Dear All,
I asked and was answered: Receiving Jesus is doing something is it not?
No, it is not. Salvation is receiving Christ (Jn1:12, Col2:6).
If you are not doing something how can you be receiving? The act of receiving is doing even if it is passive. Making a choice is doing something. Is Ben saying man gets saved without making choices, without receiving Christ? No he does not. Have you thrown the dictionary and grammar usage out the window Ben?
Or are you just trying to be argumentative?
He says this:
"'Do not work for the food which perishes, but for the food which endures to eternal life, which the Son of Man shall give to you; for on Him the Father, even God, has set His seal.' And they said to Him, 'What shall we do, that we may work the works of God?' Jesus answered, 'This is the work of God, that you believe in Him whom He has sent'". Jn6:27-29 Receiving Jesus by belief is not a work---it is to surrender ourselves to HIS work of salvation IN us. It is NOT "our work", it is "THE WORK OF GOD!"
How does one surrender without doing something? Surrendering is doing something. The whole point is not to trap Ben into saying salvation is by works [which he has repeatedly said that it is not] but to talk about what differentiates the elect from the nonelect.
Believing is doing something. Why do some believe and others do not? That was the question I answered using Scripture. Ben has not answered it except to say the nonelect love sin more. So I asked why they love sin more than the elect. He has given no reasonable answer.
And before we can receive Jesus, we must have some information about who He is and what He has done, do we not?
"Now faith comes from hearing, and hearing by the word of God. If you confess with your mouth Jesus as LORD (faith) and believe in your hearts God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved. For with the heart man believes, resulting in righteousness, and with the mouth he confesses, resulting in salvation." Rm10
That we agree on.
So in the one sense, we have latitude like Adam in that we freely act, as we desire, even as he did. But in another and greater sense we are not like Adam because we have the Spirit indwelling us and He is part of us even as we are part of Christ's body and a part of God.
The difference between your (OSAS) and my (OSNAS) perspectives, is that Scriptures teaches us "the Holy Spirit dwells in us when we believe, and departs when we disbelieve"...
This is his assertion, his take on Scripture of which I believe is false. The Holy Spirit dwells in us when we believe and forever, since the Holy Spirit only dwells in true believers. He never leaves true believers.
Is this choice [to choose Jesus] like Adams choice to sin [at the Fall]? Is this what salvation is, to choose correctly (as opposed to Adam, who chose wrongly)?
Adam knew very well that what he was about to do was rebellion and against God's command, but Adam did it anyway. Scripture tells us that under the New Covenant (JESUS), He is revealed to all men (Rm1:20), all men are called to Him (Jn12:32), but some men receive Him and others reject Him (Jn3:18). Those who "beleive not" also know very well whom they are rejecting (Rm1:21).
This is a poor reading of Scripture. Ben asserts things that Romans isnt saying. He is reading his doctrine into the Word instead of letting the Word teach him.
Scripture does not say Under the New Covenant [JESUS]
is revealed to all men.
Without getting personal that is an outright falsity. It says in Romans 1:20-21
20 For the invisible things of him since the creation of the world are clearly seen, being perceived through the things that are made, even his everlasting power and divinity; that they may be without excuse: 21 because that, knowing God, they glorified him not as God, neither gave thanks; but became vain in their reasonings, and their senseless heart was darkened. [ASV]
It is false theology to say that Jesus is revealed through the things that are made. The scripture plainly tells us that Jesus was not revealed but by His own witness and the witness of His people since then, See 1 Cor. 2
6 We speak wisdom, however, among them that are fullgrown: yet a wisdom not of this world, nor of the rulers of this world, who are coming to nought: 7 but we speak God's wisdom in a mystery, even the wisdom that hath been hidden, which God foreordained before the worlds unto our glory: 8 which none of the rulers of this world hath known: for had they known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory: 9 but as it is written, Things which eye saw not, and ear heard not, And which entered not into the heart of man, Whatsoever things God prepared for them that love him. 10 But unto us God revealed them through the Spirit: [emphasis mine]
Here plainly it says that this was a mystery that had been hidden and the rulers knew it not. But this mystery is revealed to us by the Spirit.
Likewise, just because the word all is used in a sentence, it doesnt have to mean everyone who ever lived or will live. The Zondervan NIV Bible Commentary has this to say about John 12:32:
All men does not imply that everyone will ultimately be saved; instead, it means that Christ draws people to Himself indiscriminately, without regard to their nationality, race, or status. Jesus utterance was prompted by the presence of Greek Gentiles and should be evaluated in that context.
To point out in John where all does not mean everybody.
Look at John 3:26 And they came unto John, and said to him, Rabbi, he that was with thee beyond the Jordan, to whom thou hast borne witness, behold, the same baptizeth, and all men come to him.
Yet not everyone who ever lived, nor even all those alive at that time, nor not even all those in Israel came to Him. That is not the meaning of all.
Let us look at John 4:29 Come, see a man, who told me all things that ever I did: can this be the Christ?
She did not mean that Jesus told her of every singular thing she did in life from birth through childhood and so forth. That all does not mean everything.
John 7:21 21 Jesus answered and said unto them, I did one work, and ye all marvel because thereof.
Not everyone who ever lived marveled.
John 8 2 And early in the morning he came again into the temple, and all the people came unto him; and he sat down, and taught them.
I wasnt there, were you? Therefore all doesnt mean everybody who ever lived.
John 11 48 If we let him thus alone, all men will believe on him: and the Romans will come and take away both our place and our nation.
The Pharisee who said this wasnt thinking of you or the billions in China when he said all.
All doesnt have to mean everybody who ever lived. That is a theological construct based on a certain interpretation scheme, and not gospel truth.
So all men do not know who Jesus is, and that is plainly put forth in the Scriptures. 1 Cor 2 :8 plainly says that IF they had known who Jesus was they would NOT have put Him to death. [which none of the rulers of this world hath known: for had they known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory] They did not think He was the Lord of Glory.
So my point still stands:
Only those whom the Spirit reveals the truth to know in their hearts the veracity of the Gospel.
The rest think it foolishness.
[1 Cor 1] 17 For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not in wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made void. 18 For the word of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us who are saved it is the power of God.
Next.
Ben is simply making assertions of his own imaginings here.
"My own imaginings"? Every assertion I have made has been backed by Scripture. How may Scripture references were in your last several posts??? On a theology debate, it is desireable to not become personal, but rather to contend with Scripture...
It is not personal at all. You have not backed up every assertion with Scripture. You misused and maligned Scripture at times, but you have not backed up your assertions with the Word. You cant because they are false. [Now that is an assertion of mine.]
He then says:
He completely ignored my question to him about Acts 4.
I don't remember you asking about Acts chapter 4 verses 27-30. Where in that passage does it say that God predestined Pilate's and Herod's eternity? It seems that Jesus WAS PREDESTINED, but Pilate and Herod were convenient. God used them, but did not create their bent. What of Mary? Was She commanded to be righteous? No. God chose the time and place, Mary was convenient. Had God chosen a different time, or place, or had Mary not been righteous, He would have chosen a different vessel for Christ's birth...
But of course he still has not answered my comments on Acts 4. How hard is it to scroll back and read yesterdays posts? His answer has nothing to do with my question. We are not talking about Herods or Pilates eternity but about predestination and free will. Can God predestine an act without violating a mans free will? Yes, as shown by the Jews and the rulers doing just what Gods power and will determined before would be done:
Acts 4 26 The kings of the earth set themselves in array, And the rulers were gathered together, Against the Lord, and against his Anointed: 27 for of a truth in this city against thy holy Servant Jesus, whom thou didst anoint, both Herod and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles and the peoples of Israel, were gathered together, 28 to do whatsoever thy hand and thy council foreordained to come to pass.
I asked if these who were gathered freely do what God had foreordained they would do or not? The Bible tells me that God can foreordain mens choices without violating their freewill. If you say God violated their free will, well then there goes your argument about free will. The Arminianist position isnt reality. Gods predestination of His elect does not violate the elects free will. That is a straw man attack on the truth.
Next.
He has been rude like that to me in the past, and he continues to be. I wish he would stop it. I do not think it is a proper way to deal with others, and I know he doesn't like it when others treat him that way. So therefore it is sin and he should stop it, repent of it and not do it anymore.
Kindly do not make the discussions personal. I have not, nor will I ever, attack anyone on a personal level. I do not believe I have been rude. If I ever appear so, then I promptly and humbly apologise. I contend for Scripture, specifically "OSNAS"; in responding to posts, I often make comments on other aspects of "OSAS", as they occur to me. If I am wrong on Scriptural points, prove me so with Scripture---I assure you I will listen.
Ben makes it personal when he blatantly ascribes doctrine to me that I do not hold. As he does not hold every possible Arminianist doctrine, I need not hold every doctrine he thinks is Calvinistic. He should not ascribe to me what I have not revealed as mine. AS I ASKED HIM, would it be fair to Ben if I ascribed a doctrine that says we must get born again after every sin? But some Arminianist hold that doctrine, so why shouldnt I say Ben believes that? But that is the similar thing he does to me on every thread on this website where we have interacted.
He says I apologize but then he just keeps on doing it. If you want to email me Ben and we can discuss this more, do so at
mjwhite_1@msn.com. But try and understand that there are real live people debating you and not All-One-Belief-Roboton-Calvinites behind the screen. You can couch your response as not to make it seem like the person you are answering is the one that holds that belief you are ascribing. It takes little work and is a proper way to treat people.
Next.
But Ben is not sure what OSAS believes about free will. First He says this: The very nature of "OSAS" is to deny free will.
Then he says this: By definition, he-who-believes-in-OSAS, also believes free will has limits. How can we believe free will has limits when we deny it?
I'm very pleased to hear that. Then you recognize that man has free will to either accept Jesus, or reject Him. From the start, to the finish. We are in agreement on "OSNAS". Free will has no limits...
What is wrong Ben with your logic skills? Are you very pleased to hear that Ben does not know what OSAS believes about free will? That is what I said.
Nothing in the above quote actually says anything about what I believe or about what Calvinism believes. Your answer does not match what I was saying. You contradicted yourself in your assertions and I was pointing that out to you.
OSAS does not deny free will. It never has. Free will has limits. Everyone knows that. Read Romans 7:
15 For that which I do I know not: for not what I would, that do I practise; but what I hate, that I do. 16 But if what I would not, that I do, I consent unto the law that it is good. 17 So now it is no more I that do it, but sin which dwelleth in me. 18 For I know that in me, that is, in my flesh, dwelleth no good thing: for to will is present with me, but to do that which is good is not. 19 For the good which I would I do not: but the evil which I would not, that I practise. 20 But if what I would not, that I do, it is no more I that do it, but sin which dwelleth in me. 21 I find then the law, that, to me who would do good, evil is present. 22 For I delight in the law of God after the inward man: 23 but I see a different law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity under the law of sin which is in my members. 24 Wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me out of the body of this death? 25 I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then I of myself with the mind, indeed, serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin.
end part one,mike