Should we pray for the lost?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Romanbear

Active Member
Jun 24, 2003
394
9
Denver Co.
✟579.00
Faith
Christian
Hi everyone; :wave:
In a bible Q&A this question was asked. Should we pray for the Lost. Since the lost have a will of there own said the Arminians and God will not interfear with it. There is little reason to pray for the Lost because God will not go against there will.
Some of the Calvinist said that, since God is the one who does all of it and no part comes from man. That this seemed to them to be a reasonable solution.
My self being labled an Arminian by Calvinist and would have to agree that I do believe similarly as Arminians.As far as Arminianism how ever on this point I have to disagree.
2Pe 3:9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.

This verse establishes that God is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance. It is not His will that any perish.Then.

Mat 18:19 Again I say unto you, That if two of you shall agree on earth as touching any thing that they shall ask, it shall be done for them of my Father which is in heaven.

This verse clearly says that if two of us agree and ask God He will grant it.
Lets face it, God is all powerful. If He is then He may have a way to influence a person and leave there freewill in tact. I mean He did Change the mind of Jonah about going to Nineveh. God does have the power to change the circumstance in our lives so that we do His will,to bring certain of His plans to light.

Personally I Love my Lord and Savior and His will is my will what He wants I want as well for Him. So shouldn't we pray for the Lost
What say you?
In Christ;
romanbear
 
  • Like
Reactions: CeCe

duster1az

Active Member
Jun 25, 2003
291
0
63
Southwest
Visit site
✟421.00
Faith
Christian
Romanbear writes: "Lets face it, God is all powerful. If He is then He may have a way to influence a person and leave there freewill in tact."

I consider the above statement to be one of intelligence.

God didn't created the human will as an instrument to defeat Himself. I believe it was created for the realization of His own purposes. Even though God is sovereign and could coerce human will, He works within the individual "both to will and to work for His good pleasure" (Phil. 2:13).

I believe there are two types of calling. One is a general call (John 12:32) and the other is an effictive call (John 6:44). One may be resisted and the other not. The vision that God creates in the heart and the persuasion He exercises produces a favorable reaction on the part of the one effectively called. Even though God's divine persuasion is limitless, it still remains persuasion and the favorable decision made for Christ is the person's own apart from coersion.

The divine invitation of "whosoever will may come" is still true, but it's also true the none will ever come apart from this effective call.

In Christ,
Tracey
 
Upvote 0
Hi folks: I can see no evidence of an irrestible calling or irresistible grace.
a."you stiff-necked people with uncir. hearts and ears! You are just like your fathers: you always resist the Holy Spirit", Acts 7:51
b. "Irresistible grace" is an oxymoron: if it is grace, it must be a gift and cannot be forced(however kindly or behind the scenes) upon the recipient. The NT speaks of those who have "spurned the Son of God...and outraged the Spirit of Grace", Heb.10:29. God bless, Al
 
Upvote 0

duster1az

Active Member
Jun 25, 2003
291
0
63
Southwest
Visit site
✟421.00
Faith
Christian
Allen2 writes: "Hi folks: I can see no evidence of an irrestible calling or irresistible grace.
a."you stiff-necked people with uncir. hearts and ears! You are just like your fathers: you always resist the Holy Spirit", Acts 7:51
b. "Irresistible grace" is an oxymoron: if it is grace, it must be a gift and cannot be forced(however kindly or behind the scenes) upon the recipient. The NT speaks of those who have "spurned the Son of God...and outraged the Spirit of Grace", Heb.10:29. God bless, Al"

"And we know that God causes all things to work together for good to those who love God, to those who are called according to His purpose. For whom He foreknew, He also predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son, that He might be the first-born among many brethren; and whom He predestined, these He also called; and whom He called, these He also justified; and whom He justified , these He also glorified" (Romans 8:28-30).

These verses seem to be evidence of an irresistable calling through grace.

The verses you quote, IMO, are addressing Jews who are interested in Christ, but not to the extent of receiving His death as the fulfillment and termination of Jewish sacrifices. The confusion of law and grace ia always troubling, but situations like that had never before or since existed.

It should be remembered that there's a peculiar blindness upon Israel respecting the gospel. Christ spoke about the blindness: "For judgement I came into this world, that those who do not see may see; and that those who see may become blind" (John 9:39). The blindness was predicted by (Isaiah 6:9-10) and seeing that Paul speaks of it again in (2 Cor. 3:14-16) it's not strange that there would be difficulty and hesitation to accept on the part of unregenerate Jews.

In Christ,
Tracey
 
Upvote 0

frumanchu

God's justice does not demand second chances
Supporter
Apr 5, 2003
6,713
469
47
Ohio
✟62,780.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Libertarian
Romanbear said:
Hi everyone; :wave:
In a bible Q&A this question was asked. Should we pray for the Lost. Since the lost have a will of there own said the Arminians and God will not interfear with it. There is little reason to pray for the Lost because God will not go against there will.
Some of the Calvinist said that, since God is the one who does all of it and no part comes from man. That this seemed to them to be a reasonable solution.
My self being labled an Arminian by Calvinist and would have to agree that I do believe similarly as Arminians.As far as Arminianism how ever on this point I have to disagree.

Romanbear, I think both responses are incorrect even in light of their own theology. Prayer is an act of faith. Prayer is a means of relationship. Christ Himself petitioned the Father in the Garden that the cup pass from Him, yet not His will but the Father's be done. There is nothing wrong with bringing such requests before the Father. Surely I am within the will of God to pray for the salvation of my children, my best friend, and others who I know and love who do not yet know the Lord.

2Pe 3:9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.

This verse establishes that God is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance. It is not His will that any perish.Then.

Hmm. I believe this verse does not say what you believe it to. Those being referred to are the elect, the believers. In the verse prior he addresses the 'beloved' and if you look at the larger context of the verse it doesn't make sense for the 'us' in the verse (to which 'all' and 'any' refer) to be all men individually. So, I don't believe this verse of itself is grounds for praying for the lost.

Mat 18:19 Again I say unto you, That if two of you shall agree on earth as touching any thing that they shall ask, it shall be done for them of my Father which is in heaven.

This verse clearly says that if two of us agree and ask God He will grant it.
Lets face it, God is all powerful. If He is then He may have a way to influence a person and leave there freewill in tact. I mean He did Change the mind of Jonah about going to Nineveh. God does have the power to change the circumstance in our lives so that we do His will,to bring certain of His plans to light.

I find that interesting. You have said you are an Arminian (or at least that you've been labeled such) and yet you speak of God being able to bring about His will leaving man's intact. That sounds very Calvinist:) But here we have a dilemma. However, that position cannot stand alongside your interpretation of 2 Peter 3:9, for if He truly had the power and ability you say then all men WOULD come to repentance and we know that is not the case. It opens a whole can of worms as well about the nature of man's will and its role in salvation. I'd enjoy further discussion, but I digress...

Personally I Love my Lord and Savior and His will is my will what He wants I want as well for Him. So shouldn't we pray for the Lost
What say you?

Absolutely! Although I tend to shy away from a 'blanket prayer' for all lost everywhere and choose to keep mine more specific. But my 'prayer formula' always puts me in a position of submission to the will of God above all else. P.R.A.Y - Praise Repent Ask Yield I've found that it at least cuts down on the number of times the Spirit groans for me when words fail;)
 
Upvote 0

Romanbear

Active Member
Jun 24, 2003
394
9
Denver Co.
✟579.00
Faith
Christian
Hi Duster az; :wave:
Thankyou for the Kind response, It's nice to have someone agree with you on a given subject.I've never really seen conviction as anything other than just a call.However anycall you respond to is effectual. I felt that call everytime I went to church as a child growing up but I regretfully had to wait until I was sixteen to answer it. :)

Hi Allen2; :wave:
I don't believe in irresistable grace either. Salvation is a gift and it won't be forced down your throat.Being shoved down my throat by my parents was one of the reasons I resisted through most of my childhood against accepting Christ.

Can't you see though that most hear the gospel more than once,before they respond.Sometimes weather because of your own mood or the particular drawing of the Holy Spirit the call is stronger or weaker sometimes you feel nothing at all but then there are times when because the climate is right you come apart at the seams and drop to your knees and accept Christ. Your right though there is no such thing as "Irresistable Grace" the term isn't in any version of the Bible that I've ever read. But then I have to think of Paul.When He heard Christ ask him why he persecuted Him.When Paul knew full well that Christ had been crucified.Paul had to be full of fear and once presented with such evidence how could he deny that Christ was who He said He was.If he believed this then Paul was saved. Don't you agree that Paul was sort of hit over the head with it,and yet his freewill was still intact.After all when we are in a dark room and someone turns on the light we have admit that we can see better with the light on than off.

Please don't misinterpret what I'm trying to convey. I'm not a Calvinist, but I do believe that if God is who we believe Him to be, then there must be times when at least some of His creation is predestined to fulfill His purpose.

In Revelations we read about the two witnesses that preach to the world;
These have to be predestined to fulfill this prophecy.predestined means no choice.How ever everyone who belongs to Christ is not necessarily predestined,because not all of us have that much effect on the people around us,but are Christian never the less. :)

Hi frumanchu; :wave:
In referance to 2nd peter 3:9
A quote from you;
Hmm. I believe this verse does not say what you believe it to. Those being referred to are the elect, the believers. In the verse prior he addresses the 'beloved' and if you look at the larger context of the verse it doesn't make sense for the 'us' in the verse (to which 'all' and 'any' refer) to be all men individually. So, I don't believe this verse of itself is grounds for praying for the lost. .
My reply;
I don't believe the term elect is even mentioned here,but never the less we were all lost once and even though found the words "All" and "Any" mean exactly what they say "All" and "Any". There is no way you could know that everyone this letter was addressed to were in fact saved, because you can't see there heart. Although any and all who are saved are definitely elect.
Election ocurred when God Looked at His creation and He had seen who would have chosen Him. Therefore they are elected. The key here is who would "choose to follow Him" of coarse God see's all time past present and future all at once, because God is not effected by time He created it and lives out side of it. Therefore as we speak God is aware of everthing at once and always is.This is why somethings are predestined and somethings aren't.Man must be able to choose God and choose to Love God otherwise there is no true Love of Him.At anyrate if what you say is true then all men are elected.It's just that some actually most reject God, elected or not.Remember the Jews were the elect also because they were chosen and still are but some still reject.

We can't be given to Christ unless we believe and repent first.Elected maybe but until this happens we are not saved. We were all known before the foundation of the world. we are all His creation and it is not His will that any perrish.
It is most absurd to assume that someone is elect simply because Peter reffered to them as beloved. Did Peter save them, by calling them beloved?. Please don't take offense instead of classifying me as a Calvinist/Arminian. Truth be told I'm neither. Just a plain old bornagain Christian.
A quote from you;

P.R.A.Y - Praise Repent Ask Yield I love this because this is exactly what prayer is. True worship in it's greatist form.

In Christ;
Ray
 
Upvote 0

Reformationist

Non nobis domine sed tuo nomine da gloriam
Mar 7, 2002
14,273
465
51
✟37,095.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Romanbear said:
Hi everyone; :wave:
Should we pray for the Lost.

Absolutely. If a Christian does not pray for those who are lost then they show their lack of love for their fellow man and their lack of desire that the great and magnificent gift of salvation be given to others.

Since the lost have a will of there own said the Arminians and God will not interfear with it. There is little reason to pray for the Lost because God will not go against there will.

Is this what you think?

Some of the Calvinist said that, since God is the one who does all of it and no part comes from man.

I know of no Calvinist who says this.

2Pe 3:9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.

This verse establishes that God is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance. It is not His will that any perish.Then.

The Will of the Lord is often an easily misunderstood thing, as is the case here. First off, the "any" and "all" are clearly qualified when this verse is read in context. The epistle of 2 Peter is written and delivered to a Christian audience. Additionally, in 3:9 Peter says that the Lord is long suffering toward us. He is not talking about the world as a whole, but rather those whom the Lord will bring unto salvation. He is saying that God will not loose any of His chosen and so He does not execute His judgment upon a fallen world but refrains for the sake of His beloved in Christ.

Mat 18:19 Again I say unto you, That if two of you shall agree on earth as touching any thing that they shall ask, it shall be done for them of my Father which is in heaven.

This verse clearly says that if two of us agree and ask God He will grant it.

This has to be done in the Spirit of the Lord. If you don't believe me try and get a friend and the two of you pray for a sportscar. I'm sure you'd both be in agreement though I seriously doubt the Lord will grant your request. Any prayers submitted according to the counsel of the Word of God that are in accordance with His Will and will be given. That's your guarantee.

The entire sovereign Plan of God will be fulfilled. Nothing in His decreed Will will fail.

God bless
 
Upvote 0

frumanchu

God's justice does not demand second chances
Supporter
Apr 5, 2003
6,713
469
47
Ohio
✟62,780.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Libertarian
Romanbear said:
Hi frumanchu; :wave:

Election ocurred when God Looked at His creation and He had seen who would have chosen Him. Therefore they are elected. The key here is who would "choose to follow Him" of coarse God see's all time past present and future all at once, because God is not effected by time He created it and lives out side of it. Therefore as we speak God is aware of everthing at once and always is.This is why somethings are predestined and somethings aren't.Man must be able to choose God and choose to Love God otherwise there is no true Love of Him.At anyrate if what you say is true then all men are elected.It's just that some actually most reject God, elected or not.Remember the Jews were the elect also because they were chosen and still are but some still reject.

They are not all Israel who are called Israel. ;)

We can't be given to Christ unless we believe and repent first.Elected maybe but until this happens we are not saved. We were all known before the foundation of the world.

The word translated 'foreknow' in Romans 8:29 is a derivative of the word translated 'know' in Matthew 7:23 (Depart, for I never knew you). Clearly, not all were 'known' in the sense put forth here, which is one of intimacy..a special relationship.

Anyway, we both agree that we are to pray for the lost. We'll leave it at that unless you want to further explore the doctrine of predestination and election. :)
 
Upvote 0

Romanbear

Active Member
Jun 24, 2003
394
9
Denver Co.
✟579.00
Faith
Christian
Hi reformationist; :wave:
A quote from you;
Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Since the lost have a will of there own said the Arminians and God will not interfear with it. There is little reason to pray for the Lost because God will not go against there will.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Is this what you think?

My reply;
This is what some think. Not necessarily myself.
A quote from you;
Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Some of the Calvinist said that, since God is the one who does all of it and no part comes from man.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I know of no Calvinist who says this.

My reply;
You must not know very many Calvinist.

As far as the terms used in 2nd peter 3:9 "Any" and "All" I find it amazing that when Calvinist see scripture that doesn't line up with there doctrine. They're very quick to distract the real meaning, only to add there own. The term Beloved does not mean everyone who read the letter was saved simply because Peter called them beloved. Nor does it mean that they were elect. Churches at the beginning were no more pure Christian than they are today. In fact take a long hard look at Ananias and Sapphira were they Saved they Lied to the Holy Spirit. Roughly IMHO only about half who claim Christ is actually saved. The rest just think they are. So to assume that the term meant only the elect or saved is absurd.
A quote from you;
Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mat 18:19 Again I say unto you, That if two of you shall agree on earth as touching any thing that they shall ask, it shall be done for them of my Father which is in heaven.

This verse clearly says that if two of us agree and ask God He will grant it.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This has to be done in the Spirit of the Lord. If you don't believe me try and get a friend and the two of you pray for a sportscar.

My Reply;
Now your talking my language. In fact I've had more sport cars than I need and it's not because I prayed for them it's because my Lord and Savior has blessed me. Not that I'm desevering, but because He loves me.
It seems the more I give to other people the more He blesses me with my hearts desire.When I accepted Christ as a young man I had nothing to give. Then I started to give of my self and blessings just started rolling in it's the most amazing thing I'm rich with all that He has given me.
I never pray for material possesions for my self. I don't have to. I don't worry about them because my Lord knows what I have need of and provides it. Might I suggest if your desire is a sportscar then give,,, and it will return to you a 100 fold. But when you give don't do it because you want to receive more back. Give because you Love the Lord and want to do His will more than your own. Give because of the prompting of the Lord. He will tell you when to give and what to give. If you follow His promptings you will be blessed beyond your imagination.The more your blessed the more you give and so on.

In answer to your challenge I would like to remind you that if it's the Lord's will that I have a sportscar you can bet your last dollar that when prayed for it I will have it...

The Lord is not willing that any should perrish that all should come to repentance.

Think this one through if you're right then the beloved would be saved already. I believe that repentance is necessary before we are saved.I hope you do to. After saved it is no longer I that sins but the sin that dwells in my flesh.This is being under grace. Under grace instead of being under the law. So if Peter knew that all he refered to in 2nd peter 3:9 were in fact saved already then why come to repentance again as in this verse? do we have to repent over and over again or just aquire forgiveness?To repent is to turn from your sins. this means not to do these things again. This is impossible by our selves I admit this. as long as our flesh is in this world we will have sin. This sin is only in the flesh and is not attached to our souls.
Rom 7:14 For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin.
Rom 7:15 For that which I do I allow not: for what I would, that do I not; but what I hate, that do I.
Rom 7:16 If then I do that which I would not, I consent unto the law that it is good.
Rom 7:17 Now then it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.
So what good does it do to repent the breaking of the Law when it is no more I that do it?
Obviously Peter knew that not all were saved in the church. but yet he refered to them as beloved...
In Christ :)
Romanbear
 
Upvote 0

Romanbear

Active Member
Jun 24, 2003
394
9
Denver Co.
✟579.00
Faith
Christian
Hi frumanchu; :wave:
A quote from you;
They are not all Israel who are called Israel.
You're right some are grafted in.
A quote from you;
The word translated 'foreknow' in Romans 8:29 is a derivative of the word translated 'know' in Matthew 7:23 (Depart, for I never knew you). Clearly, not all were 'known' in the sense put forth here, which is one of intimacy..a special relationship.
My Reply
Mat 7:21 Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.
You're right again only those who do His will are infact saved. So many think that if they go to church and talk the religous talk that they're saved. Being saved means that you have surrendered to Christ allowing Him to live through you.Allowing His will through you.

We can explore any topic as long as we have respect for one another not allowing anger to do the debating for us. So far I've enjoyed our conversation.
In Christ; :)
Romanbear
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

frumanchu

God's justice does not demand second chances
Supporter
Apr 5, 2003
6,713
469
47
Ohio
✟62,780.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Libertarian
Romanbear said:
As far as the terms used in 2nd peter 3:9 "Any" and "All" I find it amazing that when Calvinist see scripture that doesn't line up with there doctrine. They're very quick to distract the real meaning, only to add there own. The term Beloved does not mean everyone who read the letter was saved simply because Peter called them beloved. Nor does it mean that they were elect. Churches at the beginning were no more pure Christian than they are today. In fact take a long hard look at Ananias and Sapphira were they Saved they Lied to the Holy Spirit. Roughly IMHO only about half who claim Christ is actually saved. The rest just think they are. So to assume that the term meant only the elect or saved is absurd.

Think this one through if you're right then the beloved would be saved already. I believe that repentance is necessary before we are saved.I hope you do to. After saved it is no longer I that sins but the sin that dwells in my flesh.This is being under grace. Under grace instead of being under the law. So if Peter knew that all he refered to in 2nd peter 3:9 were in fact saved already then why come to repentance again as in this verse?

I think you misunderstand what it is we're saying about this verse. I merely alluded to it in my prior response because I didn't think it germaine to the discussion. But, since you've addressed it again, let me explain further.

In its context this section follows strong words against false teachers in Chapter 2. Entering Chapter 3 Peter reminds them of what he covered largely in his first epistle, the promise and security of salvation and the trust and obedience of the saints. He warns them that scoffers will come in the last days sarcastically saying 'where is your Christ that's supposed to come? all this evil is around as it has always been and he hasn't come in judgement to wipe it all out!' Peter reminds them that just as the world was created and brought forth by the word, and by the word was judged in the flood wiping out mankind, so the word now preserves the present world, reserving it for the final judgement. Peter then reminds them that God is not bound by time...a thousand years with Him is as a day and vice versa. He is not slack concerning His promise. What promise? The promise that He will one day come in righteous judgement and bring an end to all unrighteousness. So why has it not happened yet? Because He is longsuffering toward us, not willing that any [of us] should perish but that all [of us] should come to repentance.

Obviously salvation is in view here. Let's take a closer look at the possible interpretations of the verse. I think both sides must agree that 'any' and 'all' refer back to the 'us' in the verse. The point of contention is whether 'us' is mankind (of which Peter and his audience are both members) or the elect (of which Peter and all true believers are members).

First, if we take the Arminian position and assume that the 'any' and 'all' refer to every individual person, then we have God reserving His judgement to give every person opportunity to come to repentance. The question must be asked then, at what point does He say "enough" and end it. What's the cutoff? What about those who were never given the chance? Or does Judgement really never come so long as men are being born? This interpretation seems to leave a number of questions unanswered.

Now let's look at it from a Calvinist point of view and assume that 'any' and 'all' refer to the elect. Since Peter speaks to them in contrast to false teachers, scoffers, etc. it can be reasonable to assume that those he is addressing, the recipients of the promise, are the saints...the believers. Looking at it in light of election we have Him being lonsuffering toward us [the elect], not willing that any [of the elect] should perish, but that all [of the elect] should come to repentance.

The objection has been raised...'if the elect are necessarily going to be saved anyway, then why does he even need to say this?' Again, look at the context. The scoffers have implied that the delay in His return means He's not really coming. Peter's purpose in 3:8-9 is to reassure his audience that there is nothing to fear. He is not slack, but rather patient and operating according to His own timetable. Furthermore, if He were to respond to the scoffers by showing up 'ahead of schedule' there is a big problem. The full number of the Gentiles will not have been reached. While election before the foundation of the world is UNTO salvation, it is not in and of itself the CAUSE of salvation. Election is a decree. Salvation is the carrying out of that decree. If He were to come prematurely, there would be men who were elect but that had not yet come to repentance and salvation. In essence, God would be abandoning the elect! And thus we have Peter's words...He is longsuffering towards the elect. He will not abandon them. He WILL bring each and every last one of His elect to salvation.

Contrary to what was put forth, I do not see the use of the term 'beloved' as implying that all who read the letter are saved. I believe it shows who Peter INTENDS the audience to be. Let me post an excerpt from a commentary:

"Peter’s Christian readers must realize that the apparent delay of divine judgment is a sign of God’s forbearance and mercy toward them, particularly toward the believers in their midst who have been confused and misled by the false teachers. Note that the scope of “all” is qualified by the word “us.” The repentance in view, for the sake of which God delays judgment, is that of God’s people rather than the world at large. God is not willing that any of His elect should perish (John 6:39)."

New Geneva study Bible. 1997, c1995 (electronic ed.) (2 Pe 3:9). Nashville: Thomas Nelson.

You said: "I find it amazing that when Calvinist see scripture that doesn't line up with there doctrine. They're very quick to distract the real meaning, only to add there own."

I submit that the Calvinist argument for the verse above is consistent and thorough, and when expounded upon logically does not leave one scratching their head as the Arminian version does.

Scriptural study is NOT always easy, and sometimes first appearances are not accurate. The same word in Greek is translated in different ways at different times. The Greek word translated 'all' in 2 Peter 3:9 is the same one translated 'all kinds of' in 1 Timothy 6:10 ("For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil, for which some have strayed from the faith in their greediness, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows." Actually, the King James Authorized Version does translate it simply as 'all'). If "'all' means all" as is so often spoken to Calvinists, then love of money is behind homosexuality and adultery and other such things. Due dilligence must be given to Scriptural study! :)
 
Upvote 0

Romanbear

Active Member
Jun 24, 2003
394
9
Denver Co.
✟579.00
Faith
Christian
Hi frumanchu; :wave:
A quote from you;
First, if we take the Arminian position and assume that the 'any' and 'all' refer to every individual person, then we have God reserving His judgement to give every person opportunity to come to repentance. The question must be asked then, at what point does He say "enough" and end it. What's the cutoff? What about those who were never given the chance? Or does Judgement really never come so long as men are being born? This interpretation seems to leave a number of questions unanswered.
My Reply;
Why do you assume that you know what Arminians believe.We believe in choice. That man has the opportunity to either accept Christ or reject Him. The cutoff place is death, or being turned over to a reprobate mind. As far as those who never had a chance. I don't know and I don't believe anyone else does either. There are a lot of questions that I have as well that are not answered in the Word.To theorize about them to try to make sense of them is ludicrous because men are only men and are wrong most of the time when they do this. Example; In Christ day the priest the scribes and the Pharisees were all wrong about the coming of the Messiah. To try to answer some of our questions gets very frustrating indeed,but be patient someday you'll have all the answers. It seems to me that most of the Calvinist I've spoken with, all seem to be in a hurry to know all there is to know. There are things yet still in the Bible that haven't been revealed and won't be until God is ready for them to be.
A quote from you;
I submit that the Calvinist argument for the verse above is consistent and thorough, and when expounded upon logically does not leave one scratching their head as the Arminian version does.
My Reply;
Who on God's earth ever said that doctrine had to be logical to be fact. Did God's word say any where that everything we want to know is in the scriptures? It doesn't say this does it?.
This seems to be a regular activity that Calvinist participate in. Where you have your own definitions for words that aren't logical to you. You take all and any and add to them to make the word seem logical. Calvinist do the same to John 3:16 when Christ was clearly speaking to Nicodemus. By saying that whosoever is only referring to the elect is absurd. From Nicodemus's response I don't think he understood what Christ was speaking about. Even though there is an apocryphal book known as the book of Nicodemus. No one knows if the man was ever really saved.
How about .
Rev 3:20 Behold, I stand at the door, and knock: if any man hear my voice, and open the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with me.

I already know what your response will be but my question will throw you. If we have no choice why does Christ stand at the door and Knock?And why are we given the choice to open the door a clear decision is required. I'll bet you were already to tell me how we are dead and can't hear unless regenerated.
Rom 10:13 For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.

This verse is good for Jews, Greeks or gentiles. How many do you think were Christian when Paul said this. Do you think that the synagogue was full of Christians? I don't know that he was in fact in a synagogue but this chapter does starts out like a sermon.
A quote from you;
Let's take a closer look at the possible interpretations of the verse.
My Reply;
You sound like a Greek scholar do you have a PHD in Greek? Or at least a 2000 year old greek dictionary. Why should I want to reinterpret the Bible. The Bible doesn't need our interpretation. and the more you interpret it the father away from the truth you become.

As I said in my previous post I have been labeled an Arminian by Calvinist. When this first happened to me I didn't know what he was talking about. When I found out I was a little irritated. I know who Jacobus Arminius was. I know that he studied at Calvin's college and while there turned half of that college of Calvinist into Arminians. A very remarkable man, but I follow no man. I follow Christ. I follow no doctrine as laid out by men but follow the doctrine of Christ.

There were no Calvinist before Augustine and I've never met a Jew who believed in Unconditional Election, Irresistible Grace, Limited Atonement,Total depravity of man, and Perseverance of the saints. none of these things are listed in the Bible but are only in the Calvinist logical mind. :scratch:
At the end of your post it says Sola Scriptura. This isn't appropriate for Calvinist it should read ("Sola Scriptura and Logical conclusion"). ;)
In Christ;
Romanbear
 
Upvote 0

Reformationist

Non nobis domine sed tuo nomine da gloriam
Mar 7, 2002
14,273
465
51
✟37,095.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
If I may I'd like to join the conversation. :)

Romanbear said:
Hi frumanchu; :wave:
Why do you assume that you know what Arminians believe.

All people who are reformed Christians are Arminians, in the theological sense, before they are Calvinists. Even if it is only for the time before they later rest their dependency fully upon the sovereign grace of God. So, just because Calvinists don't believe in unregenerate man's complete moral freedom, as do many Arminians, it doesn't mean that we don't know what Arminians believe.

We believe in choice.

As do all Christians, Calvinists included.

That man has the opportunity to either accept Christ or reject Him.

Again, this is something that most who subscribe to the reformed view meritoriously uphold as the Truth of the Gospel. Where we differ is in the root cause of a person's acceptance or rejection of the Gospel, and ultimately Christ Himself.

The cutoff place is death, or being turned over to a reprobate mind.

You use these terms, "death" and "being turned over to a reprobate mind," as if they are synonymous. Is that what you believe? Do you believe that once someone is turned over to a reprobate mind they are no longer capable of turning to Christ in repentence?

There are a lot of questions that I have as well that are not answered in the Word.To theorize about them to try to make sense of them is ludicrous because men are only men and are wrong most of the time when they do this.

I absolutely agree.

To try to answer some of our questions gets very frustrating indeed,but be patient someday you'll have all the answers.

No where in the Word, nor in a logically assumed stance on the nature of glorification is the concept of "having all the answers" even hinted at. When we are glorified we will definitely be in perfect harmony with the Will of God but we cannot, nor will we, ever know what it means to be infinite. Being infinite is something that is exclusive to infinite beings, of which I am only aware of the Godhead.

It seems to me that most of the Calvinist I've spoken with, all seem to be in a hurry to know all there is to know. There are things yet still in the Bible that haven't been revealed and won't be until God is ready for them to be.

I would say that some of the most studious, and well respected theologians of evangelical Christianty were, and are, reformed but I think it's a bit presumptuous to imply that "being in a hurry to know all there is to know" is a trait exclusive to Calvinists. On the contrary, I'd say that is a defining trait of humanity as a whole.

This seems to be a regular activity that Calvinist participate in. Where you have your own definitions for words that aren't logical to you. You take all and any and add to them to make the word seem logical. Calvinist do the same to John 3:16 when Christ was clearly speaking to Nicodemus. By saying that whosoever is only referring to the elect is absurd.

Romanbear, it is not the reformed belief that "whosoever" is a reference to only those that are the elect in the sense that you are implying. Rather, whosoever refers to any and all who will believe. The reformed view of this understanding is that those who will believe are those whom the Father has given to the Son, which is not every single person, but rather those whom God is pleased to bring to a saving knowledge of Himself. The point of contention between Arminians and Calvinists regarding this passage is that Arminians make the theological leap that this passage, in some way, implies that all mankind has been given the moral ability to submit to the Word and serve God. This passage implies nothing of the kind. It merely says, "whosoever believes in Him shall not perish but have everlasting life." This is, in no way, contradictory to what the Calvinists believe. We believe that all who believe will be saved. What we don't presuppose is that all mankind has been given the moral ability to submit to God.

How about .
Rev 3:20 Behold, I stand at the door, and knock: if any man hear my voice, and open the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with me.

What is this proof of and how is it supposed to contradict reformed theology?

If we have no choice why does Christ stand at the door and Knock?

You do have the choice, and reformed theology purports that you have the choice as well. What it does not try to do is marry two things that are not necessarily linked, i.e., just because you have the ability to make the choice for Christ in your fallen state that it means you have the moral inclination to ever do so. It's just not the case. Fallen man could choose to submit to God, if he desired it. He just never desires it and Scripture makes that abundantly clear.

And why are we given the choice to open the door a clear decision is required.

A decision is required. However, that decision isn't the basis for your regeneration. Let me ask you something, is the choice you make, either for or against Christ, predetermined or do you just arbitrarily make decisions? Do you have a reason for the decisions you make or do you operate from a position of moral neutrality? Again, the precursor to all of our actions, to include choosing to serve God in obedience, are motivated by our wills. The will of the unregenerate individual is never motivated to submit to God, independant of the providence of God Himself. The Bible says that numerous times. We must always choose according to our greatest desire or inclination at the time that a decision is before us. The greatest desire of unregenerate man is never to glorify God by submitting to His authority so he never does that.

Rom 10:13 For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.

Again, a verse that does nothing to contradict reformed theology or support your view.

Why should I want to reinterpret the Bible. The Bible doesn't need our interpretation. and the more you interpret it the father away from the truth you become.

You don't interpret the Bible? :confused:

I follow no doctrine as laid out by men but follow the doctrine of Christ.

Interpreted by yourself, right? The doctrines set forth in the Word most certainly do reveal certain things about and from God to us. However, you still must interpret what you read, or does Christ Himself read the Word to you and then explain it?

There were no Calvinist before Augustine and I've never met a Jew who believed in Unconditional Election, Irresistible Grace, Limited Atonement,Total depravity of man, and Perseverance of the saints.

Let me introduce you to one. He was pretty famous, all things considered. He wrote more of the New Testament books than any other person. His name was Paul.

none of these things are listed in the Bible but are only in the Calvinist logical mind. :scratch:

Everything I've ever read that Calvin espoused is not only in the Bible but the most God centered approach to biblical interpretation that I've ever been exposed to. What things might you be referring to and maybe we can address them. At the very least we may be able to determine whether you understand reformed theology.

God bless
 
Upvote 0

duster1az

Active Member
Jun 25, 2003
291
0
63
Southwest
Visit site
✟421.00
Faith
Christian
Romanbear writes: "If we have no choice why does Christ stand at the door and Knock?

Let's look at the question from a viewpoint that makes our liberty lie in the power of acting according to a disposition, or motive that's strongest in our mind.

Through this viewpoint our liberty doesn't lie in the power of acting or not acting, but in acting from choice. Liberty shouldn't be considered to be more or less because of the manner in which it was produced. If our choice is determined by something in the mind, or by something external that influences us, our choice makes the action free.

I'm thankful God doesn't require us to reconcile divine decrees with our liberty. Chances are many of us would fall short. It's enough for me to believe that God has decreed all things that come to pass, and that we're answerable for our actions.

In Christ,
Tracey
 
Upvote 0

Romanbear

Active Member
Jun 24, 2003
394
9
Denver Co.
✟579.00
Faith
Christian
Hi Reformationist;
A quote from you;
All people who are reformed Christians are Arminians,
My Reply;
Your assumption is wrong. I am not a reformed Catholic. This is what reformed means.
A quote from you;
Even if it is only for the time before they later rest their dependency fully upon the sovereign grace of God.
My Reply;
Without faith my friend there is no grace for it is through faith that we acquire grace
A quote from you; "we believe in choice"(This from my last post to furmanchu)
As do all Christians, Calvinists included .
My Reply;
If this were true then you wouldn't have irresistible grace.
A quote from you;
You use these terms, "death" and "being turned over to a reprobate mind," as if they are synonymous. Is that what you believe? Do you believe that once someone is turned over to a reprobate mind they are no longer capable of turning to Christ in repentence?
My Reply;
Rom 1:28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;

This here because of space but you should read Romans 1:13-34 to get the full picture. ;) I want to point out that these men would not retain God in there knowledge.They must have accepted it at first then changed there minds.Or maybe they turned back to there sins. At any rate God gave them up. So much for the Christian who thinks they can be saved and sin all they want.

A quote from you;

You do have the choice, and reformed theology purports that you have the choice as well.

My Reply;

I don't think your a Calvinist. I think your are an Arminian/ Calvinist. a Five point Calvinist would never say this.

A quote from you;

Fallen man could choose to submit to God, if he desired it. He just never desires it and Scripture makes that abundantly clear.

My Reply;

Clear to Calvinist maybe.

A quote from you ;

A decision is required. However, that decision isn't the basis for your regeneration. Let me ask you something, is the choice you make, either for or against Christ, predetermined or do you just arbitrarily make decisions? Do you have a reason for the decisions you make or do you operate from a position of moral neutrality? Again, the precursor to all of our actions, to include choosing to serve God in obedience, are motivated by our wills. The will of the unregenerate individual is never motivated to submit to God, independent of the providence of God Himself. The Bible says that numerous times. We must always choose according to our greatest desire or inclination at the time that a decision is before us. The greatest desire of unregenerate man is never to glorify God by submitting to His authority so he never does that.

My Reply;

Good try my friend.In the first place no where in scripture is it said that we are "regenerated"Or born again before we believe. Every where in scripture faith and repentance comes first. We are motivated by the conviction by the Holy Spirit through hearing the gospel. Hence we are drawn but this is not regeneration.None of the above Quote is Biblical

A quote from you;


From my earlier post in black

Why should I want to reinterpret the Bible. The Bible doesn't need our interpretation. and the more you interpret it the father away from the truth you become.




You don't interpret the Bible?

My reply;

If it ain't broke don't fix it. Interpretation is what is wrong with the world today. This is why we are loosing our freedom in this country the Judges interpret the constitution instead of reading it as it was meant to be. When you read a news paper do you interpret it or do you just sit there and read what is happening in the world accepting the writers interpretation.

A quote from you;

Quote: from romanbear

There were no Calvinist before Augustine and I've never met a Jew who believed in Unconditional Election, Irresistible Grace, Limited Atonement,Total depravity of man, and Perseverance of the saints.


Let me introduce you to one. He was pretty famous, all things considered. He wrote more of the New Testament books than any other person. His name was Paul.

My Reply;

Paul was complicated in his writing this is true, but not a Calvinist.This only in your mind. Because of the way you have been taught Calvinism. Or should I say Interpret it.
Augustine originally wrote down what is called Calvinism. IMHO the original doctrine of the Catholic Church. As wrong then as it is now.


I've enjoyed our conversation and am willing to debate with you. I even appreciate your attempt at conversion many have tried and failed.

I have no desire to be a Calvinist for there are as many types of Calvinist as there are types of asprin.

In Christ; :)

Romanbear
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Reformationist

Non nobis domine sed tuo nomine da gloriam
Mar 7, 2002
14,273
465
51
✟37,095.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Romanbear said:
Hi Reformationist;
A quote from you;
All people who are reformed Christians are Arminians,
My Reply;
Your assumption is wrong. I am not a reformed Catholic. This is what reformed means.

Uh...you kinda missed an important part of my statement. I didn't say "All people who are reformed Christians are Arminians." I said, "All people who are reformed Christians are Arminians, in the theological sense, before they are Calvinists." Maybe it would be clearer if I said, "All people who are Calvinists are Arminians, in the theological sense, before they are Calvinists."

Without faith my friend there is no grace for it is through faith that we acquire grace

Really? So all people who receive the grace of God have faith in Him? Or are you talking about a particular grace, like salvation?

If this were true then you wouldn't have irresistible grace.

Romanbear, you really should study reformed Christianity before you presume to use terms in relation to our beliefs without really understanding their relationship to our beliefs. All reformed Christians believe that man either FREELY chooses God or FREELY rejects God. The sovereign providence of God in man's disposition does not eliminate his FREELY made choice. The irrisistibility of God's grace is often a confusing way of phrasing it and that term is most often used to preserve the "I" in the acrostic TULIP. A better way to phrase that is to say that reformed believers acknowledge the efficacy of God's grace. That is, we believe that God's grace accomplishes that which it was purposed to accomplish.

This here because of space but you should read Romans 1:13-34 to get the full picture. ;)

Two things. First, I have read the Book of Romans probably 100 times, in it's entirity, to include chapter one. Second, I didn't say I disagreed with you. I just asked if you believed that once a person is "turned over" to a reprobate mind they are incapable of repenting, which you didn't answer.

I want to point out that these men would not retain God in there knowledge.They must have accepted it at first then changed there minds.

What do you mean they "accepted it?" There's a huge difference between the saving knowledge of God in faith and a knowledge of God because He makes His presence obvious in His own creation.

Or maybe they turned back to there sins. At any rate God gave them up.

No. God gives none of His sheep up. He may cease restraining the unregenerate and turn them over to their wickedness but God never ceases to grace His children.

So much for the Christian who thinks they can be saved and sin all they want.

I know of no Christian who believes such a thing.

I don't think your a Calvinist. I think your are an Arminian/ Calvinist. a Five point Calvinist would never say this.

I don't think you spend much time studying the view you oppose. All of the greatest reformed theologians say that man freely makes a choice, that is, their choice is uncoerced.

Clear to Calvinist maybe.

Clear to someone who understands that when the "free will" of man bumps up against the sovereignty of God the "free will" of man must yield.

Good try my friend.In the first place no where in scripture is it said that we are "regenerated"Or born again before we believe. Every where in scripture faith and repentance comes first. We are motivated by the conviction by the Holy Spirit through hearing the gospel. Hence we are drawn but this is not regeneration.None of the above Quote is Biblical.

Romanbear, if you are just going to continue ignoring the questions I ask but expect me to address your questions then just let me know and I'll stop wasting my time.

In the first place no where in scripture is it said that we are "regenerated"Or born again before we believe.

John 3:3
Jesus answered and said to him, "Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God."

Please explain how someone can serve Christ who presently reigns over the Kingdom of God if they cannot even see it. A person must be born again BEFORE he can see the Kingdom of God, much less seek it.

Every where in scripture faith and repentance comes first.

Really? So God gives no grace first? God doesn't have to do anything before man comes to faith? Tell me, is having faith in God and living by that faith the result of His grace or is it something that man inherently has the moral ability to do in his fallen state?

Hence we are drawn but this is not regeneration.

We're drawn, huh? What is that? Is that like "enticed" or "wooed?" What biblical verses lead you to believe that unregenerate man comes to faith because he is merely "enticed?"

If it ain't broke don't fix it. Interpretation is what is wrong with the world today. This is why we are loosing our freedom in this country the Judges interpret the constitution instead of reading it as it was meant to be.

This makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. All people interpret everything they come in contact with. AGAIN I ASK, if you are not going by anyone's interpretation of the Gospel, to include your own, then how do you know what the Word tells us? Does God Himself read the Bible to you and tell you what it means?

When you read a news paper do you interpret it or do you just sit there and read what is happening in the world accepting the writers interpretation.

Goodness gracious. I'm not the person who wrote it so I interpret it based on how I understand what the writer wrote. This has to do with the literary style they use, the words they employ, the tone of their statements, etc. Yes, I absolutely have to interpret what they write. In newspapers this is not often very difficult because their insights are rarely more than just a recounting of the facts. The Bible is much more than that. The Lord Himself uses parables to explain spiritual things. If I just "sat there and read" the parable of the sower should I then just assume our Almighty is speaking of farming habits? Of course not. I have to understand what He is alluding to. This requires interpretation. Interpretation isn't what's wrong with the world today. Inaccurate interpretation, however, definitely causes problems.

Paul was complicated in his writing this is true, but not a Calvinist.

That's true. Paul was not a Calvinist. "Calvinism" is a term for people who box up people's beliefs so that they can use that term as a basis for giving their opinion little credence. Paul was a Christian. John Calvin was a Christian. I am a Christian. I believe that what John Calvin taught is what Paul, and Jesus, taught, as well as all the other Apostles.

This only in your mind. Because of the way you have been taught Calvinism. Or should I say Interpret it.

I am seriously wondering the merit in carrying on a conversation with someone who feels the need to be so condescending. How about you just share your views rather than incessantly condemn mine, okay?

Augustine originally wrote down what is called Calvinism. IMHO the original doctrine of the Catholic Church. As wrong then as it is now.

I suppose you have the correct interpretation. Oh that's right, you don't interpret the Bible. You just sit there and read it. :rolleyes:

I even appreciate your attempt at conversion many have tried and failed.

Romanbear, I am not trying to "convert" you so "failure" isn't something I struggle with. You're a Christian, right? You've already been converted by the One who converts. God enlightens the mind of men, not me. I trust in God that His Will will be done. If you don't believe as I do then it obviously wasn't God's decree that you do so. My job isn't to try to make you think as I do. My job is to seek the Will of God. Oftentimes that leads me into conversations with people who disagree with me. When I find myself in that situation I am commanded to deal with it in godliness. Often I fail at that.

I have no desire to be a Calvinist for there are as many types of Calvinist as there are types of asprin.

I see. Well that's a very godly way of putting it. :rolleyes:

God bless
 
Upvote 0

Romanbear

Active Member
Jun 24, 2003
394
9
Denver Co.
✟579.00
Faith
Christian
Hi Reformationist; :wave:
A quote from you;
Uh...you kinda missed an important part of my statement. I didn't say "All people who are reformed Christians are Arminians." I said, "All people who are reformed Christians are Arminians, in the theological sense, before they are Calvinists." Maybe it would be clearer if I said, "All people who are Calvinists are Arminians, in the theological sense, before they are Calvinists."
My Reply ;
You're right you did, forgive me. You see I interpreted it to how I had seen your explanation of Arminians excepting Christ then becoming Calvinist. Calvinism being a complicated doctrine that it is I see how this would be necessary.
A quote from you;
Two things. First, I have read the Book of Romans probably 100 times, in it's entirity, to include chapter one. Second, I didn't say I disagreed with you. I just asked if you believed that once a person is "turned over" to a reprobate mind they are incapable of repenting, which you didn't answer .
My reply;
Since I became a Christian 42 years ago I've read the Bible through to many times to count.Please don't take this the wrong way, I'm not bragging. Before I accepted Christ I was instructed in the Bible and had to memorize a lot of it just to get away from my parents for the summers. Our Church had incentives to learn and one was to go to camp for the summer.

You would think that since I wasn't a Christian at the time I would have rebelled. I did but in my own way.
The Bible is the most important book on earth and I can't get enough of it. I'm not an THD or any degree for that matter.
A quote from you;From me first
I want to point out that these men would not retain God in there knowledge.They must have accepted it at first then changed there minds.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What do you mean they "accepted it?" There's a huge difference between the saving knowledge of God in faith and a knowledge of God because He makes His presence obvious in His own creation.
My Reply;
Obviously your forgetting the parable of the sewer. Where the seed that fell by the way side sprung up but had no root.
Mat 13:3 And he spake many things unto them in parables, saying, Behold, a sower went forth to sow;

Mat 13:4 And when he sowed, some seeds fell by the way side, and the fowls came and devoured them up:

Mat 13:5 Some fell upon stony places, where they had not much earth: and forthwith they sprung up, because they had no deepness of earth:

Mat 13:6 And when the sun was up, they were scorched; and because they had no root, they withered away.

Go to mat:13 and read it along with the explaination of the parable. You'll understand.

A quote from you;

No. God gives none of His sheep up. He may cease restraining the unregenerate and turn them over to their wickedness but God never ceases to grace His children.

My Reply;

Read mat 18:35

I'm Sorry This is all I can answer for now I will return in a few days see you then.
May God Bless you,

In Christ;

Romanbear
 
Upvote 0

Reformationist

Non nobis domine sed tuo nomine da gloriam
Mar 7, 2002
14,273
465
51
✟37,095.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Romanbear said:
Hi Reformationist; :wave:
Obviously your forgetting the parable of the sewer.

Uh no...I'm not forgetting it. In fact, if anything, it just reinforces what I'm saying.

Go to mat:13 and read it along with the explaination of the parable. You'll understand.

I already understand it. What is it that you wish for me to understand from those verses?

Read mat 18:35

You move around in the Bible with seemingly no sense of continuity. What does the parable of the unforgiving servent have to do with what we're talking about? Are you trying to say that it means that we can lose our salvation? :scratch:

God bless
 
Upvote 0

Romanbear

Active Member
Jun 24, 2003
394
9
Denver Co.
✟579.00
Faith
Christian
Hi Reformationist; :wave:
A quote from your last post in blue;
Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally Posted by Romanbear
Hi Reformationist;
Obviously your forgetting the parable of the sewer.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Uh no...I'm not forgetting it. In fact, if anything, it just reinforces what I'm saying.
My Reply;
I'm not saying you aren't Christian but, are you sure?. You see your description of how people become Calvinist fits so perfectly with the parable of Christ that concerns the seed that fell by the way side. You sprang up fast and then wilted away because you had no root. Meaning you lost intrest and went after something more intresting to you. If you had root then you wouldn't have left the first doctrine which you admit was Arminianism.
A quote from you in blue;
You move around in the Bible with seemingly no sense of continuity. What does the parable of the unforgiving servent have to do with what we're talking about? Are you trying to say that it means that we can lose our salvation?
My Reply; :rolleyes:
I realize that it's nonsense to you to read this in the Bible and then formaulate in your mind that your sin can be put back on you for being unforgiving after becomming Christian. but if you believe the Bible as you say you do then you'll have to admit that this is true.
As Far as moving around in the Bible. It's necessary when questions take you there.
As far a continuity. Where is your's? This is what it sounds like to me. You first start out in Arminianism then switch in midstream to Calvinism because it's more appealing to you. I don't know,but there isn't much continuity in this. Then you try to say that I don't show much continuity but, I'm still believing the same doctrine I started with. Sort of sounds like a guilty conscience where the guilty trys to place suspicion on someone else to hide there own wrong doings. Are you feeling sort of shorted out!, because this is my field and can tell you right away where the short is.All You need is a little light with two leads :(
In Christ; :wave:
Romanbear
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Romanbear

Active Member
Jun 24, 2003
394
9
Denver Co.
✟579.00
Faith
Christian
Hi Reformationist; :wave:
I will now finish what we were discussing when I left for the holiday.
A quote from you;
Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Why should I want to reinterpret the Bible. The Bible doesn't need our interpretation. and the more you interpret it the father away from the truth you become.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You don't interpret the Bible?
My Reply;
God's word interprets itself How can we assume we know what God is thinking.
A quote from you;
Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I follow no doctrine as laid out by men but follow the doctrine of Christ.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Interpreted by yourself, right?
My Reply;
Wrong.Completely wrong read on my answer is coming.
A quote from you;
The doctrines set forth in the Word most certainly do reveal certain things about and from God to us. However, you still must interpret what you read, or does Christ Himself read the Word to you and then explain it?
My Reply;
You seem like an educated man an engineer. Let me put it this way. You draw up a set of plans for an electrical circut. Not anyone can read a schematic but to those who can, they understand it perfectly. They know exactly what you want. The way they arrive at the correct knowledge as to what you want is by the symbols you have written down. They mean only one thing. Todays language isn't this way so we try to define what is said for most words this is simple, but for some of the compositions it's not so easy. Now lets say were back to the schematic. It's simple it can only mean one thing. The Bible is this way but over the years language has changed an example; We don't know if good is bad or bad is good because the same term means completely different things. This is where we run in to trouble when trying to define what Gods word says. If I define it and say it means one thing and you say it means something else then someone has to be wrong. You on one hand defined it your self and I let God do that for me. Who do you think is right. You say your right because you are you and me, just the guy on the other end of the net.
Here is How you find out. Get on your knees and pray to God to give you an answer and do it with sincerity, pray with ernest and you'll find the answer because God will give it to you.
If you have to interpret it then you're admitting that you don't understand it. Therefore You have to make sense of it. So you interpret it.To me the Bible interprets itself. God does speak to me through His word. He explains things to me in my meditations. Haven't you ever listened to God?. Try it sometime you'll like it. When I come across something that I don't understand I pray about it until He gives me the answer. I don't sit and ponder what I don't understand, I let the leading of the spirit take care of it. He leads me to truth I don't assume it.
In speaking with others on this board I'm always intouch with God praying with in my self for the way the Lord would have me to answer. Although I don't always answer with God in mind. I'm only human and sometimes emotion is involved. After all we are speaking about the most emotional subject there is. Faith In God. I try to let the Holy Spirit have it His way with what ever I minister.
Do you allow the Holy Spirit to lead you in what you say and believe?Or are you led by your definitions and consider it weak to admit your not as smart as you thought you were?
Very little of this post actually comes from my mind, but I'm led as to what to say. :)
In Christ;
Romanbear
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.