Are you saved because you believe? Or do you believe because you are saved?

BNR32FAN said:

it’s strange how all the sudden you seem to have shifted from a person being capable of believing without being elected to Judas being capable of believing knowing that he was obviously not elected. Why the sudden shift in position?

Click to expand...

I have not switched at all. Where do you get that? Judas (as with anyone else) is incapable of believing salvifically, without the work of God in regenerating. Many many people believe in God, intellectually, and some even believe Christ is the only savior, like the devil believes it.

Mark Quayle said:

I have not switched at all. Where do you get that? Judas (as with anyone else) is incapable of believing salvifically, without the work of God in regenerating. Many many people believe in God, intellectually, and some even believe Christ is the only savior, like the devil believes it.

Click to expand...

lol this is one of those he believed but he did really believe situations isn’t it? But satan and the demons weren’t thrown out of heaven for failing to believe were they? They were thrown out for their disobedience.

BNR32FAN said:

lol this is one of those he believed but he did really believe situations isn’t it? But satan and the demons weren’t thrown out of heaven for failing to believe were they? They were thrown out for their disobedience.

Click to expand...

What has being thrown out to do with the subject at hand, other than to supplement my point that not all belief is salvific belief?

I have been saying all along that there are two different kinds of faith, two kinds of belief, two kinds of repentance, two kinds of obedience.

Dave L said:

Faith is a fruit of the Holy Spirit. The flesh only worships idols it thinks are Jesus.

Click to expand...

That is one way to say that the flesh is enmity with God., and neither can please God because it is impossible to please God without faith.

Mark Quayle said:

I have been saying all along that there are two different kinds of faith, two kinds of belief, two kinds of repentance, two kinds of obedience.

Click to expand...

If the Father in heaven will give the Holy Spirit to those who ask, why not Salvation? If the real thing is available upon request, why are many worried about counterfeits? Just ask and it is settled - this is a promise.

Mark Quayle said:

What has being thrown out to do with the subject at hand, other than to supplement my point that not all belief is salvific belief?

I have been saying all along that there are two different kinds of faith, two kinds of belief, two kinds of repentance, two kinds of obedience.

Click to expand...

Forgive if I’m mistaken but it appeared that you were insinuating that demons were cast out of heaven because of their belief not because of their disobedience. That their belief was not “salvific” seeing as you used them as an example of how Judas’ belief was also not salvific.

Minister Monardo said:

By an experience in the heart, are you referring to conviction?
John 16:
7 Nevertheless I tell you the truth. It is to your advantage that I go away; for if I do not go away,
the Helper will not come to you; but if I depart, I will send Him to you.
8 And when He has come, He will convict the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment.

Click to expand...

What Calvinists don't understand is that people can feel that conviction in their hearts but they can choose to resist it for various reasons (don't want to give up anything for Christ such as power, status, certain sins that they enjoy too much to give up, etc.).

Acts 7:51 “You stiff-necked people! Your hearts and ears are still uncircumcised. You are just like your ancestors: You always resist the Holy Spirit!

Acts 13:46 Then Paul and Barnabas answered them boldly: “We had to speak the word of God to you first. Since you reject it and do not consider yourselves worthy of eternal life, we now turn to the Gentiles.

Isaiah 65:2 I have spread out my hands all the day unto a rebellious people, which walketh in a way that was not good, after their own thoughts; 3 A people that provoketh me to anger continually to my face; that sacrificeth in gardens, and burneth incense upon altars of brick; 4 Which remain among the graves, and lodge in the monuments, which eat swine's flesh, and broth of abominable things is in their vessels; 5 Which say, Stand by thyself, come not near to me; for I am holier than thou. These are a smoke in my nose, a fire that burneth all the day. 6 Behold, it is written before me: I will not keep silence, but will recompense, even recompense into their bosom,

Isaiah 66:2 For all those things hath mine hand made, and all those things have been, saith the Lord: but to this man will I look, even to him that is poor and of a contrite spirit, and trembleth at my word. 3 He that killeth an ox is as if he slew a man; he that sacrificeth a lamb, as if he cut off a dog's neck; he that offereth an oblation, as if he offered swine's blood; he that burneth incense, as if he blessed an idol. Yea, they have chosen their own ways, and their soul delighteth in their abominations. 4 I also will choose their delusions, and will bring their fears upon them; because when I called, none did answer; when I spake, they did not hear: but they did evil before mine eyes, and chose that in which I delighted not.

Matthew 22:1 Jesus spoke to them again in parables, saying: 2 “The kingdom of heaven is like a king who prepared a wedding banquet for his son. 3 He sent his servants to those who had been invited to the banquet to tell them to come, but they refused to come.

Matthew 23:37 “Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you who kill the prophets and stone those sent to you, how often I have longed to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, and you were not willing.

All of these passages show God reaching out to people to humble themselves and turn from their wicked ways, but some chose their own evil ways instead of humbling themselves and acknowledging theirs sins. Why would God reach out to them if they had no ability to humble themselves and repent? I don't believe He would. That would not make any sense.

Dave L said:

The Creeds define Christian belief. Cults are those who do not agree with them.

Click to expand...

You are equating some useless creeds with scripture itself. Creeds made by people who were not the authors of the Bible. That is just utter foolishness.

Dave L said:

The wedding call was for wicked Israel to repent. They did not and lost the nation in 70 AD.

You think the atonement cannot save. Unless the self-righteous make up the difference with their works (obedience).

Click to expand...

The wedding invitation was for individuals to repent. Why would those who refused to come be called to repent if they couldn't? That's the question you can't answer.

Is God in the business of wasting His time offering salvation to people who are not able to accept it? Of course not. He invited them because they, like all people, are capable of choosing to accept it or reject it. The fact is that some of them accepted the invitation and the rest didn't (Romans 11:5 - a remnant was saved).

The wedding invitation went out to the Gentiles, also (Matt 22:9-10). Not sure why you didn't mention that. Like the Jews, some Gentiles have accepted it and some haven't. All people are responsible to accept or reject the invitation.

Nova2216 said:

"Preaching Christ" is teaching the gospel which saves which includes water immersion for the remission of sins according to (Acts 2:38,47 ; 8:5,12,13,26-40 ; 16:30-34 ; 22:16) (Mark 16:15,16) (Jn 3:3-5,23) (1Peter 3:20,21) (Col. 2:12) (Titus 3:5) (Heb.10:22) (Rom. 6:3-6,16-18).

Ac 8:5 Then Philip went down to the city of Samaria, and preached Christ unto them.

Ac 8:12 But when they believed Philip preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women.

Ac 8:35 Then Philip opened his mouth, and began at the same scripture, and preached unto him Jesus. 36 And as they went on their way, they came unto a certain water: and the eunuch said, See, here is water; what doth hinder me to be baptized? 37 And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God. 38 And he commanded the chariot to stand still: and they went down both into the water, both Philip and the eunuch; and he baptized him. 39 And when they were come up out of the water, the Spirit of the Lord caught away Philip, that the eunuch saw him no more: and he went on his way rejoicing.


8:5 preaching Christ

8:12 preaching the things concerning the kingdom must include water baptism

8:35 How did the eunuch know about water immersion?

The text just says Philip preached Christ.


Why is baptism (in water) important? (Mark 16:16) (Acts 22:16)

(Jn 3:3-5) you cannot enter the kingdom (the church / the saved) unless you are baptized in water for the remission of sins (Acts 2:38,47) (Mark 16:15,16) (1Peter 3:20,21) (Titus 3:5) (Rom. 6:3-6,16-18)


Baptism (in water) doth now save us... (1Peter 3:20,21)


The thief on the cross lived and was saved under the OT Law system.

He was never commanded to be baptized for the remission of sins.


When one is baptized correctly they are baptized into Christs death (Rom. 6:3-6).

How could the thief be baptized into the death of Christ WHILE CHRIST IS STILL ALIVE?


The NT will of Christ was not in affect until the death of Christ (Heb. 7:12 ; 8:6-13 ; 9:15-17 ; 10:9,10)


2Ti 2:15 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.



Read more here.
Mission Printing Home Page

Click to expand...

You misinterpret all of those passages. For example, John 3 has absolutely nothing to do with water baptism. Jesus contrasted natural birth with being born of the Spirit. Natural birth isn't enough since all people are born naturally. You must also be born of the Spirit in order to be born again.

Tell me, if water baptism was required in order to be saved, why did the people Peter preached to in the following passage receive the Spirit before being water baptized?

Acts 10:43 All the prophets testify about him that everyone who believes in him receives forgiveness of sins through his name.” 44 While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit came on all who heard the message. 45 The circumcised believers who had come with Peter were astonished that the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out even on Gentiles. 46 For they heard them speaking in tongues and praising God. Then Peter said, 47 “Surely no one can stand in the way of their being baptized with water. They have received the Holy Spirit just as we have.” 48 So he ordered that they be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. Then they asked Peter to stay with them for a few days.

We are saved the moment we receive the Holy Spirit. These people were saved and then after that Peter said they should be water baptized. This shows clearly that water baptism is not necessary for salvation and is rather intended to be the first act of obedience after salvation, if possible.

What about those who die before they can be water baptized or are unable to be water baptized for some other reason? Are they not saved?

Mark Quayle said:

With a handle like yours, I should think you would know better than to use your references to God's impartiality to defend your thesis here.

Click to expand...

I think you probably don't know what my handle means. Did you know that you are a spiritual Jew, too?

Romans 2:28 A person is not a Jew who is one only outwardly, nor is circumcision merely outward and physical. 29 No, a person is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is circumcision of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the written code. Such a person’s praise is not from other people, but from God.

Every one of those verses refer to a specific way that God is impartial. After all, was Israel not a favorite, particular, specially dealt with? And why --because they were better? --Of course not, but because God chose them for his purposes.

"God is impartial", because he is just and can't be bribed or coerced. "God is impartial", because all have sinned. "God is impartial" because the elect are chosen from both Jew and Greek. "God is impartial" because a person's temporal or social status is of no real consequence. "God is impartial" because he judges according to what a person does, and not according to our sight. --It does not say "God is impartial because he has no particular plans for anybody that he doesn't also plan for everybody."

Click to expand...

I disagree. We're talking about salvation here. Why would God choose to create billions of people while giving salvation to some and withholding it from the rest? What kind of God is that? A God who only cares about some people but not the rest. Is that the impression you get from reading passages like John 3:16 and 1 John 2:1-2?

1 Tim 2:3-6, The context shows the impetus is that God is the only Savior of any person.

Click to expand...

Are you sure you actually read the passage? Let's look at it.

1 Tim 2:3 This is good, and pleases God our Savior, 4 who wants all people to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth. 5 For there is one God and one mediator between God and mankind, the man Christ Jesus, 6 who gave himself as a ransom for all people. This has now been witnessed to at the proper time.

Do you believe that God wants all people to be saved as this scripture clearly says? Do you believe that Jesus "gave Himself as a ransom for all people" as this scripture clearly says?

It specifically says that God " Acts 17:30-31, He is saying that people everywhere, (i.e. not from Israel alone), are included in those required to repent.

Click to expand...

You take so much scripture out of context.

Acts 17:30 In the past God overlooked such ignorance, but now he commands all people everywhere to repent. 31 For he has set a day when he will judge the world with justice by the man he has appointed. He has given proof of this to everyone by raising him from the dead.”

Are you willing to acknowledge that the scope of people that God commands to repent is the same as the scope of people that He will judge "by the man He has apointed" (Christ), which is "everyone" in "the world"? If so, then don't you believe that He is going to judge literally all people?

Romans 14:10 You, then, why do you judge your brother or sister? Or why do you treat them with contempt? For we will all stand before God’s judgment seat. 11 It is written: “‘As surely as I live,’ says the Lord, every knee will bow before me; every tongue will acknowledge God.’” 12 So then, each of us will give an account of ourselves to God.

2 Peter 3:9, Contextually is speaking to and speaking about all the Elect.

Click to expand...

Why would God need to be patient while waiting for the elect to repent if their repentance is entirely up to Him? Can you not see how that makes no sense? If it isn't up to us at all on whether to repent or not (due to supposedly not having free will) then there would be no need for God to patiently wait for people to repent.

Ezekiel 18:21-32 says he doesn't take pleasure in the death of anyone --what has that to do with your thesis?

Click to expand...

It doesn't just say that. It also says that He would rather that they had turned from their wicked ways and lived. You seem to never actually read passages like those carefully.

Why would God say that He would rather that they had turned from their wicked ways if they had no ability to turn from their wicked ways?

Ezekiel 18:23 Have I any pleasure at all that the wicked should die? saith the Lord God: and not that he should return from his ways, and live?

Do you not ever even think of these things? Why would you overlook that from that passage? You always only see half of the big picture. You see the part about Him not taking pleasure in the death of the wicked and somehow miss the part which indicates that He wishes they would have turned from their ways instead.

If He truly does not take pleasure in their death then why did He create them with no chance of being saved? Is He a glutton for punishment? Why would He say He'd rather they have turned from their ways if they couldn't turn from their ways? That would make no sense.

Mark Quayle said:

I have not switched at all. Where do you get that? Judas (as with anyone else) is incapable of believing salvifically, without the work of God in regenerating. Many many people believe in God, intellectually, and some even believe Christ is the only savior, like the devil believes it.

Click to expand...

Why are people without excuse for not believing salvifically if they are incapable of believing?

What is your interpretation of this passage:

Romans 1:18 The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of people, who suppress the truth by their wickedness, 19 since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. 20 For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse. 21 For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22 Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools 23 and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like a mortal human being and birds and animals and reptiles.

There's a few things to notice here.

First, God is angry (wrath of God) about "all the godlessness and wickedness of people"? Why would that be the case if people are totally depraved as Calvinism teaches? He is angry with people for just being themselves as they were created to be through no choice of their own? Really? Do you think that makes sense?

Notice that it says "they knew God" in the context of knowing "God's invisible qualities" like "His eternal power and divine nature". How can this be if they were totally depraved? Doesn't Calvinism teach that people are totally depraved from birth? How could these totally depraved, wicked people have previously known God (not just His existance but His qualities)?

They didn't just know of God's existence but they knew His character and that man's wickedness angered Him. Yet, they still took part in wickedness. They were not born futile but "became futile". They were not born with "foolish hearts" but their hearts were darkened. They were not born as fools but "became fools". Calvinism does not take any of this into account.

Lastly, Paul makes it clear that the wicked have no excuse for their wickedness. This completely contradicts Calvinism. If people are naturally totally depraved as Calvinism teaches, then that would be a good excuse for being wicked and rejecting God and His Son Jesus Christ because that would mean they can't help but to be wicked and reject Him. But, Paul says they have no excuse.

Spiritual Jew said:

Why would God choose to create billions of people while giving salvation to some and withholding it from the rest? What kind of God is that? A God who only cares about some people but not the rest. Is that the impression you get from reading passages like John 3:16 and 1 John 2:1-2?

Click to expand...

Why would the owner of the fields pay some workers according to contract for working all day, then pay those who worked only an hour the same total amount? Because he is generous to SOME. (Matthew 20). Why would God say "Make the heart of this people calloused; make their ears dull and close their eyes. Otherwise they might see with their eyes, hear with their ears, understand with their hearts, and turn and be healed."(Isaiah 6:10) Doesn't that sound like "withholding"?

Spiritual Jew said:

Are you sure you actually read the passage? Let's look at it.

1 Tim 2:3 This is good, and pleases God our Savior, 4 who wants all people to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth. 5 For there is one God and one mediator between God and mankind, the man Christ Jesus, 6 who gave himself as a ransom for all people. This has now been witnessed to at the proper time.

Do you believe that God wants all people to be saved as this scripture clearly says? Do you believe that Jesus "gave Himself as a ransom for all people" as this scripture clearly says?

You take so much scripture out of context.

Acts 17:30 In the past God overlooked such ignorance, but now he commands all people everywhere to repent. 31 For he has set a day when he will judge the world with justice by the man he has appointed. He has given proof of this to everyone by raising him from the dead.”

Are you willing to acknowledge that the scope of people that God commands to repent is the same as the scope of people that He will judge "by the man He has apointed" (Christ), which is "everyone" in "the world"? If so, then don't you believe that He is going to judge literally all people?

Romans 14:10 You, then, why do you judge your brother or sister? Or why do you treat them with contempt? For we will all stand before God’s judgment seat. 11 It is written: “‘As surely as I live,’ says the Lord, every knee will bow before me; every tongue will acknowledge God.’” 12 So then, each of us will give an account of ourselves to God.

Why would God need to be patient while waiting for the elect to repent if their repentance is entirely up to Him? Can you not see how that makes no sense? If it isn't up to us at all on whether to repent or not (due to supposedly not having free will) then there would be no need for God to patiently wait for people to repent.

It doesn't just say that. It also says that He would rather that they had turned from their wicked ways and lived. You seem to never actually read passages like those carefully.

Why would God say that He would rather that they had turned from their wicked ways if they had no ability to turn from their wicked ways?

Ezekiel 18:23 Have I any pleasure at all that the wicked should die? saith the Lord God: and not that he should return from his ways, and live?

Do you not ever even think of these things? Why would you overlook that from that passage? You always only see half of the big picture. You see the part about Him not taking pleasure in the death of the wicked and somehow miss the part which indicates that He wishes they would have turned from their ways instead.

If He truly does not take pleasure in their death then why did He create them with no chance of being saved? Is He a glutton for punishment? Why would He say He'd rather they have turned from their ways if they couldn't turn from their ways? That would make no sense.

Click to expand...

In keeping with your tone, I say, read it again. 1 Timothy 2 says "...there is ONE God and ONE Mediator between God and man.." I.e. THERE IS NO OTHER. All people are to be preached to, and all are required to repent. And yes, even those whose will is corrupt and are unable to repent. If they do not repent, they are already condemned.

No, I do not accept your take on 1 Timothy 2:3. I do believe what it says, but it does not say what you take it to mean. Are you willing to admit that God can do as he says and not how you take it to mean? Are you willing to admit that God can command absolutely everyone to repent, yet not provide them means out of their self-willed predicament? Are not the vessels created for destruction, his to do with as he pleases? (Romans 9)

Will you acknowledge that God should gain no pleasure from the death of the wicked, yet relegate them to destruction? He does this for his own purposes --and his own glory (Romans 9 again --Read it!). Of course he gains no pleasure from destruction! That proves nothing about to whom he gives his particular mercy.

"Chance of being saved"? Why do you say "chance"? Do you mean, "ability"? Chance is a fiction. You would leave God's choice of members comprising the PERFECT Bride of Christ to "CHANCE"? Don't you ever even think of these things? Chance is a logical fiction. Nothing can happen by chance. God directs all things, if no other way, logically by the fact that he is First Cause.

By the way, Ezekiel 18:23 is not written about the elect, the Church, but of the nation of Israel. He is referring to physical death, punishment for disobedience to the law. But even if the principle transfers to the ultimately lost, that he wishes it did not have to be so, remember he also did not delight in having to die, yet the purposes of God were more important than his suffering. The purposes of God are even more important than the lives of the lost.

"Why would God need to be patient while waiting for the elect to repent if their repentance is entirely up to Him?" Their lack of repentence is not entirely up to him --they WILL NOT to repent; but their ABILITY to repent, their escape from slavery to self-willed sin --that is up to him. TAKE NOTE and don't forget it on your next condescending answer: THEY WILL TO REBEL AGAINST HIM. By no means do I deny THEY DO CHOOSE to do wrong. BUT, if God has chosen them (the Elect), he will sooner or later give them the Spirit of God, transforming them from slavery to sin to slavery to Christ, enabling them to repent --so yes, it is up to them at that point, and they indeed will repent --all in good time.

Tolworth John said:

John 6:39+40 I will loose none of those he ( God the Father ) has given me, but rase them up on the last day. This is my Father's will, that everyone who looks to the Son and believes in him will have eternal life and I will raise them up on the last day.

We are saved because God chose us and saved because it is Jesus who keeps us safe.

Click to expand...

The problem with that typical proof text from Calvinism, is that Jesus lost ONE of those that the Father gave Him - JUDAS.

Joh 17:12 While I was with them in the world, I kept them in thy name: those that thou gavest me I have kept, and NONE of them is lost, EXCEPT the son of perdition; that the scripture might be fulfilled. (Judas)

Thus being given to Jesus by the father is not proof of unconditional Election, or irresistible grace, since ONE of the 12 given to Jesus was lost.

Kenny'sID said:

Shame on you for twisting scripture, he was clearly both dead and lost to his father

“But the father said to his servants, ‘Quick! Bring the best robe and put it on him. Put a ring on his finger and sandals on his feet. 23 Bring the fattened calf and kill it. Let’s have a feast and celebrate. 24 For this son of mine was dead and is alive again; he was lost and is found.’ So they began to celebrate.

DNA? lol! we all have God's dna, even the unsaved. What a frail attempt at changing the meaning of the bible, but if I've said it once I've said it several times, changing the word is the only way to make your end of this work.

Curious, who taught you the dna spin?

Click to expand...

You’re right, and the DNA spin is just trying to prove that once a son, always a son, is true.

He was obviously a dead son, before returning.

The prodigal son.


In the prodigal son story, the father represents God, thus the son represents believers who are Gods adopted sons.


He’s already a son when the story starts.


He leaves the father to live in sin


When he returns to the father in repentance, the father says: this is my son WHO WAS DEAD, but is now alive AGAIN, he WAS LOST, but now IS FOUND.


Luk 15:32 It was meet that we should make merry, and be glad: for this thy brother *was dead*, and is *alive again*; and *was lost*, and *is found*.


He obviously wasn’t dead physically and resurrected.


How then was he dead?


He was dead in his sins.


Eph 2:1 And you hath he quickened,who *were dead* in *trespasses and sins*


Thus the son was alive, left his Father to live a sinful life, became DEAD in his sins, then returned in repentance, and became alive AGAIN.

,

Spiritual Jew said:

Why are people without excuse for not believing salvifically if they are incapable of believing?

Click to expand...

He explains why! They have sinned, and willfully refuse to repent. Their will --once again-- THEIR WILL is enslaved to sin. THEY WILL NOT, and so they cannot.

Spiritual Jew said:

First, God is angry (wrath of God) about "all the godlessness and wickedness of people"? Why would that be the case if people are totally depraved as Calvinism teaches? He is angry with people for just being themselves as they were created to be through no choice of their own? Really? Do you think that makes sense?

Click to expand...

Of course that makes no sense, because you have misrepresented what Calvinism teaches. Do you not know what Total Depravity means? As a result of the fall, they WILL not to believe --where do you get that they have no choice in the matter? Calvinism teaches that they CHOOSE to sin, CHOOSE to reject the obvious fact displayed in nature that the Creator does indeed exist, CHOOSE not to submit to him. Total Depravity says they always will not submit, and so they cannot, because they are [willing] slaves to sin. The only way out of their self-willed predicament is the work of God in them.

Spiritual Jew said:

Notice that it says "they knew God" in the context of knowing "God's invisible qualities" like "His eternal power and divine nature". How can this be if they were totally depraved? Doesn't Calvinism teach that people are totally depraved from birth? How could these totally depraved, wicked people have previously known God (not just His existance but His qualities)?

Click to expand...

You answered it yourself. "They knew God" from his general revelation --his invisible qualities, and his eternal power and divine nature known by what is visible --yet they WILL not believe. Again --they are SLAVES to sin.

Spiritual Jew said:

(said to Dave L) Why would those who refused to come be called to repent if they couldn't? That's the question you can't answer.

Click to expand...

You could answer it yourself, but you won't, because it would destroy your thesis. Calvinism blames THEM. They WILL NOT TO COME. Again, they are slaves to sin. What is so hard to understand about that?

Spiritual Jew said:

They didn't just know of God's existence but they knew His character and that man's wickedness angered Him. Yet, they still took part in wickedness. They were not born futile but "became futile". They were not born with "foolish hearts" but their hearts were darkened. They were not born as fools but "became fools". Calvinism does not take any of this into account.

Click to expand...

Not to cut you too short, but where does it say they were not born futile, foolish etc? It does say that what they did makes them that --and increasingly so, actually. If scripture says that they have inherited a sinful nature from Adam, then it is so. Can you acknowledge they are born with a sinful nature?

Spiritual Jew said:

Lastly, Paul makes it clear that the wicked have no excuse for their wickedness. This completely contradicts Calvinism. If people are naturally totally depraved as Calvinism teaches, then that would be a good excuse for being wicked and rejecting God and His Son Jesus Christ because that would mean they can't help but to be wicked and reject Him. But, Paul says they have no excuse.

Click to expand...

It does not contradict Calvinism at all. It apparently contradicts your notion of Calvinism, because you have been getting Calvinism wrong consistently. Calvinism give nobody any excuse. You do! While you gnaw your fists against Calvinism, go to a Reformed Theology site and do a good study on the meaning of "Total Depravity". You've got it wrong.

And while you are at it, consider the depth of difference between the rights of Creator and created. Whatever else you may think of Calvinism, and regardless of what Calvinism says, God has the absolute right to do as he pleases with his creation. He owes us NOTHING. We have no right to demand anything --not even that his ways make sense to us. I note, for example, our presupposition that "the command implies the ability to obey." God is not like us.

Francis Drake said:

Despite travelling to a distant location, and spending all the money on wine women and song, he never ceased being his father's son. He never lost his father's genes and DNA deep in his body.
Losing the cash only indicates loss of reward, not loss of life.

Click to expand...

Not so!

The prodigal son.


In the prodigal son story, the father represents God, thus the son represents believers who are Gods adopted sons.


He’s already a son when the story starts.


He leaves the father to live in sin


When he returns to the father in repentance, the father says: this is my son WHO WAS DEAD, but is now alive AGAIN, he WAS LOST, but now IS FOUND.


Luk 15:32 It was meet that we should make merry, and be glad: for this thy brother *was dead*, and is *alive again*; and *was lost*, and *is found*.


He obviously wasn’t dead physically and resurrected.


How then was he dead?


He was dead in his sins.


Eph 2:1 And you hath he quickened,who *were dead* in *trespasses and sins*


Thus the son was alive, left his Father to live a sinful life, became DEAD in his sins, then returned in repentance, and became alive AGAIN.

Spiritual Jew said:

You misinterpret all of those passages. For example, John 3 has absolutely nothing to do with water baptism. Jesus contrasted natural birth with being born of the Spirit. Natural birth isn't enough since all people are born naturally. You must also be born of the Spirit in order to be born again.

Tell me, if water baptism was required in order to be saved, why did the people Peter preached to in the following passage receive the Spirit before being water baptized?

Acts 10:43 All the prophets testify about him that everyone who believes in him receives forgiveness of sins through his name.” 44 While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit came on all who heard the message. 45 The circumcised believers who had come with Peter were astonished that the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out even on Gentiles. 46 For they heard them speaking in tongues and praising God. Then Peter said, 47 “Surely no one can stand in the way of their being baptized with water. They have received the Holy Spirit just as we have.” 48 So he ordered that they be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. Then they asked Peter to stay with them for a few days.

We are saved the moment we receive the Holy Spirit. These people were saved and then after that Peter said they should be water baptized. This shows clearly that water baptism is not necessary for salvation and is rather intended to be the first act of obedience after salvation, if possible.

What about those who die before they can be water baptized or are unable to be water baptized for some other reason? Are they not saved?

Click to expand...

So you claim (Jn 3) has nothing to do with water baptism!!!

Notice please verse 23.

Joh 3:23 And John also was baptizing in Aenon near to Salim, because there was much water there: and they came, and were baptized. (Acts 22:16)

Are you still sure I do not know what I am teaching?


Those in (Acts 10:48) were ordered to be baptized (in water as those in Ac. 8:5,12,13,26-40).

Why were they commanded to do so - Baptism saves according to (Mark 16:15,16) (1Peter 3:20,21) (Rom. 6:3,4 ; 16-18) (Gal. 3:27)


Mark 16:15,16 ---> Bel + Bapt. = Saved



Read more here.
Mission Printing Home Page

Mark Quayle said:

Of course that makes no sense, because you have misrepresented what Calvinism teaches. Do you not know what Total Depravity means? As a result of the fall, they WILL not to believe --where do you get that they have no choice in the matter? Calvinism teaches that they CHOOSE to sin, CHOOSE to reject the obvious fact displayed in nature that the Creator does indeed exist, CHOOSE not to submit to him. Total Depravity says they always will not submit, and so they cannot, because they are [willing] slaves to sin. The only way out of their self-willed predicament is the work of God in them.

Click to expand...

It’s not what they choose, it’s what the Calvinist version of God chose.

In reformed/Calvinist doctrine, because God decreed the fall of man into sin, men are born totally depraved and spiritually dead, and thus unable to believe at all until first regenerated and made alive, and then they can believe.

But for the non elect, God has arbitrarily decreed that He will withhold regeneration, and leave them spiritually dead and unable to believe - but then damns them to hell for not believing.

Thus God makes it impossible for the non elect to believe, then burns them in the lake of fire forever, for their unbelief.

To add insult to injury, God arbitrarily decides most of His creation will burn in Hell by withholding election from them, and He also arbitrarily hates them - per the Romans 9 Calvinist dogma that God loved elect Jacob, but hated non elect Esau.

Since Jesus said most people will be lost, and only FEW will be saved, that means that the God of Calvinism has arbitrarily decreed that 75% or more of mankind is elected unto damnation, and 25% or less, are of the lucky elect, who won the salvation lottery.

And Calvinists are just fine with that.

Calvinism is an insult to Gods character and nature.