Regeneration preceeding final acceptance

Wasn't that the excuse that Felix used [Acts 24:25]? </font>[/QUOTE]Not the same request!

 

Wes

You have a unique ability to avoid answering any question or providing any Scripture to prove your false assertions.

 

Ya! don't ya love it?

Be patient the answer is forthcoming. I should have time this weekend.

 

Is this union with Christ and NEW creation is the state of the sinful - totally depraved unconverted person?

</font>[/QUOTE]You were able to reproduce my definition of regeneration correctly but is your following question either intelligible or intelligent?

 

now i'm really getting a better picture of your faith wes.

***************
"Prove to me that man has not changed the meaning of terms used. Prove to me that YOUR use of select scriptures is in accordance with God's will!"
***************


This kinda sounds scary to me wes. this is "wes word" and not Gods Word. do you not feel this is placing you as god??? does this not scare you?


you have a bible where you believe what you want...and throw the other out if you do not believe it.

so everyone is wasting our time debating with you. if you can pick what is right..and what is wrong....hey...we do need to listen to you and stop believe Gods Word....for it looks like you know better than us and God.

NO...you know what wes...i think i'll stick to the Bible...GODS WORD


IN Christ...james

 

NO,Jarthur001, It is not me stepping up, it is me challenging what you are espousing!

For example, You say and hold to Grace being what Saves. Prove it! Demonstrate the fact, show us all how grace does what you say it does. No I am not questioning God or rippin' his Word, or tearing down his church.

I am saying if you profess that something is so, prove it!

Just because you can't prove your doctrine even with sound reasoning, is no reason for you to accuse me of not believing the bible! I do, and I rely on it every day. I just don't believe it in the same way that you believe it! You believe it in accordance with a doctrinal plan, and I don't adhere to any specific doctrine except what the Bible tells me,with illumination by the Holy Spirit.

I wish you would stick to the Word of God, and toss out your Calvinist doctrine!

 

wes,

i have went over this 20 times. many others have done the same. In some way you feel this is your winning card. When shown the verses, you only move to another tread and start again.

wes, is it really your goal to know the truth?
If so..drop your pride for a few days and listen. do not attack. Ask things you do not understand. Just for a few days, act like you are in school...learning. I just think this would be good for you.

In the end, you may still not agree. But you will not need to bring up the "grace is not a gift" again...for you will know what we mean when we say this.

just a idea wes....

 

If Grace saves, as you profess it does, then explain how grace saves! You should be able to do that in ONE POST! If you cannot, then you do not know what you're talking about! If you do not know what you're talking about then it is you who must be the student!

If you know how grace saves, you should also be able to define the grace that does save. You should have a clear and concise definition of grace that has the power and means to save.

You have not provided any of that, and until you do, you do not know the truth.

You don't want me bringing this up because you have no answers!

 

i have many times
others have more times than me..

bob...just read what we already posted...ok?

if you do not understand...i'll tell you one passage to go to....

if that does not work..i'll explain in one short note

 

There has not been one definition of grace posted, that even eludes to grace having salvific power.

There has not been one explanation providing knowledge of HOW grace saves.

Stop stalling!

 

Stop stalling??? please wes

we have been over this 20 times.

like i said...i will now post one passage..

then you can twist the words...

then i post one more time how you are worng...

then that is it.

stop bringing this broken record up...and LISTEN

ok..now the passage


john 5

12 Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned: 13 (For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law. 14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come. 15 But not as the offence, so also is the free gift. For if through the offence of one many be dead, much more the grace of God, and the gift by grace, which is by one man, Jesus Christ, hath abounded unto many. 16 And not as it was by one that sinned, so is the gift: for the judgment was by one to condemnation, but the free gift is of many offences unto justification.

now its your turn to twist the meaning

 

Ok first problem.

That is not John 5. (Were you thinking of Romans 5)?

 

Second problem -

The "many" that fall under the curse of sin, sinful nature as a result of the first Adam, death are the "many" that are benefitted by the second Adam.

Seems kinda "Arminian"

But if it had said that "the many" came under the curse of sin as a result of the fall of the first Adam - whereas the "FEW" (of Matt 7) are benefitted by the work of the Second Adam -- then it would be "calvinist".

So we know what a Calvinist position is (Specific to those Calvinists that believe in limited atonement and that God does not care for the lost) - we just don't see it in the text.

In Christ,

Bob

 

All of Calvnism’s favorite words do redefine – are here. WORLD, ALL MEN etc. And who can argue that ALL have sinned (not just the “elect”)?? Who can argue that WORLD really does Not mean the Whole World has fallen under the domain of sin – for All have sinned. God appears to be using very “arminian” terms here – once again.

The Same all-encompassing Many that were lost because of the one fall of the one man Adam are benefited by the One man Christ!!!

Will not be quoting this text to Arminians any time soon.

Now we see again that the same ALL that were condemned by Adam’s fall – are in the scope of the benefit of Christ’s gift.

again - all men - same author, same subject, same reference as we see in vs 12 nailed down here again. All men condemned by Adam - and all men benefitted by the one act of Christ.

 

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by BobRyan:
OldRegular defines that unconverted unforgiven unrepentant kind of "regeneration" event as ...


quote:Old Regular
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The initial event in salvation is regeneration, the theological term synonymous with rebirth or being born again.

Regeneration is solely the work of God the Holy Spirit whereby those who are spiritually dead in trespass and sin are made spiritual alive and are brought into union with Jesus Christ.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So Bob asks


"Is this union with Christ and NEW creation really the state of the sinful - totally depraved unconverted person?"

Bob asks this because OldRegular places CONVERSION and repentance BEYOND the point of the New Birth in his list.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

OldRegular then asks if that makes sense.

good question -- does it??

IN Christ,

Bob

 

Jarthur001

You will mlearn that trying to carry on a dialog with Wes is useless. He will twist and deny, whatever suits his unknown purpose.

 

Hi ya bob,

sorry i have been doing yard work today.


ok this looks like the classic "change the subject in the answer" that many want to do on here.

lets look at what wes asked me to do.
***********************
NO,Jarthur001, It is not me stepping up, it is me challenging what you are espousing!

For example, You say and hold to Grace being what Saves. Prove it! Demonstrate the fact, show us all how grace does what you say it does. No I am not questioning God or rippin' his Word, or tearing down his church.
**********************

i have done this in many ways bob..and the passage i posted was only one.

you talk about it sounds like ariniam...ok fine...if that is what you think...welcome to the light. remember that line? i got it from you. good line bob.


Now bob...does it say grace is part of salvation? yes it does.

is that what wes asked? yes it was

then you go into this same old line about what I MUST believe for i am a calvin. really bob...i ask you again...please let me have my own reasons for my faith?? ok?

i do not tell you MUST believe anything..do i?

i gave wes what he wanted...that is that.

now i also said i would explain it...if someone does not understand. but really it is plain as it can get. GRACE GODS saves. without Gods grace..we would not have salvation..do you not agree bob?

****************

then you go and talk about another passage in matt. great verse bob..we can talk about that if you want....but wes asked me to post a verse showing GODS GRACE saved. that is what i did...right?

******************

then you go back to the calvin teaches this..ok...well here is your post

"So we know what a Calvinist position is (Specific to those Calvinists that believe in limited atonement and that God does not care for the lost) - we just don't see it in the text."

again bob..if you want to talk about limited atonement..we will. but wes asked me to post a verse on grace....and if Gods grace was a factor in salvation. again this is what i posted...right??


now...if you or wes do not understand this verse and how it shows how grace does save....i'll be glad to help you. just let me know


In Christ...James

 

me again bob...lets look at this post

All of Calvnism’s favorite words do redefine – are here. WORLD, ALL MEN etc. And who can argue that ALL have sinned (not just the “elect”)?? Who can argue that WORLD really does Not mean the Whole World has fallen under the domain of sin – for All have sinned. God appears to be using very “arminian” terms here – once again.

James says..
*******************
arminian???? calvin???? who cares BOB...its the Bible. You need to look away form your ouline and read what ones post.

Can a calvin person claim this verse? YES

can an arminian claim this verse? YES

wes asked about grace...grace saves. the passage claims it. is that calvin or arminian? you tell me bob....but i don't care where you place it. i do not carry a flag for calvin...i look for the truth. if its in the bible call it what you want...but know this..it is true. like i said before..i think its jamesism

The Same all-encompassing Many that were lost because of the one fall of the one man Adam are benefited by the One man Christ!!!

Will not be quoting this text to Arminians any time soon.


James says.
****************
why not bob? i like that passage too? i do not hide from it. is it a calvin verse or arminian? you tell me. GRACE IS PART OF SALVATION. why try to fight this truth?? it is there. would you like for me to explain it to you bob? if so...let me know

Now we see again that the same ALL that were condemned by Adam’s fall – are in the scope of the benefit of Christ’s gift.

James says
*********************
SCOPE...yes i like the word you used. Good word.
BTW..did you read that last bit..."receive the abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness" humm there it is again. GRACE FROM GOD IS PART OF SALVATION. it is a required factor for salvation.

again - all men - same author, same subject, same reference as we see in vs 12 nailed down here again. All men condemned by Adam - and all men benefitted by the one act of Christ. </font>[/QUOTE]For God so love the world..that he gave....

salvation is for all that come to Him.

now..how does it come?

BY grace are you saved though faith. GRACE is the root reason salvation happens. Without grace..there is no faith. faith is the factor used in the root category "grace" as the saving power needed for salvation.

In Christ...james

 

let me repost again for wes...

romans 5

12 Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned: 13 (For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law. 14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come. 15 But not as the offence, so also is the free gift. For if through the offence of one many be dead, much more the grace of God, and the gift by grace, which is by one man, Jesus Christ, hath abounded unto many. 16 And not as it was by one that sinned, so is the gift: for the judgment was by one to condemnation, but the free gift is of many offences unto justification.

 

Originally posted by BobRyan July 28, 2005 12:08 PM

OldRegular defines that unconverted unforgiven unrepentant kind of "regeneration" event as

Is this union with Christ and NEW creation is the state of the sinful - totally depraved unconverted person?

Is there a text showing that an unconverted person is not sinful and depraved as in Rom 3:9-11?

In Christ,
Bob

*********************************************************************************************

Posted by BobRyan July 30, 2005 01:41 PM

OldRegular defines that unconverted unforgiven unrepentant kind of "regeneration" event as ...

So Bob asks

"Is this union with Christ and NEW creation really the state of the sinful - totally depraved unconverted person?"

Bob asks this because OldRegular places CONVERSION and repentance BEYOND the point of the New Birth in his list.

OldRegular then asks if that makes sense.

good question -- does it??

IN Christ,

Bob

***************************************************************************************************

Old Regular responds to set the record straight by reposting his response to BobRyan's post of July 28, 2005 12:08 PM


posted July 29, 2005 09:43 PM by OldRegular                      

Question by BobRyan

Response by OldRegular

Question by BobRyan repeated in OldRegular’s post of July 29, 2005 09:43 PM

Now Bob I don’t want to accuse you of lying or misrepresenting the truth but please compare the highlighted statement in your first post [July 28, 2005 12:08 PM] with the highlighted statement in your second post [July 30, 2005 01:41 PM] in response to my post of [July 29, 2005 09:43 PM]. Please note that there is considerable difference in the two statements. I am sure you will claim that only one word was changed but one word can make a difference, like "saved" and "lost". Now surely you are not going to contend that the original highlighted statement [Is this union with Christ and NEW creation is the state of the sinful - totally depraved unconverted person?] is intelligible?