|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
|
Login  | |
|
RE: Calvinism/Arminianism - One Stop Thread - 11/21/2008 11:39:01 AM
|
|
|
FreeGrace
Posts: 8263
Joined: 12/30/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: rwe2156
quote:
ODELIYA:
I'm just not seeing any indication that if a person dies before repentance of a particular sin he is lost. Del -
Nobody is saying we are lost if we die in unrepentant sin - thats a strawman argument
(I've never accused anybody of that - am I right?)
The argument is whether an believer can die in total unbelief - apostacy.
I maintain that if we are kept secure and no one can snatch us out of his hands, we must be one of his - the same God who keeps us will not let us go, dear.
rw, you accuse Del of a strawman argument, and you present one here. No one argues against God keeping us and not let us go. That speaks of our salvation, not whether or not we "keep believing" or not. They aren't related. Once He saves someone, they stay saved, regardless of how bad they live the rest of their miserable lives. That is what you can't accept.
But, grace means that no one deserves heaven, so the lifestyle post salvation does not affect one's eternal destiny. That is the point.
What IS affected is one's spiritual growth (nil) and eternal rewards.
quote:
Solomon was not "wholly devoted to the Lord" and did not "follow the Lord completely".
He was NOT an atheist.
That isn't the point. He turned away from God and worshiped false gods, courtesy of his many foreign wives. Is there a material difference, is Del's question to you.
quote:
An unrepentant idolater, but NOT an atheist.
OK, good. And that's how he ended per 1 Kings 11. Don't you think the Bible would have made it clear that he repented before he died IF he did? Yet, there is no support for that. Just claims by the calvinists.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Calvinism/Arminianism - One Stop Thread - 11/21/2008 11:42:14 AM
|
|
|
FreeGrace
Posts: 8263
Joined: 12/30/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: rwe2156
quote:
ORIGINAL: FreeGrace
What is your point here? Can you prove that Sol repented before the Lord "tore his kingdom"
away from him? And why did the Lord "tear" his kingdom away from him? The answer is found in 1 Kings 11:9-13.
Free,
First, God didn't tear ALL of his kingdom away from him, did he?
What does 1 Kings 11:13 say. But you dodge the point. The result of his disobedience to God was the loss of his kingdom. Where in 1 Kings 11 or anywhere else does the Bible say he repented before he died. Nowhere.
quote:
Second, what about Lot?
Was he an atheist too?
No. Why do you ask?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Calvinism/Arminianism - One Stop Thread - 11/21/2008 11:51:11 AM
|
|
|
FreeGrace
Posts: 8263
Joined: 12/30/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: rwe2156
quote:
Free:
How can anyone believe in Christ "for nothing"? Can you explain that?
The didn't believe in Christ, they only thought they did, but it was a false gospel.
Where in the Bible is there any concept of people only "thinking they believed in Christ"?
If a person doesn't know what they believe, they simply have no opinion on the subject. Call them confused, or undecided.
But the argument that people have only "thought they believed" but didn't really is too silly to maintain.
The real issue is exactly what they believed about Christ. They may have believed in some facts about Christ, but not what John delineated, and are therefore not saved, but think they are.
quote:
quote:
We're talking about people who actually really believed in Christ for eternal life.
Then they didn't believe in vain, Free.
And that would be my point. 
quote:
The question is not whether believing the gospel is efficacious, but
whether faith can be a fleeting thing, temporary and enduring only
if the recipient chooses to at his own whim and desire.
And Jesus gave us the answer, which is "yes". He said "they believed for a while". That is clearly temporary and fleeting.
quote:
It is also whether holiness is a guarantee and sanctification is part of our salvation.
Show me where holiness is as guarantee. All the commands for holiness and obedience proves that it isn't a guarantee.
quote:
quote:
RWE:
With this statement you are not truly believing God keeps you saved, now are you, friend?
FG:
That is exactly what I am saying, rw. How can you miss it?
Hold on just a minute, Free!
There is a much deeper issue here unless I misread you.
You don't think God keeps you saved?
Of course I do. I think you somehow missed part of the quote. I've NEVER argued other than God is the One who saves and the One who keeps us.
quote:
quote:
does "once regenerated, always regenerated" mean to you?
Quite simply - a sheep doesn't turn into a goat.
Sheep=believer, goat=unbeliever.
What do you do with the very clear words of Jesus in Luke 8:13 then?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Calvinism/Arminianism - One Stop Thread - 11/21/2008 11:53:50 AM
|
|
|
TheosCentric
Posts: 2036
Joined: 2/26/2006
Status: offline
|
Ecclesiastes 2
_____________________________
"Missions exists because worship doesn't." -- John Piper, Let the Nations be Glad
God at the Center
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Calvinism/Arminianism - One Stop Thread - 11/21/2008 11:58:37 AM
|
|
|
FreeGrace
Posts: 8263
Joined: 12/30/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: rwe2156
quote:
ORIGINAL: FreeGrace
quote:
ORIGINAL: rwe2156
quote:
ORIGINAL: FreeGrace
quote:
ORIGINAL: rwe2156
Do you all agree the 3 main facets of the Gospel are
1. Repent
2. Believe
3. Receive the Holy Spirit???
If so, why do you think its can all be temporary?
Who ever said it was "all" temporary? Once the Holy Spirit is received
that is absolutely permanent, if you believe the Bible and Eph 4:30.
The Holy Spirit cannot deny itself, neither does it go dormant
because a man simply decided to follow Buddha.
Can the Spirit be grieved, quenched, and resisted, rw?
Funny.
Very funny.
I don't see what's so funny in my question. Can He or not?
quote:
Can the Spirit be evicted?
You don't answer my questions, and yet you throw them at me! What's up with that? But, the answer is NO, the Spirit cannot be evicted. And I don't know the relevance of your question to the discussion and my questions to you. Please answer. Don't pull an "HK".
quote:
quote:
No, you have misunderstood me. The Bible commands believers to be filled with the Spirit and to walk by means of the Spirit. Why do you think that is?
They glorify God, they are useful to the kingdom, they have a good witness to the lost.
But you are saying it is not only a "holy choice" but we can be empty of the Spirit.
Where does the Bible tell us a believer can be devoid of the Spirit?
No, I am not saying that any believer can be "empty" of the Spirit. What makes you even think that way?
Believers are either filled or not filled. This speaks of control, not a glass of wine. Eph 5:18
Believers are either walking by the means of the Spirit, or they are fulfilling the lusts of the flesh. Gal 5:16
Believers are either grieving the Spirit or not. Eph 4:30
Believers are either quenching the Spirit or not. 1 Thess 5:19
If you are any of the calvinists disagree with these 4 statements, please elaborate as to why you do. Not just your opinion about my pov. I'm already aware of your opinions about my pov. I'm looking for substance as to why you disagree.
quote:
quote:
What you and the calvinists seem to think is that the Holy Spirit just automatically takes over in the life of the believer.
1. Please don't lump me in with the Calvinists.
Then quit hangin' with em.
quote:
2. I believe sanctification is a synergy.
Please elaborate.
quote:
quote:
You are only saved by believing the promise of God, rw. If you don't believe what He promises, you are making God out to be a liar.
I sure wouldn't "go there".
You know I am talking about assurance, not the mechanism of salvation,
So stop it.
I wouldn't have posted what I did if you had made clear your pov.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Calvinism/Arminianism - One Stop Thread - 11/21/2008 12:03:44 PM
|
|
|
FreeGrace
Posts: 8263
Joined: 12/30/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: KingJamesBond
HisFish,
quote:
I make no claim in my post of sinless perfection, far from it. I dont know how you got that. Neither do i elevate myself above anyone else because i deserve eternal damnation, but for a reason known only to God He decided i should be saved.
Good points.
There is a substantial difference between free-will concepts and those that are reformed (Calvies).
In a free-will POV I can imagine hundreds of people being left to sustain their existance as they are swimming around in a gigantic sea. In their POV God just throws life boats all over the place but these boats are always out of reach. In their POV the boats just sit there waiting for these people to swim and save themselves. The weak of course would never make it.
This is nothing but a clear failure of yours in understanding the FW pov. But one of you have already admitted that it is "too horrible to contemplate", so who can blame you for your failure to understand it?
I am unaware of anyone who hold to FW pov who thinks that they save themselves, or that their faith does so. If anyone does, they are dead wrong. But all you are doing is using a strawman argument.
quote:
In the first scenario the boats only wait as an offer for the people to save themselves.
Strawman.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Calvinism/Arminianism - One Stop Thread - 11/21/2008 12:07:59 PM
|
|
|
FreeGrace
Posts: 8263
Joined: 12/30/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: rwe2156
If they EVER once believed - Hey! - There IN! God promised it, right?
Its OK - this theology you apparently believe puts no demands or expectations on the believer, sis...................so just relax. Free says they're saved - right?
rw, you are using a strawman argument, just like the calvinists. Where have I said that God places no femands or expectations on the believer? I have repeatedly noted all the commands in the Bible that we ARE expected to obey! There can be no spiritual growth with obedience.
Are you not paying attention to my posts as well?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Calvinism/Arminianism - One Stop Thread - 11/21/2008 12:12:35 PM
|
|
|
FreeGrace
Posts: 8263
Joined: 12/30/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: HardKnox
C. The faith that saves (a biblical phrase used by Jesus, FG, so don't complain about it) is not a part of the unregenerate man and must be added to a sinner before they can be justified.
What support do you have from Scripture for this statement?
Also, "saves" is an action (verb) and is caused by a noun (faith). God is the One who saves. Show me where God "added faith" to an unbeliever.
quote:
D. That faith belongs to Jesus, comes from God through the Holy Spirit and is a product of God's Word.
Jesus is the Author and Finisher of our faith. Which is the Christian faith.
quote:
E. That faith is a gift from God, it is not from man, but is extended to man by the work of the Holy Spirit.
Yes, the Christian faith is a gift from God. And specifically, eternal life is a gift from God, which is given only to believers.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Calvinism/Arminianism - One Stop Thread - 11/21/2008 12:17:32 PM
|
|
|
FreeGrace
Posts: 8263
Joined: 12/30/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: kelman
quote:
ORIGINAL: FreeGrace
Yes, the Holy Spirit indwells every believer, and IS grieved when one drifts from the faith. But, because people can "sear their conscience" as 1 Tim 4:2 indicates, 1Tim is not speaking about elievers....it's talking about apostasy. These are not words used of believers, so seared consciences are not applicable to them.
Have you ever consulted with a dictionary on the word "apostasy"? I suggest you do. Hint: it means no longer believing what you used to believe.
quote:
"that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils; 2 Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron;"
Please explain how an unbeliever can "depart from the faith". iow, how can you depart a vehicle that you aren't in? Can't be done.
quote:
quote:
quote:
That's not the point, though. There is no scriptural basis to say that a born again believer can denounce God, die and be received into heaven....none.
The real issue is that there is no Scripture that says that those who have believed and wander from the faith will lose their salvation.
You're not talking about a "little wandering" from the faith. You're talking about total and complete apostasy. You're talking about someone who denounces God and then, according to you, will be received into heaven - that's totally off the reservation.
Quick, the dictionary!
quote:
quote:
God is no "indian giver", pardon the phrase. When He gives His gift, it is permanent.
Yep, and when He gives the gift of faith, He doesn't take it back. In fact, God says He is the Author and finisher of our faith, not to mention the Giver of ALL good things. So, your pov that believers can totally and irrevocably lose their faith has no support from Scripture - none.
The gift is eternal life. That isn't given back. But the very definition of "apostasy" is one who no longer believes what they used to believe.
Jesus Himself tells of those who "believe for a while". That is apostasy.
It cannot be said that unbelievers are apostate, since they have NEVER believed in Christ.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Calvinism/Arminianism - One Stop Thread - 11/21/2008 12:19:24 PM
|
|
|
FreeGrace
Posts: 8263
Joined: 12/30/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: kelman
And, of course, the most important issue is that Solomon repented of his sin as seen in Ecclesiastes.
Rejoice, O young man, in thy youth; and let thy heart cheer thee in the days of thy youth, and walk in the ways of thine heart, and in the sight of thine eyes: but know thou, that for all these things God will bring thee into judgment. -Ecclesiastes 11:9
Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: Fear God, and keep his commandments: for this is the whole duty of man. -Ecclesiastes 12:13
Only if you can prove he wrote that at the very end of his life. 1 Kings 11 is a summary of his life. The result of his miserable life was that God tore the kingdom from him.
Does that sound like repentance?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Calvinism/Arminianism - One Stop Thread - 11/21/2008 12:20:55 PM
|
|
|
FreeGrace
Posts: 8263
Joined: 12/30/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: TheosCentric
As HK noted, if one wants to see an example of Solomon's acknowledgment of his sin, look at Ecc. 2.
What that written at the end of his life? 1 Kings 11 as a summary of his life is very clear.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Calvinism/Arminianism - One Stop Thread - 11/21/2008 12:28:42 PM
|
|
|
HardKnox
Posts: 448
Joined: 11/6/2008
Status: offline
|
FG,
quote:
11 Kings 11 as a summary of his life is very clear.1 Kings 11 as a summary of his life is very clear.1 Kings 11 as a summary of his life is very clear.1 Kings 11 as a summary of his life is very clear.1 Kings 11 as a summary of his life is very clear. Kings 11 as a summary of his life is very clear.
Sound of doors slamming shut!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Calvinism/Arminianism - One Stop Thread - 11/21/2008 12:46:59 PM
|
|
|
rwe2156
Posts: 2472
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: HardKnox
C. The faith that saves (a biblical phrase used by Jesus, FG, so don't complain
about it) is not a part of the unregenerate man and must be added to a sinner
before they can be justified.
Might I respond here?
I agree there are different kinds of faith and there is only one faith that saves.
This is why we are told to 'believe in thy heart'. Believing the gospel is not
a simple mental acknowledgment of some facts about Jesus - sorry, FG.
This is a point where I think our evangelism gets in really BIG trouble,
because an emotional decision, "profession" of belief or whatever other
methods we use is not assurance the one has actually been saved.
After all, one can get 'emotional' about a football game, "profess" to be a fan,
and even venture out to many games and know nothing about the team,
the coach or how the strategy of the game - they are not a true "fan" - right?
No, the faith it takes to believe and be saved can only occur in the
one whose mind has been opened by repentance (this is my theology
speaking, now).
And my theology tells me man is capable and able to repent, but is
unwilling because of the cares of the world, his pride, his sin, and
his self-seeking attitude. Rom 1 and 2 tell us this and the OT is chock
full of man rejecting God even though they have knowledge of him.
I believe man is able to recognize his sin and his condition before God -
through the internal moral witness we are all born with and triggered by
a variety of life circumstances, people (witness), prayer (direct intercession by God),
or revelation (Holy Spirit).
THIS is the fuel that keep my evangelism motor running, not simply that
I am carrying a message to the elect (whoever they are), as if God needs
my help to save a man or something.
Biblically, I think this ability is borne out by OT scriptures such as Eze 33:11;
Jer 18:7-10; Jonah 4:10; Amos 7:1-6 and Ex. 32:14 as well as many
others where we see conditional statements made by God that "if"
men repent, God will go to "plan B" or at least not do what he threatened.
In the NT we see a slightly different kind of repentance. Not a turning
away so much as a changing of the mind. Can a man change his mind?
Certainly. Can a man renew his mind? Of course not - that is what
regeneration does.
Here's what I see:
1. God commands all men everywhere to repent - a command is given
with a view toward obedience. Ability to obey is irrelevant.
Willingness to obey is what's really important.
2. God desires all men to repent - how can God desire anything
if he determines whether or not it will occur?
3. God waits patiently for men to repent - what sense does this make
if man is simply irresistibly drawn and effectually called?
4. God rejoices when men repent - God is surprised one of his
elect hears the gospel and believes? I don't get this either.
Seems he would be more pleased with himself, like in creation.
None of this would make sense if God is the author of it.
Lets look at some other facts:
1. Why is it hard for a rich man to be saved? He is not elect?
The Bible doesn't tell us this.
He is a god-hating, wicked enemy of God? Possibly.
Or, he is self-seeking and he trusts in himself an loves money?
Why did the rich young ruler walk away in dispair after he was
face with the gospel Jesus taught? Does the Bible tell us he was unable
because he wasn't elect, or was it something else? It was something else.
We know prosperity is the greatest hinderance to the gospel - a fact borne
out by real life experience - ask any missionary. It also explains why our
gospel has become what it is and why so many churches are basically
Jesus Clubs run like the world and putting on a dog and pony shows to
attract the lost (translation: get more money to run the show).
2. If election and IG are true, why did Paul reason with the Jews and Greeks?
Or be "all things to all men"?
The elect need "convincing"? Why?
No - the reality is men are reluctant to repent for the reasons already given.
3. Why aren't the elect saved the first time they hear the gospel?
There are no biblical answers for this, only suppositions about
"in God's time", etc. And there are no example of anyone becoming
saved after hearing the gospel 6.2 times or whatever it is.
4. Why do statistics say most are saved at a young age? Why does
the majority of children saved have parents that are also saved?
(Even accounting for the 90% that turn away in the late teens,
the statistic still stands). Its got nothing to do with election.
5. Why are so few older people saved? The statistics bear out that
very, very few people come to Christ after the age of 50.
Why? Hearts calloused by a life of sin - what the Bible tells us.
6. What is preventing the return of Jesus? Has he not come back because
all the elect have not been gathered in yet? Or is God patient because
He knows there are still some who will repent?
I remind you I do not deny election - it certainly is a biblical doctrine,
but I do not believe it is the only standard for the way men are saved.
Sure, God can choose to save anybody he wants any way he wants,
but the Bible is clear there is a process: Repent, Believe, Receive HS.
I believe people who are saved fall into a couple categories:
Those whom God has chosen to save and those whom God perserves
because he know they will make a personal decision to repent.
Please don't tell me my theology is man determines he will be saved, not God
because a man cannot save himself by repenting anymore than he
can forgive himself by asking for forgiveness.
Sorry for the length. It is not an attack and I hope I don't get an attacked.
If total depravity and election are true, I want to believe it. Sincerely.
Looking forward to your response. I will be unavailable for a couple days.
_____________________________
The Truth is between the tensions. The "contradictions"only reflect our lack of understanding.
So we choose sides. God help us.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Calvinism/Arminianism - One Stop Thread - 11/21/2008 12:51:53 PM
|
|
|
rwe2156
Posts: 2472
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: mcleod
Not to be rude RWE 2156, but you keep using the sheep and goats. Are you sure that you are aware of what Christ was telling the masses that day?
It's easy to use these phrases, yet we need now to look and see if we are showing compassion to the stranger the God sends in our in our lives.
No problem.
Its simple. Sheep=believer, goat=unbeliever.
If you think believer can become an unbeliever you think a sheep can become a goat.
The next question is then, can a goat turn back into a sheep if he feels like it?
Some here think a sheep is simply any two legged animal who "thinks" he is a sheep. 
_____________________________
The Truth is between the tensions. The "contradictions"only reflect our lack of understanding.
So we choose sides. God help us.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Calvinism/Arminianism - One Stop Thread - 11/21/2008 12:56:06 PM
|
|
|
FreeGrace
Posts: 8263
Joined: 12/30/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: HardKnox
FG,
quote:
The question was why did the Lord tear the kingdom away from him? And the answer IS found in 1 Kings. Since 1 Kings 11 presents a summary of the end of his life, your opinion is wrong. Period.
Thus saith FG. The Lord tearing the kingdom from Solomon (actually his son, not him) is a consequence of sin. Just because forgiveness takes place does not mean the sin’s fallout does not continue. Need examples? Or did a couple just jump into you mind you had previously overlooked, like David and Bathsheba, David and the census....? FG, are you going to read what I just wrote glibly, then yell that its all irrelevant, like you usually do or are you going to read it carefully for a change?
I read all of your posts, and look carefully for answers to me questions, which you do not provide.
quote:
Now, read Ecclesiastes 2. That’s Solomon talking about his exploration into wickedness and how he came out of it before the end of his life.
Yep. Now, can you prove he wrote that at the very end of his life? No.
1 Kings 11 is a summary. He didn't end well. Read it yourself.
quote:
quote:
Sure do. Jesus Himself noted some who "believed for a while". What does that mean to you? That they never believed? 
A. You totally missed the point. My point is that if you and others say that a believer turns atheist and goes to heaven (because he retains the gift of eternal life) on the assumption that the person really believed in the first place. In other words (and I know your not going to get this, but here goes anyway), you have “gotten into the heart of the man” and read his intentions, judged that he really was a true believer in the first place as if you have that inside knowledge that only God has.
This is irrelevant opinion of yours. I quoted Jesus who said the second believed. Your issue of rejecting that they believed is with Jesus, not me.
quote:
Then you construct this hypothesis of his being able to give up his faith later and put God in the dilemma (as it were, because it doesn’t happen at all) of having to receive an unbeliever into heaven.
What you "cleverly" ignore is that He has regenerated that former believer and given him eternal life. Only if you can demonstrate that God does take back regeneration and eternal life will I believe you.
quote:
And don’t forget, At the end of the Bible after all other epistemological/soteriological doctrine has been established, God says no unbeliever will go to heaven, so now you’ve made him a liar.
Not at all. Rather, when the Bible speaks of "unbeliever" it refers to those who have NEVER believed. Jesus spoke of those who "believed for a while". Where do you read that such aren't saved?
quote:
B. Rather than (rationally) adjust the attributes of God to essentially turn him into some kind of a waffling, hand-wringing, PC pluralist, why not follow the scripture and consider the possibility that man is the variable and God is the Factor. The variable is in human faith, not in divine Promise. Divine Promise includes the redeemed of God and excludes unbelievers.
It does indeed. The issue, since you seem to have forgotten, is with former believers who have been regenerated and given eternal life. Just show me where the Bible teaches that God takes back His gifts when one only believes for a while, and I will believe you.
quote:
Human variability occasioned by sin gives us a sinful faith that cannot lift the head toward heaven that needs to be trumped by a living faith, created by the Spirit through the Word that grows. Does it occasionally get wrestled down by the old faith (which is now doubt)? Yes. But which one will win out in the end? The New and Living Faith because it is not an attribute of man, but the Spirit of God, as it were, believing within us. See? Simple. Man is justified and secure to the end and God goes on being God and only telling the truth. No vague hypotheses or reading Everymen into whosoevers. But you know, FG. In the end, it isn’t about reason. Its about choice based on preference, do you want to take a God-centered or a man-centered view of salvation.
Long paragraph, but where is your proof that God causes one to believe, as you assume? He doesn't. So, none of this paragraph is relevant.
quote:
quote:
If Luke 8:12,13 aren't good enough for you, how about 1 Tim 5:8, 11 and 15. Who do you think Paul is referring to there?
Luke 8 is “good enough for me” seeing it is the revelation of the Holy Spirit. You have constantly refused to temper it by Matt. 13 (I can’t count how many times I’ve brought that up).
Oh, "temper it" now. Actually, it is Matt 13 that needs tempering from Luke 8. Jesus' words are very clear. You just reject them as written. btw, there is nothing in Matt 13 that teaches what you think it does. Luke is the one who made it clear.
quote:
Two accounts of the same parable or event from the gospels is not meant to be argued with one another, they are meant to compliment one another. Luke 8 is “good enough for me”, but your interpretation of it isn’t.
I see no contradiction between the two. Luke is simply more clear, and you reject his clarity, with the "excuse" of Matt 13.
quote:
Nobody in that parable is saved except the last seed.
That is merely calvinistic opinion. The issue in the soils is one of fruit. The point is that only faithful and obedient believers will produce fruit.
quote:
The belief of the unregenerate can die.
Who cares about the "belief of the unregenerate" and what does that even mean? This statement is totally irrelevant.
quote:
The belief of the regenerate bears fruit.
Only the regenerate that persevere in obedience and faithfulness.
quote:
Fruit is the test of faith, which is precisely why it is impossible for a person to be a true believer at one point become and atheist later, die unrepentant, and go to heaven. Their faith was dead, it always was.
I don't think you realize the issue. How can anything be "always dead"? In order for something to die, what is the status prior to said "death"? Being alive. I believe that torpedoes your pov.
quote:
They never had a God-given faith that would go the distance (because it was empowered by the Holy Spirit through the Word). 1 Tim 5 (forget verse 8, its talking about denying the Christian Faith, related, but not germaine to this discussion) 15 is tempered by verse 6, “But she that liveth in pleasure is dead while she liveth.” The presumption is not that she ever truly believed, but that she was already worldly (the third ground in Matt.13). The “first faith” is simply the early faith (sinful faith) oriented to the externals of Christianity, but choked out by worldliness.
What do you mean by "externals of Christianity"? And nice try at mixing and matching verses to suit your pov.
Actually, 1 Tim 5:15 is "tempered" by v.11. You know, the widows whose "dedication to Christ" was overcome by their sensual desires. You want to claim Paul is referring to unbelievers here? On what basis.
And, there is no such thing as "sinful faith". Where did you make that up from?
quote:
quote:
You haven't "explained" a thing. All you've done is show a critical judgmental attitude towards my pov but without any substance whatsoever. I'm still waiting for your answer as to whom John was referring to in the phrase "whole world" in 1 John 2:2.
Answered. Go back and do your own homework on this and don’t bring it back up, please, unitl you do. Double yawn.
The only answer you gave on 1 John is "universe", which I believe was in reference to 5:19, not 2:2. Why are you so adamant in refusing to give me a simple answer, since you didn't initially? How hard is it to rewrite it?
quote:
quote:
Man has NO faith at birth.
Babies don’t trust their mothers? Babies don’t believe in the breast?
Prove that infants have rational thought processes. Good luck. Babies, function from God given instincts and reflexes, not thought processes.
So, again, there is NO faith at birth. Only instincts and reflexes.
quote:
quote:
James is speaking about a believer who isn't demonstrating his faith, which should be clear from his own example in 2:15,16. iow, words alone don't get the job done; one must produce actions to demonstrate their Christian faith.
No he isn’t. You’re wrong. James is setting up a condition in which a person may spuriously claim to have inert faith (assent).
Ah, "inert faith". My Bible doesn't have that word. Does yours?
quote:
James says that the evidence, the footprint of faith is works. In other words, a person who defines their faith strictly by an internal tendency has a faith that is inactive, unfruitful, and dead.
While works are an evidence of faith, lack of works indicate that the faith isn't "working". What does v.18 say? "Someone may say, you have faith, and I have works" We know from the rest of the verse that both are saved (have faith) by the statement "show me your faith without the works, and I will show you may faith by my works." iow, he is acknowledging that the other person has faith. He is asking how he can show it without works. The point being, one cannot "show" their faith if they don't have works. This verse is quite elementary. I'm surprised that so many fail to grasp it.
quote:
He goes on to compare it to the faith of demons.
"faith of demons"? No, James never talks about the "faith of demons", as you assume. He does talk about the fact that demons believe in monotheism. Just read v.19 carefully. It is also quite elementary.
quote:
quote:
No, you already admitted my pov is "too horrible to contemplate". Now you want to change your tune (excuse) and claim you can't decipher my pov. Nonsense.
I assure you, I quite understand your pov (at least where it settles down on some slightly stable area of the quagmire). Its your method of biblical interpretation that is entirely inexplicable.
That is my opinion of calvinism and why I ask my questions. I'm trying to find out specifically where I'm wrong, if I am, and you have not provided any substance, only snippy comments about my pov.
quote:
It must have something to do with the way you’re wired. Since I don’t have your circuits, I can never quite guess what you’re going to do with a verse from one minute to the next. But I do know you are going to plasticize it into you pov. In other words, I don’t always know where you’re coming from, but I can usually guess where you’re going.
Without any substantive replies, you haven't even entered the debate.
quote:
quote:
Then why don't you even attempt a response with some substance in it? All you do is give snippy comments but you haven't engaged the debate at all.
You know I have. If you really thought I didn’t engage, you wouldn’t keep answering. I just get snippy to try to keep from going to sleep.
No. All I've gotten from you is snip. You have failed to provide any substance.
quote:
quote:
If I'm "reading" 1 Tim wrong, can you explain to me how 1 Tim 5:8 can describe an unbeliever, or 5:11 and 15.
I’ve dealt with 11 and 15, but why would you want to bring up verse 8.
No, you didn't. You claimed v.6 "tempers" v.15, when the reality is that v.11 does. And you did NOT deal with v.11.
quote:
I’m glad you did, but that verse blows your atheists right out of heaven. A guy goes to church, calls himself a Christian, says “Yeah” to everything the preacher says (when he can stay awake), but is lazy and allows his family to in squaller. He’s not a Christian. He’s lying to himself. His head bobs up and down with empty assent, but his heart isn’t into it. That’s called “good and necessary consequence”. No blood-bought, Spirit filled, grateful, ex-sinner-now-saint can possibly be “worse” than an atheist, FG. Your pov is a dead end street. When a pov ends in Christians being worse than atheists and gives atheists an open door into the holy presence of God, that pov is dead wrong. And you know what? There is no more that needs to be said about it. Howl and holler that you are misunderstood til you’re blue in the face. This argument is finished and buried six feet under. You lose.
No, your answer is a loser. All you've done is be judgmental, which you don't get from 1 Tim. Where is "empty assent" in 1 Tim, or anywhere else in the Bible. It's just a made up phrase to suit you calvinists.
Anyway, your answer (finally some substance!) is that the guy in 1 Tim 5:8 is not a believer. So, why does Paul describe him as having "denied the faith" and "worse than an unbeliever"? You have not dealt with that.
Please do.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Calvinism/Arminianism - One Stop Thread - 11/21/2008 12:59:29 PM
|
|
|
FreeGrace
Posts: 8263
Joined: 12/30/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: HardKnox
FG,
quote:
11 Kings 11 as a summary of his life is very clear.1 Kings 11 as a summary of his life is very clear.1 Kings 11 as a summary of his life is very clear.1 Kings 11 as a summary of his life is very clear.1 Kings 11 as a summary of his life is very clear. Kings 11 as a summary of his life is very clear.
Sound of doors slamming shut!
Other than merely melodrama, what is your point? No substantive rebuttal?
Again?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Calvinism/Arminianism - One Stop Thread - 11/21/2008 1:04:24 PM
|
|
|
HardKnox
Posts: 448
Joined: 11/6/2008
Status: offline
|
FG,
quote:
What support do you have from Scripture for this statement?
Luke 7:50, but you’ll just tear it up and throw it away because it has nothing to do with your pov.
quote:
Also, "saves" is an action (verb) and is caused by a noun (faith).
Oh, boy. Here we go again. The FG Book of Grammatical Pontificating
quote:
God is the One who saves. Show me where God "added faith" to an unbeliever.
I’ve done that but you tore it up and threw it away because it had nothing to do with your pov.  So, I’ll draw from your pov  (what the hey); Didn’t I hear back there somewhere you said “Men are born with NO faith?” Yet men have faith, right? So-o-o, where do they get it? Oh wait. Faith is a set of propositions (see below). Men believe, which is a verb. They believe with their minds, not with faith. Right? But wait. Didn’t we already deal with that? Doesn’t God say all the thoughts of men are that there is no God? So, with the mind man believes nothing but that there is no God. No. That can’t be right......... 
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Calvinism/Arminianism - One Stop Thread - 11/21/2008 1:24:35 PM
|
|
|
HardKnox
Posts: 448
Joined: 11/6/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
Post #: 5642
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Calvinism/Arminianism - One Stop Thread - 11/21/2008 1:29:15 PM
|
|
|
HardKnox
Posts: 448
Joined: 11/6/2008
Status: offline
|
RWE,
I'm going to take your post home and go over it carefully. I want to make sure I understand where you're coming from before I answer (if I can). In spite of what some people try to blather, I really do care to answer questions and understand points of view and I want to give yours all due respect. Later, dude.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Calvinism/Arminianism - One Stop Thread - 11/21/2008 1:33:17 PM
|
|
|
HardKnox
Posts: 448
Joined: 11/6/2008
Status: offline
|
Did you all know that babies don't have reasoning per FG. They have reflexes and instincts. Their little rodents or microbes. Out of this grows the Freegrace epistemology. The Evolution of Believing, catchy title, no?
I assure you, FG. My two sons were reasoning in the womb and everyone here who has had children knows what a crock that view is.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Calvinism/Arminianism - One Stop Thread - 11/21/2008 2:03:59 PM
|
|
|
| |
Forum Tools
Printable Version
I'll go back to the FG hound mode.