remains condemned. but then again he is born wiht the sin nature, which he did not choose to have, that gets him impossible not to sin."


Please, who do you know that has never sinned, willfully?
1 John 1:8 "If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us."

 

For every thing, spin, spin, spin
There is a season, spin, spin, spin

I love this reasoning.... "if he didn't sin, then he wouldn't be guilty of sin, but then everyone sins, but it's still unfair because he was born with a nature that sins so he still sins, but if he didn't sin, he wouldn't sin, but then that's impossible because he has to sin, and he chose to sin but he didn't choose to be born with a sinful nature even if he does choose to sin..."

Face facts Aki:

1. We are born with a sinful nature, therefore we sin
2. We are physically born spiritually dead and therefore vessels of wrath
3. We inherited this condition from Adam

The above points are true and Biblical. If you have a problem with them, I suggest you take it before God and see what He thinks about your problem.

 

And the clay says to the Potter, "That's not FAIR!!!"

 

For every thing, spin, spin, spin
There is a season, spin, spin, spin

I love this reasoning.... "if he didn't sin, then he wouldn't be guilty of sin, but then everyone sins, but it's still unfair because he was born with a nature that sins so he still sins, but if he didn't sin, he wouldn't sin, but then that's impossible because he has to sin, and he chose to sin but he didn't choose to be born with a sinful nature even if he does choose to sin..."

Face facts Aki:

1. We are born with a sinful nature, therefore we sin
2. We are physically born spiritually dead and therefore vessels of wrath
3. We inherited this condition from Adam

The above points are true and Biblical. If you have a problem with them, I suggest you take it before God and see what He thinks about your problem. </font>[/QUOTE]Npetreley,
One thing nobody brings up is the fact that sinners LIKE to sin, they WANT to sin, they LOVE sin. Does this lesson accountability? The murderer that tells the judge, "I love to kill, it's all I know, I was born that way." Is that a valid excuse for pardon?

James Oliphant writes:
"If one be required to lift a weight of four hundred and ten pounds, he being able to lift only four hundred pounds, he would be physically unable to obey and this inability would be a sufficient apology for not obeying the requirement. If he were commanded to raise a thousand pound weight he would be farther from being able to obey, and he would have a still better excuse for not obeying.

One feature of physical inability to obey is the farther one is from being able the better excuse he would have for not obeying.

If one is required to help the needy or aid a charitable undertaking, the poorer he is the better excuse he would have for not aiding. And so if one is required to instruct the ignorant, the less he is qualified for giving the instruction the better excuse he has for not giving it.

This principle may be illustrated in many ways. The greater one’s physical inability the better would be his apology for not obeying; his excuse is clearer and more absolute, just in proportion to the degree of his inability.

Physical inability is a just and valid excuse for not performing the commands of those in a position to command us. And I think too, that if the inability of men to obey God is physical, it would furnish a perfect excuse for disobedience. But let us consider the nature of the inability of men to serve God, or let us again consider the nature of moral inability.

A disinclination to obey, or an inclination to do the reverse would constitute a moral inability to obey. Or both, an inclination to do wrong, and an aversion to doing right, both taken together may constitute a moral inability to do right. If one has an inclination to do wrong, and no inclination to do right, he is morally unable to do right. The fact that this inclination to do wrong, springs from the natural corruption of the heart is no apology for it.

We find some men more inclined to sin than others, and let it be remembered that a preponderance of inclination to sin constitutes an inability to do right. Some men are so inclined to sin that they give themselves up to its service in fraud and profanity; others are still more inclined to sin and give themselves up to its service in theft and robbery, and others are still more inclined to evil and give themselves up to the vilest lives of murder, rapine and every foul crime. It is plain to every observer that some men are more inclined to evil than others, and hence farther from an ability to do right.

It is true that no one is by nature inclined to obey God, “All are gone out of the way ,” but some are more given up to sin, more corrupt in their lives. But an inclination to sin is no excuse for sin. The greater one’s physical inability the better his excuse for not obeying, but the greater one’s moral inability the more criminal he is.

As we increase in moral inability our guilt increases. It is the reverse from physical inability. As our physical inability increases our apology is made better, but as man’s moral inability to do right is increased his guilt is more inexcusable and blameworthy.

My position has been all the time, that an inclination to evil is no excuse for it, and the stronger one is inclined to evil, the more absolute is his moral inability to holiness, and the more aggravated is his offence, and the more inexcusable he is for his sins. It is the reverse from physical inability, and the fact that this inability has its rise in the corruptions of the heart is no excuse whatever for it.

If we take such a view of “Absolute predestination” as would prompt men to act independently of their wills, we would have physical causes producing moral effects.

Sin ever grows out of the will or there is no sin only willful sin, or I may say the will is ever connected with sin, or with righteousness. If I benefit my neighbor without willing to do so, it would not be a righteous deed; and so if I injure my neighbor without intention, I am not guilty of an evil deed. The absolute decree of God is concerned in our regeneration in a manner independent of our wills, and so we are born again in a manner wholly independent of our choice, but in every sin, the will is concerned. Sin is not forced on men whether they like or not, but it is ever acquiesced in by the choice.

The bible abounds with instances in which God has made bad men to be good, and where the tree has been made good we have seen good fruit grow on it as the result, but no instance is on record where men have been made to be bad by the Lord. There has ever been dispute as to whether moral force, instruction, exhortation, persuasion, &c., is sufficient to secure the eternal salvation of men. Those who believe this theory ignore what Flavel and others call a physical change, and urge that everything essential to eternal life can be produced by moral force, and thus go to an extreme that ignores the life-giving power of God as necessary to regeneration; while those who oppose this extreme are liable to ignore the use and place for exhortation entirely, and insist that God, by some physical power will press men into His service when He wants them, in some absolute way independent of moral suasion.

The New Testament teems with exhortation, persuasion and instruction, in righteousness in all of which men are addressed as moral beings and are recognized as capable of listening to, and considering, what is duty and right, showing that moral force has an important end to accomplish in the matter of our duty.

There is, however, a point where moral force fails. The point of the introduction of life God has reserved to himself, but after this, teaching is important. The capacity to understand spiritual things is secured in one way, or rather is given in one way, and the presentation of truth in another, even by moral instruction. The importance of teaching, of persuasion, &c., ought not to be forgotten.

Prior to regeneration the wills of men may be influenced to a better life by moral force. The will is not “self determining” but is determined by the nature of man, and his own environment.

So men’s conduct, morally, may be in some measure determined by exhortation. A proper understanding of the moral nature of man discloses the importance of instruction not only to the regenerated but to those who cannot understand spiritual things.

The church is a light to the world. Children favored with church privileges are liable to be morally better for having this privilege, and parents who try to bring up their children right are apt to see their children grow up with well established moral habits as a reward to them for their labors.

An intelligent man in seeking a wife, will prefer that one whose moral training has been good to that one who has had no right training.

So let us not ignore the use and importance of moral training, even for this world, and let us not forget the importance of exhorting one another to love and good works. It is good for men to appeal to them in hearty and warm exhortation to duty. Also let us not forget that there is a point in the eternal salvation of men where God only operates, independent of all instrumentalities, either human or angelic. Here is a point where moral force is as insufficient as it is to make a world; it is a creative work, the work of God.

 

Aki,

Five point Calvinists are a little to a lot like Jehovah Witnesses. They have their chosen verses that they try to prove their point, while ignoring other Scriptures, which they cannot dovetail together.

If we as sinners were Totally Depraved there would be no inroad into a sinner's heart that God could or would endeavor to travel, so he could make a change in the lost ones heart. They conveniently extract the fact that we even since the Fall are created after the likeness of God. [James 3:9] We talk about the mind, heart, will, and emotions of the Lord God, and yet to a Calvinist we have no mind, heart, free will, or emotions. God does everything to us, and to some Calvinists, we are no different than the rest of the sinners, except we have been elected to eternal life. He is the Divine Puppeteer and we are His toys on the stage of life.

God does not have mercy one some and point in the direction of Hell to others, unless they reject His Son. [I John 5:12-13]

The Word of God says, 'For God has concluded them all in unbelief, that He might have mercy on all.' Again, His Divine attributes come into play. He is a loving, just and merciful Lord God, 'not willing that any should perish . . . ' [II Peter 3:9]

We are depraved but not totally beyond His ability to call us by His Spirit.

Ray

 

Excellent point, UMP.

 

Aki said:

 

npetreley,

You said, 'One thing nobody brings up is the fact that sinners LIKE to sin,
they WANT to sin, they LOVE sin. Does this lesson accountability?
The murderer that tells the judge, "I love to kill, it's all I know, I
was born that way." Is that a valid excuse for pardon?'

Ray: We all from our preteens knew and know that sinners like, want and love to sin. Arminians and Calvinists alike believe this. Your example of the murderer is a parable of the wilful sinner. God will not pardon the wilful sinner.

He does, however, look for those who acknowledge their sins, those who confess the offensiveness toward the Lord because of their iniquity. The Holy Spirit working on the mind of the sinner convicts and convinces sinners of their undone condition of heart, in the sight of the Lord God.

These receive the 'pardon' from the Almighty that you spoke about. Do I hear an Amen?!

 

Ray Berrian said:

Unfortunately, he finds none. Romans 3:10-12 says:

As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one:
There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God.
They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one.

This sinner is an elect child of God. Unless he is, the Holy Spirit will have nothing to do with him.

 

pinobaptist,

Listen to what you are saying to us.

'The elect have no special claim to grace like the unelect, all are subject to God's mercy,'

The majority of sinners on their way to Hell or already in Hell, is not remotely close to Divine mercy. Can you even imagine the horrors of going to Hell for eternity?

The provision and mercy and of the atonement is toward all human beings. [Romans 11:32-33 & I Timothy 2:6]

 

Ray Berrian said:

No. It is not. Mercy is for all whether Jew or Gentile, but, not for all humankind. You can not deny that God has His elect, and that there are what the Bible calls reprobates. He does not call all mankind His people, and He came to save His people.

 

pinobaptist,

The Apostle Paul would not agree to your statement. I Timothy 2:6.

The Apostle Peter would not agree with your statement. II Peter 3:9.

The Apostle John would not agree with your statement. I John 2:2.

The Prophet Ezekiel would not agree with your statement. Ezekiel 3:19.

Here was your attempt at theology. 'He does not call all mankind His people, and He came to save His people.'

Respectfully,
Dr. Berrian

 

If the judge was their creator and they were born unable to do anything but love sin while that creator pretended to want them and call them to repentance and faith and then judged them for not responding to His words which the creator never allowed them to even understand or geniunly respond to then, Yes I think that could be a valid excuse for pardon.

 

Except that the creator calls only His people to repentance, not all mankind.

 

Mat 24:14 And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mar 16:15 And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature

God, through the means of the gospel, calls "every creature" to repentance.

 

Not one of these verses you cited says God is calling all of mankind to repentance, Skandelon.

Acts 17:30 -

And this doesn't necessarily mean all of mankind, than all manner of men, Jew or Gentile, Greek or Roman, slave or free, and God has His people among all these manner of men.