1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Regeneration Before Faith

Discussion in 'Baptist Theology & Bible Study' started by uhdum, Apr 28, 2010.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. jbh28

    jbh28 Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2008
    Messages:
    3,761
    Likes Received:
    2
    All cherries are red - all the come are drawn
    all red is cherries - all the come are drawn

    That isn't the same thing. The word drawn means that a person was attracted to cause them to come. A person isn't considered to be drawn if they didn't come.
    http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/draw

    Red doesn't mean cherries, cherries doesn't mean red. Different definitions, your reply means nothing to what I said as the definition of draw means to attract to cause to come.

    Are you saying the dictionary is wrong with the definition of draw?
     
  2. gb93433

    gb93433 Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2003
    Messages:
    15,549
    Likes Received:
    15
    I have not found a calvinist who will make an attempt to interpret 1 Sam 16:14-16, "Now the Spirit of the Lord departed from Saul, and an evil spirit from the Lord terrorized him. Saul's servants then said to him, "Behold now, an evil spirit from God is terrorizing you. "Let our lord now command your servants who are before you. Let them seek a man who is a skillful player on the harp; and it shall come about when the evil spirit from God is on you, that he shall play the harp with his hand, and you will be well." Why? Are they afraid their conflicting theologies will expose them?
     
  3. jbh28

    jbh28 Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2008
    Messages:
    3,761
    Likes Received:
    2
    And did you see how he got them to come....I find it ironic you use this passage. This parable actually supports my view very well. God called people, but no one on their own will come. God goes out and draws men to himself. Read the rest of this parable.

    Wrong, go back and read it again. This is a commong misinterpretation.

    How often would I have gathered THY CHILDREN but ye would not. It doesn't say how often would I have gathered you and you would not. It says thy children and ye would not.

    Ok, so God tries to draw, but unless thy come, they have not been drawn.

    http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/draw
     
  4. jbh28

    jbh28 Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2008
    Messages:
    3,761
    Likes Received:
    2
    The Spirit didn't indwell in the OT like it does now. I'm assuming you are saying that Saul lost his salvation?
     
  5. MB

    MB Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2006
    Messages:
    6,890
    Likes Received:
    262
    Faith:
    Baptist
    The only test I'm concerned with doesn't come from you so whether or not I may pass it or not isn't your judgement call.
    Funny the scripture you posted near the end of this post contradicts your theology here.
    70 Jesus answered them, Have not I chosen you twelve, and one of you is a devil?

    Nonsense there isn't a single soul on the planet that is unable to believe in Christ. That is simply nonbiblical. It seems you're forgetting the "whosoever wills"


    I've heard a lot of stories concerning this but this top's them all. There simply were no set rules of Grammar 2000 years ago, yet you would apply something that was only invented barely 200 years ago. I've argued this before with several who claim to be scholars in Biblical Greek.

    The best reason for so many versions of Greek is understanding.
    Really; Then why did they all deny Him?. Why did they leave Him? why didn't any come forward to defend our Lord. Did you forget about thomas? Why did they not believe in His resurrection before He appeard to them?
    Would you call that Loving Him? Especially why did they not believe the gospel that was delivered to them? You see they were there and could not believe. I believe, I know He came to die for my sins, and rose again on the third day. Thats the gospel but they didn't believe it entirely until they examined Christ and you know it.

    Then said Jesus unto the twelve, Will ye also go away?
    68 Then Simon Peter answered him, Lord, to whom shall we go? thou hast the words of eternal life.
    69 And we believe and are sure that thou art that Christ, the Son of the living God.70 Jesus answered them, Have not I chosen you twelve, and one of you is a devil?
    71 He spake of Judas Iscariot the son of Simon: for he it was that should betray him, being one of the twelve.


    Finally,[/QUOTE]
    You seem to refuse to believe they did go away like those other who stopped following Him. They ran away and they all denied Him in doing so. Actions speak louder than words. Many say they believe and haven't a clue. Remember the gate is narrow. In other words real faith means you'd give up your life for Him. Yet none of the disciples were willing to be part of Him when He was arrested.
     
  6. MB

    MB Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2006
    Messages:
    6,890
    Likes Received:
    262
    Faith:
    Baptist
    "All" Is all inclusive by all of it's meanings. Of course you'd disagree because your preception of what the Bible says is blown out of the water. It's nonsense to redefine God's word to make it fit your view.

    The disciples were called not drawn yet. You guys want them saved before they can be. The atonement hadn't been paid. The Holy Spirit hadn't come to work on the hearts of men yet because He hasn't been sent. Christ chose every one with the same intentions He chooses anyone with. We are all sinners and destined to hell before we have Christ. If it hadn't been Judas it would have been one of the others.
    MB
     
  7. Dr. Walter

    Dr. Walter New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2010
    Messages:
    5,623
    Likes Received:
    2
    You failed the test of "scripture." Being chosen as an apostle and being chosen unto salvation are not the same but that is what you base your response to me on. So what I said stands the test of Scripture.

    You failed the test of "scripture." Romans 8:7; 1 Cor. 2:14 state in clear explicit language "neither indeed can be" and "neither can he know them." the term "can" refers to ability whereas the word "may" refers to permission. Whosever will is a statement not a condition and Philip 2:13 among many other scriptures demonstrate where the willingness comes from and where it does not. So what I said stands the test of scripture.

    I don't know who told you there was no grammar 2000 years ago, whether it was Bugs Bunny or Micky Mouse, but they are wrong. Long before the apostolic period there was a thing called "Classical Greek" period and there was much discussion about Greek grammar. Greek nouns are declined with case endings and Greek verbs are conjugated. If they were not taught they could not speak or write it. You don't have to have a grammar book to be taught grammar through proper speaking. When the proper use of words are determined by their prefixes and suffixes and relationship of cases you either are taught how to speak correctly or you do not communicate.

    I don't beleive there is any point in continuing this conversation. I will let you have the last word but I am through. God's best blessings to you.


    My friend, you wont believe the words of Jesus in Matthew 16:17 nor the words of Peter in John 6:66-70 so why bother believing my words. You and every other Christian deny Christ on a daily basis and if you don't think so it is because you are either lost or very shallow in spiritual growth. Disciples fled in fear and you are going to tell me that fear has not intimidated and limited your witness? They possessed the progressive revelation of the Old Testament gospel (Acts 10:43; 26:22-23; Heb. 4:2) but did not understand the fulfilled revelation of the gospel until it was fulfilled. However, they were born again (Jn. 4:4-9) and saved and believers of the gospel John the Baptist preached and had to be or he would not have baptized them (Acts 19:4; Jn. 3:36).



    You seem to refuse to believe they did go away like those other who stopped following Him. They ran away and they all denied Him in doing so. Actions speak louder than words. Many say they believe and haven't a clue. Remember the gate is narrow. In other words real faith means you'd give up your life for Him. Yet none of the disciples were willing to be part of Him when He was arrested.[/QUOTE]
     
  8. jbh28

    jbh28 Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2008
    Messages:
    3,761
    Likes Received:
    2
    That's speaking of the disciples physically coming to Jesus, not spiritually coming to be saved.


    This has nothing to do with "whosoever wills." I believe that whosoever believes will be saved. If somebody is unable to believe, then they don't believe and "whosoever" is still valid. People cannot believe because they will not believe. Have you ever had your mind changed about something. You were totally against something. You were making a choice to be against it. Then your mind was changed for whatever reason and you were no longer opposed to it. This is almost how this is. People naturally don't want to have anything to do with God. God in a sense "changes their mind." John 6 is clear that no one can come unless drawn. Now if God draws everyone or not, there are still people that haven't been drawn yet. Of course we know not everyone will be drawn to Christ. Many will reject Him.


    Are you saying there is no such thing as grammar in Greek?
     
  9. jbh28

    jbh28 Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2008
    Messages:
    3,761
    Likes Received:
    2
    So you are saying that every time the word "all" is used it means every single person inclusively that has ever existed? Or does it have limits within its context? If I tell my church that all are invited to the fellowship hall, was I inviting the whole world, or just the church?

    I would agree that we are all on our way to hell before we are in Christ. Are you saying that God chooses everyone the same? I didn't quite follow your last paragraph.
     
  10. MB

    MB Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2006
    Messages:
    6,890
    Likes Received:
    262
    Faith:
    Baptist
    You know you need to come in from left field. If anyone has failed here it is you because you can't deal with being proved wrong. As far as Rom 8:7. The Law was nailed to the cross I live by grace not the Law. 1 Cor 2:14. I'm not arguing this verse because it's true when read in context. Let's counter all this nonsense because that is what it is.
    Rom 1:18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;
    Rom 1:19 Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.
    Rom 1:20 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:

    You can't fool me into your doctrineby taking scripture out of text, looks like I passed with flying colors. Oh by the way 1 cor 2:14 is talking about the deeper things of God not the gospel.

    You just proved you don't know what you are talking about. The history of grammar is where I learned that bit of information. Take a good look at the differences in any language from say 300 years ago and see how it reads today. Even the difference between the KJV 1611 and todays version.
    You say this then continue

    I believe all of the Bible but because I disagree with your preconceived notions caused by taking scripture out of text. You tell me I don't believe. You know we can make any book say what ever we want by one sentence at a time taken out of text. In my opinion you need to read the Bible as it is with out allegorizing everything in it.
    MB
     
    #90 MB, May 11, 2010
    Last edited by a moderator: May 11, 2010
  11. MB

    MB Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2006
    Messages:
    6,890
    Likes Received:
    262
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Nope your the one trying to place that piece of trash in my mouth. When "all" doesn't have a word describing what it is related to it's always all inclusive

    Joh 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

    If whosoever is who He died for then we have been chosen right in this verse because He died for the world. Paul agrees.

    Rom 5:17 For if by one man's offence death reigned by one; much more they which receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ.)
    Rom 5:18 Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life.

    If you would like more I'll be back in the morning.
    MB
     
  12. jbh28

    jbh28 Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2008
    Messages:
    3,761
    Likes Received:
    2
    and what is Jesus speaking about in John 12? We have Jews there, the gentiles come in and Jesus says he will draw all to him. This means both Jews and Gentiles. Your last statement isn't true. "All" is a universal term that doesn't mean every single person in the whole world that ever lives every single time unless there is a word saying otherwise. Context can limit it and the most likely interpretation is all people both Jews and Gentiles. Otherwise, all would be saved. "Draw" means to attract to cause to come. A person that is drawn is a person that has come. A person that hasn't come to Christ, has not been drawn to Christ. Again, the word "draw" means(in this context) to attract to cause to come. It's very similar to drawing a crowd to a event. "We drew a big crowd" only references the ones that came. Draw and come are two sides of the same coin. Draw is the action that God does, come is the action that the person does. You don't have one without the other.
    I have no problem with "whosoever." The "whosoever" is the ones that believe" Whosoever believeth...Will God reject someone that believes? No, whoever believes will be saved.
     
    #92 jbh28, May 11, 2010
    Last edited by a moderator: May 11, 2010
  13. Dr. Bob

    Dr. Bob Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2000
    Messages:
    30,285
    Likes Received:
    507
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Translations can really mess up theology.

    There is no "whosoever" in the Greek (in ANY Greek manuscript). That really does a number on a gajillion sermons. It simply says (literal English if you don't know Greek) "that all the ones believing in Him . . "

    It is a participle describing those who believe. It's talking about us, the believing ones.
     
  14. MB

    MB Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2006
    Messages:
    6,890
    Likes Received:
    262
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Hi Dr Bob;
    I agree and actually the whosoever wills are those who believe. There are also the whosoever will not's. Yet because there are, doesn't mean that Christ didn't die for them to and still aren't saved.

    Rom 5:18 Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life.

    The reason men aren't saved is because of rebellion. They reject the gift of Salvation.
    MB
     
  15. Winman

    Winman Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2009
    Messages:
    14,768
    Likes Received:
    2
    That is your definition as taught you by Calvinism. It is not the definition in the dictionary.

    1.to cause to move in a particular direction by or as if by a pulling force; pull; drag (often fol. by along, away, in, out, or off).

    This particular definition does not show that something has to be drawn to completion as you insist. And everybody (except Calvinists) understands this.

    Look, if I hook a fish and am pulling it in, I am drawing it to myself. If the fish breaks the line or jumps off the hook, that doesn't mean I was not drawing the fish to myself. That is just your definition to make your doctrine work.

    My older brother had a unique talent when we were kids, he could talk squirrels down out of a tree. He would talk to them and they would come right down and come up to him. He would pick them up and play with them.

    But he wasn't always successful. Sometimes he would get the squirrel just a few feet away from him and the squirrel would get frightened and run back up the tree.

    I could never do this, though I tried many times. I would imitate what he did, but for some reason squirrels did not trust me and would not approach me at all.

    My brother knew how to draw squirrels. But he did not get 100% of them to come all the way to him. Sometimes they would get very close and then suddenly run away. According to your definition of drawn, he did not draw them at all, but I know he did. They came down from the tree to within several feet of him, he absolutely drew them.

    And I showed you from God's word itself that God said he drew the Jews in Hosea 11 and they pulled away and backslid from him. God is not confused, he knows exactly what he is saying, if God said he drew them, then he did.

    I showed you in the story of when Jesus commanded Peter and Andrew to let down their nets that they captured many fish and were pulling them into the boat, but the net broke and many got away. These fish were drawn, they were pulled, but they got away.

    Luke 5:6 And when they had this done, they inclosed a great multitude of fishes: and their net brake.

    Note how this verse tells us these fish were "inclosed". They were captured, and they were drawn toward the boat, but the net broke and many escaped.

    So, you can argue falsely from a dictionary that drawn always means the thing drawn will be drawn 100% to the one drawing it, but that is nonsense and anybody with a lick of common sense knows that. You are playing word games, changing the definition of words to fit your doctrine.
     
    #95 Winman, May 12, 2010
    Last edited by a moderator: May 12, 2010
  16. MB

    MB Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2006
    Messages:
    6,890
    Likes Received:
    262
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Well according to Jews there are two types of people in the world. Jews and Gentiles. Both Jews and Gentiles are every person on the planet. If all who are drawn are saved then as some claim in this discussion something is very wrong because we know everyone will not be saved just because they were drawn.
    OK you're convinced you're right. Then please explain why men tend to add limits to the word all when there aren't any. It's very definition is all inclusive.
    It does not mean the one drawn has no choice. You can draw water from a well and loose all of it from one bounce against the wall of the well. It doesn't mean the water wasn't drawn. It only means that something upset the draw. The draw was interupted.

    We agree on this.

    MB
     
  17. Dr. Walter

    Dr. Walter New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2010
    Messages:
    5,623
    Likes Received:
    2
    The missing foundational truth

    Where we are missing each other on this subject is that you understand "hearing" and "perceiving" and "seeing" as physical capabilities sufficient for dealing with spiritual things and anyone has the ability to respond to God's Word.

    If natural born humans possessed "hearing...seeing...perceiving" suffienct to respond to spiritual things then why does God say the following words to those who abundantly heard, saw and claimed to perceive a mass of Biblical revelation from God:

    Yet the LORD hath not given you an heart to perceive, and eyes to see, and ears to hear, unto this day. - Deut. 29:4

    Why does the Lord condition these abilities upon reception of a "heart" that he must give them if they can possess such abilities without being given another heart by God?

    If as you say, all humans already possess the ability to perceive, eyes to see and ears to hear spiritual things then why does God necessarily deny they can respond as described unless he gives them another heart? They obviously had physical ears and eyes and had a mind to perceive some things?

    Why would he say the following about the same people if they possessed such a heart already?


    O that there were such an heart in them, that they would fear me, and keep all my commandments always, that it might be well with them, and with their children for ever! - Deut. 5:29

    God says this ability to perceive, see, hear, fear me and keep my commandments is inseparable from God giving a new heart. God says that until he gives this heart man is incapable of doing these things as these things only come with God giving such a heart.

    In Ezekiel 36:26-27 God clearly states that giving such a new heart effectually produces obedience to His will. He uses the words "cause you" in verse 27.

    Now, it seems to me that you are forced to define "draw" in John 6:44-45 to be inclusive of God giving such a new heart or else there can be no spiritual ability to perceive, see or hear the gospel or else you must repudiate the Lord's words in Deut. 5:29 and 29:4.

    I am not going any further than these Old Testament texts because they fully represent the foundational problem in our discussion and they are confirmed by New Testament texts (Rom. 8:7; 1 Cor. 2:14; Heb. 10:15-18; 2 Cor. 3:3-6; 4:4-6).
     
  18. jbh28

    jbh28 Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2008
    Messages:
    3,761
    Likes Received:
    2
    To cause to come by attracting;

    There's the dictionary definition. Let's try to be honest. You just gave one definition. Once dictionary has 24 different definitions. ALL of them mean that the action took place, just in a different way. you could drag( as in drag to court) or draw(as in John 6). Your fish example is more close to drag, coming to Christ is more close to draw(attract to cause to come).


    I have answered this before, but here it is again. You changed the term from drawing(the process, but not yet drawn) and the word "draw" as it is in the Scripture. It doesn't say, no man can com unless the Father is drawing him, it say no man can come unless the father draws him(which means to attract to cause to come). You were drawing the fish, but you didn't not draw it to you. If fell off. You failed at your drawing, you didn't draw the fish to you. My definition does work. But this example isn't the same as the one in the Scripture. This is more of the dragging definition. You are drawing the fish to you by it being attached to a hook. It isn't coming to you because it wants to as it is in John 6. Bad Example

    Winman, I would ask that you be honest. Maybe you are confusing me with somebody else, so I'll give you the benefit of the doubt again. He did draw the squirrels that came to him. The ones that he picked up were the ones that he drew to him. The ones that didn't come, they were not drawn. So your brother didn't draw all the Squirrles, he only able to draw some of them.

    So yes, my definition(attract to cause to come) does mean he drew some of them. Some of them he didn't draw to him.

    And I already responded to that. Why bring it up again, I already showed you were wrong. You say the Jews were drawn and left. Are you implying that one can lose his salvation? Or was God speaking of a general drawing of the Jews, but some(those that were not drawn) didn't come.

    Again, I ask that you be honest with this Winman. Did they draw the fish? Yes. Did the draw the fish in the boat...NO! The fish never mande it to the boat. In John 6, the context is draw to Christ. Also, this example isn't the same because it is closer to the draw. The fish have no choice but to come because they are being dragged in the net. In John 6, the person comes willingly.

    Yes, I agree, the were drawn TOWARD the boat, but were NOT draw IN the boat.
    As I have said, draw has more than one definition. I gave the dictionary definition the best fits John 6, but you quote the one that doesn't fit it and say that was mine. That is to bear false witness...to argue a straw man. I don't need to use logical fallacies to support my view. I haven't played any word games. I don't change the definition. You are the one playing the word games. Here is the definition that most closely fits John 6. "To cause to come by attracting;" The person in John 6 comes willingly because he is drawn by the Father to Christ.
     
  19. jbh28

    jbh28 Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2008
    Messages:
    3,761
    Likes Received:
    2
    Not all Jews and all Gentiles, but both Jews and Gentiles. Not everyone will be drawn to Christ.

    Context determines the limits to the term all. You know that all doesn't always mean everybody. As I said in an example. "All are invited to the fellowship hall for finger foods." Now, do I mean everybody in the whole word? No, just the ones in the church. The other day I made a statement that "everybody knows how to do it." A guy in front of me at church asked what I was talking about, I explained I was speaking about everybody in the Choir. The one I was previously speaking to understood that the "everybody" was "everybody in the choir." The context of our conversation limited the "everybody" to "everybody in the choir." These types of terms is what we call universal terms. We use the all the time. Well, do we use them all the time? No, I didn't use them in this sentence now did It?

    The drawing was interrupted. In John 6, the context is to Christ, draw him to Christ. If a person doesn't come to Christ, he wasn't drawn to Christ. Draw in the context of John 6 means" To cause to come by attracting;." The person that comes, comes willingly because he was drawn by the Father to Christ. You can't say that a person was drawn to Christ, but didn't come to Christ.

    In John 12, will Jesus "will draw(attract to cause to come) all people to myself. You could argue that God is drawing them, but He will not draw all people(everybody that has every lived) to himself, or all would be saved.

    :D
     
  20. Winman

    Winman Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2009
    Messages:
    14,768
    Likes Received:
    2
    The problem is, God himself said he "drew" the Jews in Hosea chapter 11, and then says they pulled away and backslid from him. So, your personal definition does not match up with the scriptures themselves. Something drawn does not always come to 100% completion, and the scriptures themselves show that.

    And no Calvinist has answered the word "resist" when Stephen said the Jews always "resist" the Holy Ghost. What is the definition of resist?

    Acts 7:51 Ye stiffnecked and uncircumcised in heart and ears, ye do always resist the Holy Ghost: as your fathers did, so do ye.

    Strong's Concordance defines resist here as;

    1) to fall upon, run against

    2) to be adverse, oppose, strive against

    Unless the Holy Spirit was attempting to draw these men, they cannot be said to be resisting. If God was simply passing by these men, not effectually attempting to draw them, they cannot be resisting.

    If I hook a fish and try to draw it in, but it fights against me, it is resisting. But if I never hook the fish, or enclose it in my net, it cannot be said to be resisting me.

    Calvinism teaches that God is not effectually calling or drawing the un-elect. Then how can they be said to be resisting? It is illogical. If God is not putting an influence on them, the unelect are not fighting or resisting God, they are just going about their business. If I walk past and ignore a policeman, is that resisting him? Of course not. But if he attempts to arrest me and I fight and try to get away, then I am resisting arrest. There has to be an influence or force upon you for you to resist.

    Jesus said he was trying to gather the Jews as a mother hen tries to gather her chicks. This is showing action and purpose on God's part, he is not being inactive or passive in the matter. But they would not come, they resisted.

    Matt 23:37 O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!

    Gathered and gathereth here is defined as;

    1) to gather together besides, to bring together to others already assembled

    2) to gather together against

    3) to gather together in one place

    You notice it says "to bring"? That is the same as drawing. God is actively trying to bring the Jews in, he is drawing them, calling them, putting influence upon them, but they resist and pull back.

    And the scriptures even say unbelievers "draw back". Now, how could it say that unless they were being drawn?

    Heb 10:38 Now the just shall live by faith: but if any man draw back, my soul shall have no pleasure in him.
    39 But we are not of them who draw back unto perdition; but of them that believe to the saving of the soul.


    So, here you have the word "draw" being shown to mean resisting, to be pulling away.

    You are playing word games, the scriptures show dozens of times that God is actively drawing men to himself, but some men resist and pull away.
     
    #100 Winman, May 13, 2010
    Last edited by a moderator: May 13, 2010
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Loading...