Where does believing faith come from part 4

Archangel

I don't know what DHK's point is. Perhaps he is just being contentious. I have made my views known many times. I appreciate your response to him. Much better than I could do.

 

God regenerates using His Word. His Word is preached through evangelism.

Rom 10:13 For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.
Rom 10:14 How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher?
Rom 10:15 And how shall they preach, except they be sent? as it is written, How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things!
Rom 10:16 But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Isaiah saith, Lord, who hath believed our report?
Rom 10:17 So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.

Jam 1:18 Of his own will begat he us with the word of truth, that we should be a kind of firstfruits of his creatures.

Phi 1:29 For unto you it is given in the behalf of Christ, not only to believe on him, but also to suffer for his sake;



We evangelize because God's Word COMMANDS us to evangelize. That is reason enough!

The "logical" reason for evangelism is that the Word of God says that the Holy Spirit uses the Word to regenerate people and bring them to faith. No Word--no regeneration. No regeneration--no faith. No faith--no salvation.

Why is it that one must believe that God Himself is powerless/unwilling to bring people effectually to Himself to believe that evangelism is necessary?

 

First of all I am not an Arminian, but I am not a Calvinist either. Not being a Calvinist does not automatically put one into the Arminian camp. Not being a Muslim does not make one a Christian by default, though that is the thinking of most Muslims. Do Calvinists think the same way?

Secondly, I don't adhere to a slice and dice method of salvation. It is a one time event in the time of a person's life (apart from sanctification and the resurrection of the body). I can remember the year, the month, the day, and even the approximate time that I was saved/regenerated. They happen at the same time. They are one and the same event. The faith does not, cannot come from God. There is not a single verse in the Bible that supports this idea. Regeneration and salvation are one and the same, happening simultaneously, and faith of a necessity must precede both. Acts 16:31 is very clear:
"Believe (have faith) and you shall be saved."
That is the order all throughout the entire Scriptures. There is no other order. God does not give faith to an unbeliever; he does not give any spiritual gift to an unbeliever. To say that he does is utter nonsense, and without any Scriptural basis whatsoever. To believe so takes away the impetus for evangelism.

 

I don't know why you are showing hostility here (unless I'm misreading you, which is quite possible).

I was not accusing you of being an Arminian; I was pointing out, however, that something you said seemed to be similar to something an Arminian might say.

I have an affinity for many Arminians, though I disagree with them on some points (no pun intended) of theology. For me, the Gospel is the "big deal."

Historically, however, only 5-Pointers were considered "Calvinists." Many 4-Pointers, 3-Pointers, and so on were referred to simply as "Arminian." It is not how I refer to non-Calvinists on this board.

I know a few 4-Pointers (rejecting limited atonement, as most 4-Pointers do) whom I respect greatly. I am an ardent supporter of limited atonement, but I see their argument and it is an argument steeped in penal-substitution atonement. So, the issue for me is not limited atonement, it is substitution (which, if properly understood, will lead to a limited atonement in most respects).

Again we have your rhetoric which does not deal substantially with my previous posting.

I'm certainly glad you can remember the exact moment of your salvation--I don't know when mine was...sometime in 2nd grade. But, salvation and regeneration are not necessarily one in the same. Even the Puritans spoke of periods of personal awakening. I think there's something to that. Is that always the way it happens? No. Can the salvation even and the regeneration be the same event? Yes, I think so, but it doesn't have to be the same event.

Your quote of Acts 16:31 is interesting since it is an imperative verb in response to the golden question "What must I do to be saved?" Since the jailer was asking, and obviously not saved when asking the question, it is evidence that something was going on in him. Why? Because Romans tells us that "No one seeks after God." Something has to change the person to seek and that is what we Calvinists call regeneration.

As far as an order, you do not see the faith-preceding-salvation argument "all throughout the entire scripture." The faith-comes-first argument is built on the presupposition that man is the main actor and God is the responder. But that in itself is not Biblical. God is always portrayed as the Main Actor and man is always the responder. This is clear in the life of Abraham, who was an idol worshiper when God called him out of Ur and, therefore, had no "faith." God acted; Abraham responded.

Further, I'm not sure why you say "God does not give any spiritual gift to a non-believer." I think I see what you are trying to say, but I'm not sure it is absolutely scriptural.

Moreover, the Ephesians 2:8-9 passage (well trodden on this site) does suggest that the entirety of salvation is a gift of God (that's not the debate). The debate is whether grace is the gift or grace and faith are the gift. The grammar is very clear on this: If you think grace is a gift, faith must also be included. Grace and faith are two sides of the same coin of the gift of salvation.

So, again, I'm not sure why there was a hint of hostility in your post. I hope we can continue in meaningful discussion in a friendly manner.

Blessings,

The Archangel

 

Most who make this defense agree with the first four points of Arminianism. In other words, are an "OSAS Arminian."

The entirety of Muslim doctrine and the entirety of Christian doctrine do not constitute a dichotomy. In the realm of Christian soteriology, the opposing five points of each side each constitute dichotomies.

Yes. Justification is a one-time event. This is often what one means when one refers to being "saved."

I agree that they happen simultaneously. However, I believe that regeneration and justification are not the same thing but that they occur chronologically simultaneous. The Holy Spirit takes the Gospel message from the Word of God and regenerates one. One who is regenerated believes the Gospel and is justified.

God gives faith (Rom 12:3-6; Eph 2:8; Phi 1:29).

I agree that they happen at the same time chronologically, but that logically regeneration precedes justification. It causes faith unto justification.

God regenerates/rebirths us "of His own will" by using His Word. This does not say that we had faith first to be regenerated. God regenerates through His Word. This new birth (and a human does not will his own birth) makes one spiritually alive (to have faith) which is the pecuniary grounds for justification.

Just because the Scriptures say that one must believe to be "saved" (justified) does not mean that it says that one must believe to be regenerated/born again. You just assume that "saved"/justified is the same thing as regenerated/born again and that "autonomous" unregenerate human faith precedes them both. Please prove this with Scripture.

Philippians 1:29.

True. The spiritual gift of faith is a greater proportion of faith to a saved individual, just as the spiritual gifts of mercy, grace, and wisdom are greater proportions. However, faith in the Gospel is a measure of faith that God gives to all believers whereby they are believers (Rom 12:3-6; Phi 1:29).

God does not regenerate and give saving faith apart from His Word of the Gospel! We preach the Gospel and God uses this to regenerate people. No one is saying here that evangelism does not play a necessary role in God's effectually bringing people to Himself.

Evangelism is primarily necessary because God COMMANDED it. PERIOD!
Evangelism is logically necessary because God uses His Word preached to regenerate people.

To tell you the truth, I am absolutely sick of the logic that smacks the many Reformers and 19th century revivalists in the face as being "inconsistent" with their theology or being "hypocrites" about what they believe. There is nothing inconsistent or hypocritical about believing that the Scriptures command evangelism and that this is the ordained means by which God effectually brings people to Himself to His full glory and credit.

I am sick of the logic that says that God has to be impotent against effectuating salvation so that evangelism becomes a logical necessity. It's the same type of logic that the open theists I know try to argue with me that God knowing the future makes Him "responsible" for man's sins; and that therefore, God has to be ignorant of the future to avoid this responsibility.

 

I too can remember the day I got saved very clearly, but I have noticed most Calvinists cannot. You would think that a person would clearly remember the day they met Christ.

You make a good point about the Philipian jailer. Yes, there was something going on inside him, he came in trembling with fear and fell down before Paul and Silas. But then (as is customary with Calvinists) you assume he was regenerated when the scriptures say no such thing.

The fact is, the scriptures tell us what the work of the Holy Spirit is when dealing with the unsaved. Jesus said when the Holy Spirit comes he will reprove the world (that is, the unsaved) of sin, righteousness, and judgement.

John 16:7 Nevertheless I tell you the truth; It is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you.
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.

Jesus makes it clear that the "world" here means unsaved mankind in verse 9.

The word "reprove" here means:

1) to convict, refute, confute
a) generally with a suggestion of shame of the person convicted
b) by conviction to bring to the light, to expose
2) to find fault with, correct
a) by word
1) to reprehend severely, chide, admonish, reprove
2) to call to account, show one his fault, demand an explanation
b) by deed
1) to chasten, to punish

Nowhere in the scriptures does it say the Holy Spirit will regenerate the unsaved and give that man the ability to believe or have faith. Nowhere does it say it will give that unsaved man a desire for God. It says reprove, which means to convict or reprehend severely, to bring one to shame. This is the work of the Holy Spirit toward the unsaved, and it is clearly shown by many examples in scripture.

Acts 2:37 Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do?

When Peter preached to the Jews on Pentacost, he showed how they had wickedly crucified the promised Christ. They were deeply convicted and made aware of their perilous condition and asked Peter and the other apostles what they should do to escape the wrath of God. Peter told them to repent and be baptized in the name of Jesus for the remission of sins, and then they would receive the Holy Spirit. This proves their conviction did not arise from the indwelling Holy Spirit.

And this is the case of the Philipian jailer as well. We do not know much detail, but it is safely assumed he knew somewhat of Paul and Silas as he took charge of them and put them in stocks. Paul and Silas were accused of exceedingly troubling the city, and of teaching customs contrary to Roman law. They had been beaten with many stripes and I am sure showed injury to which he probably observed. And when Paul and Silas prayed and sang hymns, he probably heard this as the prisoners did. And when the great earthquake opened all the cells, I am sure that this convinced the Philipian jailer that Paul and Silas were no ordinary men, and that God himself would free them.

So this is what the scriptures show. And when the Philipian jailer asked Paul and Silas what he should do, they told him he must believe on Jesus Christ to be saved. This proves he was unsaved when he made this request.

And if Calvinism is true, how could Paul and Silas honestly answer his question? They couldn't, and if Calvinism is true no Calvinist can tell a man how to be saved. Oh, you can tell a man they must believe on Christ, but to be honest and tell the whole truth you would have to tell that man that there is nothing he can do to be saved, but only if he were one of the fortunate elect, that God will regenerate him and then he will have the ability to believe.

If Calvinism is true, then preaching the gospel is meaningless. Those who are not elect cannot possibly believe it.

Telling a man to believe on Christ is meaningless if Calvinism is true, because the unelect cannot possibly believe.

No, Paul and Silas should have told the Philipian jailer to do nothing whatsoever, because any action on his part would violate God's sovereignty, and that if he happened to be one of the fortunate elect, God would save him. And Peter should have told the men on Pentacost the same thing. This would be the honest answer if Calvinism were true.

And if both the men on Pentacost and the Philipian jailer were regenerated by the Holy Spirit to have this desire to be saved that they showed, you would not have to tell them to believe on Christ either, this would already be imparted to them.

So you see, this doctrine makes no sense whatsoever and has not one word of scripture to support it.

 

Nonsense. It is always shown that a person must first have faith to be saved. It is directly said in Ephesians 1:13

Eph 1:13 In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise,

It doesn't get any clearer than this, and there is not another verse in all of scripture that so specifically addresses the order of events that take place in salvation. First you hear the gospel, second you believe or trust the gospel, and third you receive and are sealed by the Holy Spirit.

But Calvinists refuse to believe this very specific verse or try to explain it away. Not a very wise thing to do.

And where did you get this idea that Abraham was an idol worshipper? There is not one word in scripture to support this. In fact, it is just the opposite, the scriptures show that when God spoke to Abraham, that Abraham immediately believed and obeyed God.

Gen 12:1 Now the LORD had said unto Abram, Get thee out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and from thy father's house, unto a land that I will shew thee:
2 And I will make of thee a great nation, and I will bless thee, and make thy name great; and thou shalt be a blessing:
3 And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee: and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed.
4 So Abram departed, as the LORD had spoken unto him; and Lot went with him: and Abram was seventy and five years old when he departed out of Haran.

Heb 11:8 By faith Abraham, when he was called to go out into a place which he should after receive for an inheritance, obeyed; and he went out, not knowing whither he went.

So, I don't know where you got this idea that Abraham was ever an idol worshipper. Whoever told you that does not know the scriptures and should not be listened to.

 

And though you will not receive it, the order of salvation is clearly shown when God promised Abraham a son.

Rom 4:16 Therefore it is of faith, that it might be by grace; to the end the promise might be sure to all the seed; not to that only which is of the law, but to that also which is of the faith of Abraham; who is the father of us all,
17 (As it is written, I have made thee a father of many nations,) before him whom he believed, even God, who quickeneth the dead, and calleth those things which be not as though they were.
18 Who against hope believed in hope, that he might become the father of many nations; according to that which was spoken, So shall thy seed be.
19 And being not weak in faith, he considered not his own body now dead, when he was about an hundred years old, neither yet the deadness of Sara's womb:
20 He staggered not at the promise of God through unbelief; but was strong in faith, giving glory to God;
21 And being fully persuaded that, what he had promised, he was able also to perform.
22 And therefore it was imputed to him for righteousness.
23 Now it was not written for his sake alone, that it was imputed to him;
24 But for us also, to whom it shall be imputed, if we believe on him that raised up Jesus our Lord from the dead;
25 Who was delivered for our offences, and was raised again for our justification.

First, in verse 16 it shows you cannot receive God's grace unless you first have faith. This is what Ephesians 2:8 says.

Eph 2:8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:

Grace is obtained "through faith". So, you must first have faith before you can receive God's grace. But if that faith is a gift of God, then a person is receiving faith through God's grace. So Calvinism teaches exactly opposite of what the scriptures say. You couldn't possibly be in greater error if you tried.
And we see that Abraham received righteousness because he believed in verse 22. This also contradicts Calvinism, because Calvinism teaches that God regenerates a man, gives him a new righteous heart, and that only after receiveing this new heart and nature has the ability to believe.

So once again, Calvinism teaches exactly the opposite of what the scriptures say. Incredible.

And you will not accept this, but Abraham and Sarah's physical condition are a figure, a picture of man's spiritual condition. Abraham and Sarah were both "dead" physically as far as having the ability to bear children. But both were able to believe while in this dead state. And note that it says Abraham was strong in faith and believed that what God had promised (past tense) he was able to perform. So this shows that Abraham believed while in this state of deadness, and believed God was able to make him physically alive and able to have children.

And we know this is true, because Abraham and Sarah did not have Isaac until many years later. So, they weren't made physically alive immediately and then believed God's promise, No, just the opposite, they believed God's promise while still physically unable, and only many years later did God make them able to have children. So, this shows that faith precedes regeneration.

And because Abraham believed God while physically dead (concerning childbearing), God imputed righteousness to him.

And then it is clearly said that this is a figure, a picture that applies to all those that believe. It directly says that:

Rom 4:23 Now it was not written for his sake alone, that it was imputed to him;
24 But for us also, to whom it shall be imputed, if we believe on him that raised up Jesus our Lord from the dead;

This passage applies to US ALSO, to whom righteousness SHALL be imputed IF WE BELIEVE.

So, we are dead in sin, we are unable to save ourselves. But if we believe on Jesus he will make us alive. You believe first, then you are given God's grace.
You won't accept this, but this clearly shows that a person dead in sins has the ability to believe, and if that person believes will be made alive. But that is clearly the picture shown in this passage.

 

It's not really an assumption. If the scripture says "No one seeks after God," which is stated clearly, then how can man seek after God (like the Jailer) without God first doing a work in him?

Your issue is not with me, it is with the text.

It makes no sense to you because you simply don't understand what our positions are. No one is saying we don't have to tell people about Christ. Your misunderstanding of our position (and scripture) is that you are equating regeneration with salvation. Can they occur simultaneously? Sure. Do that have to? No.

We have always claimed that the Holy Spirit does His work in parallel with the evangelistic work of Christians and through that work (both parties are in view here) regeneration and salvation occurs.

As I have repeatedly shown, you are placing way too much in the participles of the above verse and are, therefore, saying something that the verse itself does not say.

Well, it is you, apparently, who do not know the scriptures:

Joshua 24
2 And Joshua said to all the people, “Thus says the Lord, the God of Israel, ‘Long ago, your fathers lived beyond the Euphrates, Terah, the father of Abraham and of Nahor; and they served other gods. 3 Then I took your father Abraham from beyond the River and led him through all the land of Canaan, and made his offspring many. I gave him Isaac. (emphasis mine)

Now, we do not say that Abraham was forever faithless. We say, as Joshua says, that when God sought Abraham, Abraham was an idol worshiper and had no faith (faith in Yahweh). Did Abraham come to faith? Absolutely! Did he have faith before God called him? No, he was an idol worshiper.

Blessings,

The Archangel

 

This passage is not talking about the order of salvation. The passage is contrasting works and faith (especially relating to Abraham, circumcision, and offspring).

The word "faith" in v. 16 hearkens back to the previous discussion about the dichotomy between faith and works. Faith, in the contexts, is not speaking about an order of salvation.

This is one reason why it is so frustrating for many of us to discuss things with you...you don't deal with context. Because of that you bring verses into a discussion that have absolutely no relevance. Now, am I saying that the Bible does not interpret the Bible? Certainly not. What I am saying, however, is this: Proof-texting a position you hold is not the same as the principle of scripture interpreting scripture.

Well...there you go again. It would be so much more helpful if you read the Greek.

Grace and Faith are two sides of the same coin of salvation. How is this stated? The phrase "and this is not your own doing" is English-ized and it doesn't capture the Greek. The Greek woodenly says "and this not out of you all." Salvation is not out of us? No, it is of God. Grace is not of us? No, it is of God. Why then would Paul intentionally place the "and this is not out of you all" next to faith if he didn't also intend faith to be considered something that comes from us?

The text says what the texts says--and it is crystal clear that grace and faith are two sides of the same salvation coin.

Well, I won't accept this because it is not the intent of Paul to express this. He is clearly and certainly not making an allegory--that is something you have imposed on the text.

Again, this shows a misunderstanding of biblical exegesis and hermeneutics. Biblical hermeneutics and biblical exegesis always seeks to find and take the author's main point or main argument and makes it the point.

What you are doing in this allegory is akin to suggesting that Hamlet lived in apartment "2B" because he said "to be or not to be." You are suggesting that what the text means to you is more important that what the author intended it to mean. That is dangerous.

Blessings,

The Archangel

 

The scriptures do say that, but you must keep it in the context. For instance Psalms 14, where this originally appears.

Psa 14:1 [To the chief Musician, A Psalm of David.] The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good.
2 The LORD looked down from heaven upon the children of men, to see if there were any that did understand, and seek God.
3 They are all gone aside, they are all together become filthy: there is none that doeth good, no, not one.
4 Have all the workers of iniquity no knowledge? who eat up my people as they eat bread, and call not upon the LORD.
5 There were they in great fear: for God is in the generation of the righteous.
6 Ye have shamed the counsel of the poor, because the LORD is his refuge.
7 Oh that the salvation of Israel were come out of Zion! when the LORD bringeth back the captivity of his people, Jacob shall rejoice, and Israel shall be glad.

If you read verses 2 and 3, yes, it does seem to say that no man seeks after God. But you cannot exclude verse 1. This is speaking about fools, about athiests who do not believe there is a God.

Now, you don't believe all unsaved men are athiests do you? They are not.

So this is speaking of specific people. And notice in verse 4 that these workers of iniquity who eat up "my people".

So, if you pull verses 2 and 3 out of the context, yes, you could argue this is speaking of all men. But if you carefully read these verses within context you will see they are not.

And the same is shown in Romans where this verse is repeated.

Rom 3:11 There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God.

But Paul is not saying this about all men, although I fully admit it does seem to say that. Because Paul also speaks of those who do seek God.

Rom 2:7 To them who by patient continuance in well doing seek for glory and honour and immortality, eternal life:
8 But unto them that are contentious, and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, indignation and wrath,
9 Tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that doeth evil, of the Jew first, and also of the Gentile;
10 But glory, honour, and peace, to every man that worketh good, to the Jew first, and also to the Gentile:
11 For there is no respect of persons with God.

So, you see here that Paul also speaks of men who by patient continuance in well doing seek after glory and honour, immortality and eternal life.

And I have showed you directly from scripture unsaved men that sought God, and even had the ability to understand the scriptures.

Mark 10:17 And when he was gone forth into the way, there came one running, and kneeled to him, and asked him, Good Master, what shall I do that I may inherit eternal life?
18 And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God.
19 Thou knowest the commandments, Do not commit adultery, Do not kill, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Defraud not, Honour thy father and mother.
20 And he answered and said unto him, Master, all these have I observed from my youth.
21 Then Jesus beholding him loved him, and said unto him, One thing thou lackest: go thy way, sell whatsoever thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, take up the cross, and follow me.
22 And he was sad at that saying, and went away grieved: for he had great possessions.
23 And Jesus looked round about, and saith unto his disciples, How hardly shall they that have riches enter into the kingdom of God!

Here is a young man who desired eternal life. He ran to Jesus, this shows his great desire. He was not rebellious to God, he kneeled down to Jesus and called him Good Master. Jesus himself confirms this man had a knowledge and understanding of scripture, and does not contradict the young man when he said he obeyed God's commandments from his youth.

Only on one point did Jesus show him to be disobedient. Jesus said he lacked just one thing, that he give up his riches and follow him. Jesus promised if he did he would have treasures in heaven.

But you see this young man go away in great sorrow and grief, because he knew he valued his wealth more than God and was not willing to give it up. This was his great sin, he did not love God with all his heart, and he was covetous.

But to teach that 100% of men do not seek God is easily disproven by this very passage and many others. Crowds of thousands followed Jesus wherever he went. But not all were saved, though many were.

So, I will admit there are many scriptures which seem to say all men do not seek God, but there are many scriptures which show otherwise as well.

I will admit this is very difficult to understand.

And you cannot argue this young man was regenerated to seek God, because he went away unsaved. This argues against Irresistable Grace. He may have been drawn to Jesus and obviously was, but he certainly resisted God and went away unsaved.

 

I want to point out something else I think significant in Psalms 14 which I showd.

Psa 14:1 [To the chief Musician, A Psalm of David.] The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good.
2 The LORD looked down from heaven upon the children of men, to see if there were any that did understand, and seek God.
3 They are all gone aside, they are all together become filthy: there is none that doeth good, no, not one.
4 Have all the workers of iniquity no knowledge? who eat up my people as they eat bread, and call not upon the LORD.
5 There were they in great fear: for God is in the generation of the righteous.
6 Ye have shamed the counsel of the poor, because the LORD is his refuge.
7 Oh that the salvation of Israel were come out of Zion! when the LORD bringeth back the captivity of his people, Jacob shall rejoice, and Israel shall be glad.

You notice that in verse 2 God calls these fools "the children of men". Now I think that is significant and should be noted. Now notice in verse 4 that God speaks of "my people".

The unsaved are the "children of men", while the saved are called "the children of God", or in this case "my people"

Now, I personally believe this shows God's foreknowledge of those who will believe. God knew before the foundation of the world who would believe his words when they heard them, and calls them his people or children.

Bear with me on this. Now read John 10:17 and it will now make sense.

John 10:27 My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me:

Notice that Jesus says "I know them". This is speaking of Jesus's foreknowledge. The scriptures say Jesus knew from the beginning who believed not, and therefore he also knows who will believe from the beginning.

John 6:64 But there are some of you that believe not. For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were that believed not, and who should betray him.
65 And he said, Therefore said I unto you, that no man can come unto me, except it were given unto him of my Father.

And verse 65 had been explained earlier by Jesus. Those who come to him were taught by God.

John 6:44 No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day.
45 It is written in the prophets, And they shall be all taught of God. Every man therefore that hath heard, and hath learned of the Father, cometh unto me.

You see, God uses the scriptures to draw a man. Those who come are those that hear and believe God's word. Notice Jesus says that every man "that hath heard, and learned of the Father, cometh unto me"

So salvation is 100% of God. No man could possibly know of God unless God gave his words and scriptures to us first. And those that believe God's word will come to Jesus.

But Jesus knows who these people are that will believe, and he knew it from the beginning. These are his children, these are his sheep, these are his elect.
Do you see how none of these scriptures contradict in any way? If Jesus knows beforehand who will believe, he can rightly call them his people, his sheep.

 

Winman I must assume that you have not read John 3:3-8 or Ephesians 2:1-8 otherwise you could not make the above statement.

 

Examine carefully the points of Arminianism. In no way am I an Arminian. I don't believe the Calvinists on this board need to continually insult the intelligence of the non-Cals by putting them into the Armin. group. We aren't J.W.'s or Mormons either. How about saying that we are "Bible believers." But that would be insulting to yourselves wouldn't it?

It doesn't matter. I have lived in an Islamic nation. They look at America as a Christian nation in spite of its pluralistic and humanistic nation. It is not a Christian nation and never was--though it was founded on a Judeo-Christian ethic. There are many religions in America. They consider all who are not Muslims Christians. That is how they look at the world. And that is how Calvinists see the world. All who are not Cals are Armins.

This is not a Biblical outlook. Properly put they are two facets of the same thing (salvation), but both occur simultaneously. And faith (not given by God) must precede both. If it doesn't salvation cannot occur.

Regeneration, the new birth; that work of the Holy Spirit by which the soul, previously dead in[FONT=&quot]sins, is created anew in Christ unto righteousness, cannot occur without faith.[/FONT]


Justification: the being regarded and treated as if innocent; or acquittal from the consequences[FONT=&quot] of guilt before the tribunal of God, cannot occur without faith. We are justified by faith (Romans 5:1)[/FONT]


Salvation means, strictly, deliverance; and so it is used of temporal deliverance, victory, in Ge 14:13; 1Sa 14:45. But as the spiritual deliverance from sin and death, through the Redeemer, Mt 1:21, is a far greater salvation, so this word has come to be used mostly only in this moral and spiritual sense; and implies not only this deliverance, but also the consequences of it, namely, eternal life and happiness inthe kingdom of out Lord, 2Co 7:10; Eph 1:13.



All three take place at the same time. All three are facets of the same thing.

Salvation is deliverance from sin.
Justification is a legal term; as some put it--God sees me "just as if I never sinned."
Regeneration--the new birth; God creating in me a new person.
--Nothing can happen without faith; nothing can happen without the operation of the Holy Spirit working through His Word. When the Holy Spirit works through His Word (the gospel message) one must have faith to believe that message and be saved, at which time he is both regenerated, justified, and born again--all at once. The faith is not given by God. It is the same faith (or kind of faith) that I would put in my wife to drive me safely home. It is confidence or trust. Here is a definition of faith from the Bible.


Romans 4:20-21 He staggered not at the promise of God through unbelief; but was strong in faith, giving glory to God; And being fully persuaded that, what he had promised, he was able also to perform.
--Abraham was strong in faith. His faith is described as: fully persuaded that what God had promised, God would perform. That is faith. It does not come from God; it comes from confidence in the person whom you are putting your faith in. You may not put your faith in a hobo from the street; but you may put your faith in an authority figure such as a policeman. Abraham had learned to put his confidence in God because of his close relationship with God; just as I have learned to put my faith or confidence in my wife because of my close relationship with her. Faith does not necessarily come from God.

God gives faith only to believers; not to unbelievers, as your Scripture indicates.
Romans 12:3-6 is written to believers, and is speaking of spiritual gifts. God does not give spiritual gifts to unbelievers.

Phil.2:9 again is written to believers, has nothing to do with salvation. Look carefully at this verse which Calvinists so often take out of context.


Philippians 1:29 For unto you it is given in the behalf of Christ, not only to believe on him, but also to suffer for his sake;
--Unto it is given. What is given? One might say that "the privilege" is given. It is a privilege to believe on Christ, and it is a privilege to suffer for his sake. Neither one have to do directly with salvation. He is pointing out the great blessings that we have in Christ. Christ didn't have to die for us, but he did. It is a privilege to believe on him, and it is a privilege to suffer for him.



Philippians 1:29 because to you has been given, as regards Christ, not only the believing on him but the suffering for him also, (Darby)


Ephesians 2:8,9--another verse taken out of context by Calvinists who can't determine the subject of the passage.


Ephesians 2:8-9 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast.
--The subject is not grace; nor is it faith. Both of these nouns are preceded by prepositions, and therefore are prepositional phrases, not the subject. The subject is understood by the context. Verse 8 starts with "for by" indicating that the subject was already spoken of previously.

The sentence starts up in verse four, and the subject is found in parenthesis in verse five:
Ephesians 2:5 Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved)
The subject is salvation.

In verse 8 the verb is "saved" We are saved "by grace" "through faith." Two prepositional phrases describing how we are saved, neither one of them being the subject of the passage. We are not saved of ourselves. We are not saved by works. But it is salvation that is the gift of God--not grace; not faith.

In no way does the gift of God refer to faith; it refers to the subject: salvation. Salvation is a gift of God; eternal life (Romans 6:23) is a gift of God, not faith. To rightly divide the word of truth here would be in order.


All three references you supplied have nothing to do with faith being a gift for an unsaved person.

 

As explained above it doesn't. It happens simultaneously. They are facets of the same event.

Yes it does. We needed to have faith in his word to be regenerated; faith in the gospel. What do you think? Far away in a heathen country where no missionary has ever penetrated, and the gospel has never gone forth, God regenerates some because faith is not necessary: only the Holy Spirit. "He of his own will begat us using his word." Even the Ethiopian Eunuch said: "How can I understand unless some man help me."

God regenerates through faith in His Word. There is no other way. If Nicodemus did not have faith in what Christ was teaching him; if there was unbelief, he could not be born again. It would have been an impossibility. He needed faith to be born again.

Ephesians 2:5 Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved
Ephesians 2:8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:
--It is the same sentence. It needs faith to be regenerated, to come alive from the dead. God doesn't give the faith, as is demonstrated here.

I already have. Did Nicodemus believe or reject what Christ explained to him. He needed faith to believe. And then he was regenerated. In Ephesians 2:5 they were made alive from the dead by faith.

God does not give spiritual gifts to unbelievers. Why do you continue to try and support this with Scripture taken out of context; Scripture written to Christians, and for Christians? Don't you even look at the context before posting?

God does not regenerate apart from His gospel. He does not give saving faith to any unbeliever. He uses believers to spread the gospel. A five point gospel, by the nature of all five points has no reason to evangelize but simply allow God to go and elect whom he wishes and allow God to do the regenerating/saving.

So what? Prayer is necessary because Christ commanded it. Reading God's Word is necessary because God commanded. There are many things in the Bible that are necessary because God commanded it. The impetus for evangelism is not simply a command, but because souls are perishing and going to hell. The lost need to be saved. Even Jesus said:
"I am come to seek and to save the lost."

It is not that God is ignorant; quite the opposite. In some aspects of Calvinism God is "so sovereign" that there is no need for evangelism. As they told Carey. God will save them in his own time, in his own way. They don't need you to do it.

 

This is too funny. HOW OFTEN are sovereign gracers chastised about "ALL does not mean ALL" and "WORLD does not mean WORLD" with certain proof texts. However, when a sovereign gracer brings a text that says "NNE," the libertarian free willer attempt to drill from the context that "NNE does not mean NNE."

I am not saying that the context of the quote from Psalm 14 is specifically targeted to the Gentile oppressors of Israel. However, if you believe that the New Testament is also inspired, you would also have to see that Paul quotes Psalm 14:1c-3 as a reference to the entirety of both Jews and Gentiles as a whole. Because the writing of Paul was God-breathed, he was giving a further manifestation of this passage that it applies to everyone (Rom 3:20,23). Those without the law do not seek after God because they are pagans. Those who have the law do not seek after God because they have a works-based religion that does not save. Everyone does not seek after God for some reason because they seek to please themselves out of paganism or self-righteous "religion."

Because we all know that "ALL does not mean ALL" right?

Why do they do that? Could it be because God is working within and on behalf of those that do?

Remember that earlier one had to repent and be baptized to receive the indwelling of the Holy Spirit (Act 2:38). Also, one could give the Holy Spirit with the laying on of hands (Act 8:16,17). Now, when the Gospel to the Gentiles began, the Holy Spirit simply fell upon people as He willed when the apostles spake (Act 11:15).

Why do you keep on harping with the same Scriptures and your same interpretations of them and just ignore the well-reasoned responses to them? I have already responded to these and you just ignore my arguments.

The rich young ruler had pride. He thought that he was good enough to merit eternal life by keeping the law. It was all about him. Jesus showed him that no one can keep the whole law and that eternal life cannot come through the deeds of the law.

The rich young ruler (as was common at the time) thought that being rich reflected a right relationship with God and His blessings. The poor and afflicted were thought to be so because of sin (Joh 9:1-3). The disciples were also shocked about this when Jesus told them that it is hard for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God (Mar 10:23-24). The disciples were "were astonished out of measure" and said "Who then can be saved?" (Mar 10:25). If the rich who were the pinnacles of God's blessings could not be saved, then how could anyone be saved?!
Then Jesus told them something even more shocking:

Man cannot save himself. It is impossible. However, God can save anyone. He saves through the His Word preached in the Gospel message.

God uses His Word to regenerate people. He saves us by the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit (Tit 3:5-6). This regeneration is what is possible with God that overrides the impossibility of man who does not seek after God. The regeneration is what grants people faith in the Gospel, which is the pecuniary grounds for justification.

Nope. Try again.

Why did the crowds follow Jesus? Not because of Who He was, but because they wanted a king who would overthrow the Roman empire and give them free meals.

When the Bible says that no one seeks after God, it does not mean that everyone is as wicked as humanly possible, distains any idea of heaven, and does not desire eternal life in any form. It means that they do not seek God as Who He is. They do not desire eternal life on God's terms.

 

Showing Scriptures that show people wanting something from God for the wrong reasons does not prove your point. Scriptures that show the people who do seek God and thereby are saved do NOT show exceptions to the rule or that "NNE does not mean NNE." It merely shows that the exceptions are because God worked in them on their behalf as the Scriptures I posted support.

It IS difficult to understand--if you are unwilling to see that salvation is ALL of God, not merely a response of God to righteous men. The righteous response of man resulting in salvation is a result of the effectual work of the Holy Spirit within him to draw him into the fold. The Holy Spirit uses the Word of God through evangelism to bring His sheep to Himself. With men this is impossible, but with God all things are impossible. God gets the credit and the glory for the actual salvation of people from start to finish. He gets credit for the fact that someone is actually saved in all respects. This is all without the absence of the requirement of faith for justification and the necessity to preach the Gospel.

Believe me, I was in your shoes years ago. I even debated on this forum from your very position. I studied the Scriptures intently without a single commentary and drew my current understanding of election, regeneration, faith, justification, sanctification, and glorification from the Scriptures themselves. It's a rough transition, but it brings a vibrant and radiant faith in God that His Word will not return void. It brings an unquenchable love for the Gospel and a desire to preach to see God do His work. There is more an aptitude for bold and unfettered preaching of the Gospel and less a fear of relevancy and the human weakness of trying to persuade the autonomous will of people that God is incapable/unwilling to change.

 

The whole of Romans 3 (Paul's quotes):
9 What then? Are we Jews any better off? No, not at all. For we have already charged that all, both Jews and Greeks, are under sin, 10 as it is written:
“None is righteous, no, not one;
11 no one understands;
no one seeks for God.
12 All have turned aside; together they have become worthless;
no one does good,
not even one.”
13 “Their throat is an open grave;
they use their tongues to deceive.”
“The venom of asps is under their lips.”
14 “Their mouth is full of curses and bitterness.”
15 “Their feet are swift to shed blood;
16 in their paths are ruin and misery,
17 and the way of peace they have not known.”
18 “There is no fear of God before their eyes.”


The quotes by Paul show something--he is building a case that all are under sin (and therefore radically depraved--so much so that seeking after God doesn't happen).

Paul is a master of the Old Testament (remember, a "Pharisee of Pharisees").

Are you saying that Paul is misquoting the Old Testament?

Are you saying that Paul mis-spoke or was mistaken?

Do you think Paul intended to say "No one seeks after God?"

Or, do you think you know better than Paul?

Blessings,

The Archangel

 

Well, this is not what this passage is about. Notice the man's question: "What must I do to be saved." This shows a basic misunderstanding that was extremely prevalent in Jesus' day--salvation was based on works of the law. This is exactly why Jesus tests the rich young ruler with the law itself. Jesus leaves out "Covet" from the so-called second table of the law. Later, Jesus will test the man with the first commandment: No other gods. Obviously this man's possessions/wealth/status, etc. were his god and by leaving he is showing that he has been breaking and will continue to break the first and last commandments--and therefore the entirety of the law.

This is not an account of a true seeker.

Jeremiah 29:13 says, "You will seek me and find me, when you seek me with all your heart."

How can one "seek" God when the scripture says "No one seeks after God?"

How can one seek God with a heart that desires "Only evil continually" and is "Desperately wicked?"

These are questions you haven't answered, though they have been posited before.

Blessings,

The Archangel

 

They accept the basic truths that have been presented to them. The quote Paul is using is in reference to the "fool" of Psalm 14 who has rejected even that.

God has reached out to man first, even placing them in the perfect location and time in history so man will do just that (Acts 17:25-26)