Denied on basis of being a CredoBaptist

[AndOne]

If I may, I think you two gentlemen are talking past eachother a little bit. concerning the order of salvation. I think everyone in this discussion agrees that regeneration comes before faith. In regeneration, the spiritual resurrection from death to life, God seals us with His spirit, giving us the saving faith to make the conscious decision to follow and live for Christ, and because He seals us with His spirit, we cannot resist His free grace, we repent and weep for mercy knowing the wretched sinners we were, and God the Father in faithfulness to God the Son, forgives us.

Soli Deo Gloria!

I totally agree with you - but if someone doesn't believe or agree with this - like say an arminian - does that mean they aren't saved?

 

[JasonLibertad]

I totally agree with you - but if someone doesn't believe or agree with this - like say an arminian - does that mean they aren't saved?

I believe that the Word of God does not come back to Him void. The elect in God's time will have their eyes open and their ears will hear what the Word of the Lord truly says.

The Truth shall set you free! What does that mean? If God is truly sovereign and all powerful and His will is always done, why then do some brethren try to make excuses for people that believe false doctrine? Not just excuse but also embrace them as brothers in Christ. God's implicit will in the word is that he will complete the good work started in his elect.
Please Read John 8:31-47

 

[Apologetic_Warrior]

I totally agree with you - but if someone doesn't believe or agree with this - like say an arminian - does that mean they aren't saved?

Nope, absolutely not. However, I will confess, personally I would not attend on a regular basis or become a member of a Church that preaches the gospel of synergism (it's what I listened to for most of my life). Unfortunately, I would say most Christians, are not even aware of the difference between monergism and synergism, and have not thought it through in light of Scripture. I am guessing most people do not consider the order of salvation when they were saved (I did not). Some growing in knowledge and understanding as they meditate on Scripture come to a monergistic understanding (as I did), others for whatever reason(s) never get past feeding on the milk of the Word (neglecting to read Scripture is one). I think part of what makes it confusing is that the unregenerate have a kind of faith, it's just they do not have saving faith. Another problem is in how biblical theology is often preached...dumbed down and overly simple, which does not promote thinking deeply about Scripture. For people like me, it took a great deal struggling and the hand of God to undo the theological presuppositions I interpreted Scripture with. It is not easy to accept that so many pastors and preachers do not preach the gospel faithfully to the Holy Scriptures. Theological inconsistency runs rampant, and considering the fast pace our society runs at, spiritual junkfood is a dime a dozen. It is a miracle how God saves people, despite everything.

 

[AndOne]

Nope, absolutely not. However, I will confess, personally I would not attend on a regular basis or become a member of a Church that preaches the gospel of synergism (it's what I listened to for most of my life). Unfortunately, I would say most Christians, are not even aware of the difference between monergism and synergism, and have not thought it through in light of Scripture. I am guessing most people do not consider the order of salvation when they were saved (I did not). Some growing in knowledge and understanding as they meditate on Scripture come to a monergistic understanding (as I did), others for whatever reason(s) never get past feeding on the milk of the Word (neglecting to read Scripture is one). I think part of what makes it confusing is that the unregenerate have a kind of faith, it's just they do not have saving faith. Another problem is in how biblical theology is often preached...dumbed down and overly simple, which does not promote thinking deeply about Scripture. For people like me, it took a great deal struggling and the hand of God to undo the theological presuppositions I interpreted Scripture with. It is not easy to accept that so many pastors and preachers do not preach the gospel faithfully to the Holy Scriptures. Theological inconsistency runs rampant, and considering the fast pace our society runs at, spiritual junkfood is a dime a dozen. It is a miracle how God saves people, despite everything.

Very good post brother - I'm with you on this - I couldn't handle a synergistic fellowship either. I try to shy away from them as much as possible - but I did go to a CC for a little awhile - but there was nothing else around.

Also - I see the theological inconsistency every day now - I am taking classes with Liberty University...

 

[Apologetic_Warrior]

Very good post brother - I'm with you on this - I couldn't handle a synergistic fellowship either. I try to shy away from them as much as possible - but I did go to a CC for a little awhile - but there was nothing else around.

Also - I see the theological inconsistency every day now - I am taking classes with Liberty University...

My pleasure bro, I am glad you asked the question. Liberty University...reminds me of something I read on a greatcourses dot com catalog my dad received in the mail. They offer a course entitled "Lost Christianities" and reading the description the first thought that came to my mind "Christians believed no such thing!" That professors are twisting that kind of postmodern garbage in people's minds makes me ill.

 

[twin1954]

First let me say that I am only posting here in support of Particular Baptist. I intend to say what I know to be truth and answer your objections to a point and after that I am done. I am not the least interested in debating things.

First I want to speak to the use of the term " will worshippers" as perjorative. It may be but it is a Biblical term, see the last verse of Col. 2. If it is perjorative it is intended to be by the Apostle who said it. It has a certain shock value that may rankle some but to those who have never thought of it as a fact of their religion by the grace of God may cause them to consider what it is they are believing once they have calmed down. IK have no problem with using clear language that sets the truth in a clear light. The simple fact is that Arminian free will works religion is will worship. But so is much of Reformed theology.

Second I want to speak to the fact that an Arminiam free will works religionist is saved. It is impossible. You simply can't love God and hate His sovereign grace. I realize that most of you were Arminians at one time and at some point came to believe in the sovereignty of God in salvation. Many of you think that you were saved as an Arminian but if that were the case it isn't a matter of sovereign grace but of superior grace. All you have done is come to superior knowledge. You have simply changed one theology for another. I am sorry but that isn't salvation. Knowledge of a sovereign God isn't higher knowledge it is saving knowledge. We can't worship at the throne of an imaginary god and worship at the throne of the God of Scripture at the same time. When Christ reveals Himself to the sinner He always reveals Himself as the God of Scripture. To call an Arminain free will works religionist brother is to compromise the truth of God. The Scriptures know nothing of a superior grace that leads the ignorant into higher truth. What it teaches is a sovereign grace of which there is nothing higher. It knows nothing of inferior knowledge of Christ. It simpy says that eternal life is to know Him the only true God and Jesus Christ whom He has sent. John 17:3. To say that an Arminain is your brother is to say that you don't have to know God to be saved. Does that mean that you must have understanding in the doctrines of grace to be saved? Not at all. But the fact is that all who are saved know without a doubt that they had nothing to do with their salvation. And it is also a fact that all who are saved by the sovereign grace of God in Christ alone will not hate the truth of God when they hear it. You can't worship God and hate His truth.

 

[JasonLibertad]

First let me say that I am only posting here in support of Particular Baptist. I intend to say what I know to be truth and answer your objections to a point and after that I am done. I am not the least interested in debating things.

First I want to speak to the use of the term " will worshippers" as perjorative. It may be but it is a Biblical term, see the last verse of Col. 2. If it is perjorative it is intended to be by the Apostle who said it. It has a certain shock value that may rankle some but to those who have never thought of it as a fact of their religion by the grace of God may cause them to consider what it is they are believing once they have calmed down. IK have no problem with using clear language that sets the truth in a clear light. The simple fact is that Arminian free will works religion is will worship. But so is much of Reformed theology.

Second I want to speak to the fact that an Arminiam free will works religionist is saved. It is impossible. You simply can't love God and hate His sovereign grace. I realize that most of you were Arminians at one time and at some point came to believe in the sovereignty of God in salvation. Many of you think that you were saved as an Arminian but if that were the case it isn't a matter of sovereign grace but of superior grace. All you have done is come to superior knowledge. You have simply changed one theology for another. I am sorry but that isn't salvation. Knowledge of a sovereign God isn't higher knowledge it is saving knowledge. We can't worship at the throne of an imaginary god and worship at the throne of the God of Scripture at the same time. When Christ reveals Himself to the sinner He always reveals Himself as the God of Scripture. To call an Arminain free will works religionist brother is to compromise the truth of God. The Scriptures know nothing of a superior grace that leads the ignorant into higher truth. What it teaches is a sovereign grace of which there is nothing higher. It knows nothing of inferior knowledge of Christ. It simpy says that eternal life is to know Him the only true God and Jesus Christ whom He has sent. John 17:3. To say that an Arminain is your brother is to say that you don't have to know God to be saved. Does that mean that you must have understanding in the doctrines of grace to be saved? Not at all. But the fact is that all who are saved know without a doubt that they had nothing to do with their salvation. And it is also a fact that all who are saved by the sovereign grace of God in Christ alone will not hate the truth of God when they hear it. You can't worship God and hate His truth.

Amen!

 

[AMR]

I resonate with Muller.

 

[msortwell]

First let me say that I am only posting here in support of Particular Baptist. I intend to say what I know to be truth and answer your objections to a point and after that I am done. I am not the least interested in debating things. First I want to speak to the use of the term " will worshippers" as perjorative. It may be but it is a Biblical term, see the last verse of Col. 2. If it is perjorative it is intended to be by the Apostle who said it.

Col 2:23, Which things have indeed a shew of wisdom in will worship, and humility, and neglecting of the body; not in any honour to the satisfying of the flesh. KJV

The verse you are citing refers to worship/religion that has its motivation within the self. It does not refer to the worship of the will, as it is being used by some here.

Col 2:23
23 These things indeed have an appearance of wisdom in self-imposed religion, false humility, and neglect of the body, but are of no value against the indulgence of the flesh. NKJV

 

[twin1954]

Col 2:23, Which things have indeed a shew of wisdom in will worship, and humility, and neglecting of the body; not in any honour to the satisfying of the flesh. KJV

The verse you are citing refers to worship/religion that has its motivation within the self. It does not refer to the worship of the will, as it is being used by some here.

Col 2:23
23 These things indeed have an appearance of wisdom in self-imposed religion, false humility, and neglect of the body, but are of no value against the indulgence of the flesh. NKJV

If that is the case it speaks more to Reformed theology then doesn't it? Well it actuallly can be properly interpreted with either usage. Either way is fine with me because it still fits.

 

[msortwell]

If that is the case it speaks more to Reformed theology then doesn't it? Well it actuallly can be properly interpreted with either usage. Either way is fine with me because it still fits.

Col 2:23
23 These things indeed have an appearance of wisdom in self-imposed religion, false humility, and neglect of the body, but are of no value against the indulgence of the flesh. NKJV

Actually no, it cannot be properly interpreted with either usage. The KJV translation is not incorrect, only the attempt to twist it to meen the worship of "free will" when it can only mean worship, or a religion, that has its origin in the will of man.

 

[msortwell]

Second I want to speak to the fact that an Arminiam free will works religionist is saved. It is impossible. You simply can't love God and hate His sovereign grace. I realize that most of you were Arminians at one time and at some point came to believe in the sovereignty of God in salvation. Many of you think that you were saved as an Arminian but if that were the case it isn't a matter of sovereign grace but of superior grace. All you have done is come to superior knowledge. You have simply changed one theology for another. I am sorry but that isn't salvation. Knowledge of a sovereign God isn't higher knowledge it is saving knowledge. We can't worship at the throne of an imaginary god and worship at the throne of the God of Scripture at the same time. When Christ reveals Himself to the sinner He always reveals Himself as the God of Scripture. To call an Arminain free will works religionist brother is to compromise the truth of God. The Scriptures know nothing of a superior grace that leads the ignorant into higher truth. What it teaches is a sovereign grace of which there is nothing higher. It knows nothing of inferior knowledge of Christ. It simpy says that eternal life is to know Him the only true God and Jesus Christ whom He has sent. John 17:3. To say that an Arminain is your brother is to say that you don't have to know God to be saved. Does that mean that you must have understanding in the doctrines of grace to be saved? Not at all. But the fact is that all who are saved know without a doubt that they had nothing to do with their salvation. And it is also a fact that all who are saved by the sovereign grace of God in Christ alone will not hate the truth of God when they hear it. You can't worship God and hate His truth.

Well . . . if you ever make it to glory you'll have to inform Paul that the letter he wrote to the church in Rome was a complete waste of time, after all, being part of the church they would, based upon your theology, have already understood all of the facets of God's redemptive work in the hearts of His elect.

Of course, that still leaves the question regarding why such an ill conceived letter managed to find its way into the cannon of Scripture.

Pure nonsense, after its kind.

 

[twin1954]

Well . . . if you ever make it to glory you'll have to inform Paul that the letter he wrote to the church in Rome was a complete waste of time, after all, being part of the church they would, based upon your theology, have already understood all of the facets of God's redemptive work in the hearts of His elect.

Of course, that still leaves the question regarding why such an ill conceived letter managed to find its way into the cannon of Scripture.

Pure nonsense, after its kind.

Whare is anything I said inconsistent with the book of Romans? Show me please if you can. You have actually only avioded a direct answer because you can't answer. What other conclusion can I come to?

 

[the particular baptist]

Well . . . if you ever make it to glory you'll have to inform Paul that the letter he wrote to the church in Rome was a complete waste of time, after all, being part of the church they would, based upon your theology, have already understood all of the facets of God's redemptive work in the hearts of His elect.

Of course, that still leaves the question regarding why such an ill conceived letter managed to find its way into the cannon of Scripture.

Pure nonsense, after its kind.

Strawman. The last feeble attempt of anyone without a leg to stand on. Wow.

 

[msortwell]

Whare is anything I said inconsistent with the book of Romans? Show me please if you can. You have actually only avioded a direct answer because you can't answer. What other conclusion can I come to?

You wrote the following:

. . . Knowledge of a sovereign God isn't higher knowledge it is saving knowledge. We can't worship at the throne of an imaginary god and worship at the throne of the God of Scripture at the same time. When Christ reveals Himself to the sinner He always reveals Himself as the God of Scripture. To call an Arminain free will works religionist brother is to compromise the truth of God. The Scriptures know nothing of a superior grace that leads the ignorant into higher truth. What it teaches is a sovereign grace of which there is nothing higher. It knows nothing of inferior knowledge of Christ. It simpy says that eternal life is to know Him the only true God and Jesus Christ whom He has sent. John 17:3. To say that an Arminain is your brother is to say that you don't have to know God to be saved. Does that mean that you must have understanding in the doctrines of grace to be saved? Not at all. But the fact is that all who are saved know without a doubt that they had nothing to do with their salvation. And it is also a fact that all who are saved by the sovereign grace of God in Christ alone will not hate the truth of God when they hear it. You can't worship God and hate His truth.

I provided the following response.

Well . . . if you ever make it to glory you'll have to inform Paul that the letter he wrote to the church in Rome was a complete waste of time, after all, being part of the church they would, based upon your theology, have already understood all of the facets of God's redemptive work in the hearts of His elect.
Of course, that still leaves the question regarding why such an ill conceived letter managed to find its way into the cannon of Scripture.
Pure nonsense, after its kind.

The point being . . . what we know about God’s absolute sovereignty is known, including its effects upon the act by which He saves us is understood, by us, because of His specific revelation in His Holy Word. It is NOT because of a mysteriously imputed knowledge of His grace. Genuine Arminians live in a happy inconsistency. They assert that regeneration is synergistic, but they with broken and contrite hearts proclaim their utter hopelessness without God’s saving grace. Their experience involves the hearing of the gospel and a whole-hearted agreement with its offer. The willingly confess that God is sovereign, they simply don't understand what that means - until it is explained to them and the Holy Ghost leads them into that truth.

What they may come to understand through the study of Romans, Ephesians, and other text is the leading role Gods voluntary acts played in bringing them to salvation.

If coming to a saving knowledge ALWAYS included gaining a fully developed understanding of God's sovereignty, the understanding of God’s sovereign grace as explained in detail in Romans, Ephesians, etc., it makes no sense for Paul to have written those letters to believers. By your premise, believers already know these things.

Moreover, the author of Hebrews even asserts that genuine believers occasionally need to be reminded of the complete absence of merit on their part.

“For when for the time ye ought to be teachers, ye have need that one teach you again which [be] the first principles of the oracles of God; and are become such as have need of milk, and not of strong meat. For every one that useth milk [is] unskilful in the word of righteousness: for he is a babe. But strong meat belongeth to them that are of full age, [even] those who by reason of use have their senses exercised to discern both good and evil. Therefore leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ, let us go on unto perfection; not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works, and of faith toward God,” (Heb 5:12-6:1 AV)

 

[Apologetic_Warrior]

The simple fact is that Arminian free will works religion is will worship. But so is much of Reformed theology.

While there is a grain of truth in what you are saying, it is not the whole truth. Non-Calvinist theology is inconsistent, and quite often...thoughtless and emotional in practice. I have heard many worship songs I would consider "will worship", that much I will concede. Songs focusing on self, and what I will do, etc.

Second I want to speak to the fact that an Arminiam free will works religionist is saved. It is impossible. You simply can't love God and hate His sovereign grace.

What you are suggesting is a strawman version of non-Calvinism. By the way, I am using the phrase "non-Calvinist" because countless non-Calvinists have never heard the terms "Arminian" or "Calvinist", much less know what they mean. It is quite possible to love God and His sovereign grace and be a non-Calvinist...even if they are inconsistant in their beliefs. I daresay the thief on the cross next to Jesus was no Calvinist...nor Reformed. I doubt he knew much theology, or read any of Paul's letters.

I realize that most of you were Arminians at one time and at some point came to believe in the sovereignty of God in salvation. Many of you think that you were saved as an Arminian but if that were the case it isn't a matter of sovereign grace but of superior grace. All you have done is come to superior knowledge. You have simply changed one theology for another. I am sorry but that isn't salvation.

Praise God my salvation is not in your hands! Praise God He knows what He has done in my life! I don't seem to recall anybody claiming that simply changing from one theology to another is salvation...quite the contrary. That you doubt our salvation...means nothing. Oh ye of little faith!

Knowledge of a sovereign God isn't higher knowledge it is saving knowledge.

Knowledge cannot save, God alone saves.

We can't worship at the throne of an imaginary god and worship at the throne of the God of Scripture at the same time. When Christ reveals Himself to the sinner He always reveals Himself as the God of Scripture. To call an Arminain free will works religionist brother is to compromise the truth of God.

I beg to differ. It is to recognize that despite human error, God alone has the power to save. It would seem, that it has not crossed your thinking, that the work of coming to a perfect interpretation of all of Scripture (the interpretation you hold), is indeed a work, and a work you are involved in, because it requires learning and memory retention. I think I know how you will respond but I want to hear it...

The Scriptures know nothing of a superior grace that leads the ignorant into higher truth. What it teaches is a sovereign grace of which there is nothing higher. It knows nothing of inferior knowledge of Christ. It simpy says that eternal life is to know Him the only true God and Jesus Christ whom He has sent. John 17:3. To say that an Arminain is your brother is to say that you don't have to know God to be saved. Does that mean that you must have understanding in the doctrines of grace to be saved? Not at all. But the fact is that all who are saved know without a doubt that they had nothing to do with their salvation. And it is also a fact that all who are saved by the sovereign grace of God in Christ alone will not hate the truth of God when they hear it. You can't worship God and hate His truth.

Wait just a minute there...I will tell you firsthand, when I had an Arminian like understanding, I did not believe anything I did saved me. I would tell you straight up that I could not save myself, God saved me. What you are suggesting is a strawman. Even if non-Calvinists preach heavy on works, it does not necessarily conclude that they preach a works based salvation. One can preach salvation by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone for the glory of God alone and still preach Christian duty, human responsibility. We have to be involved in Salvation to be saved, repentance is our duty, not God's. Read carefully, if I had NOTHING to do with my salvation, no involvement, then how is it that God the Holy Spirit raised ME to life? How is it that Christ gave ME saving faith? If I had nothing to do with my salvation...not only this, but particular redemption involves specific individuals. Yes, I had a part, my part was sin, Praise God for Jesus Christ died for my sins, and rose from the dead, so that I can have eternal life with Him.

 

[msortwell]

Well . . . if you ever make it to glory you'll have to inform Paul that the letter he wrote to the church in Rome was a complete waste of time, after all, being part of the church they would, based upon your theology, have already understood all of the facets of God's redemptive work in the hearts of His elect.

Of course, that still leaves the question regarding why such an ill conceived letter managed to find its way into the cannon of Scripture.

Pure nonsense, after its kind.

Strawman. The last feeble attempt of anyone without a leg to stand on. Wow.

Strawman - a weak or sham argument set up to be easily refuted [syn: straw man]

No. That wouldn't be it. That would constitute me offering up an argument FOR THE PURPOSE OF (i.e., to be) easily refuted (defeated).

That would be silly.

However, it was actually referring to the conflict between the position that an understanding of God's sovereign grace is somehow spontaneously imputed to every believer upon his being saved and the fact that the Inspired Word is full of text teaching at lenghth on that very subject, and teaching believers specifically.

Apparently Paul was not acquainted with your doctrine.

 

[the particular baptist]

However, it was actually referring to the conflict between the position that an understanding of God's sovereign grace is somehow spontaneously imputed to every believer upon his being saved and the fact that the Inspired Word is full of text teaching at lenghth on that very subject, and teaching believers specifically.

Mr msortwell, you are continuing to build a strawman. No one here is saying a regenerated sinner being able to articulate theology or doctrine. A regenerated believer would not attribute anything pertaining to salvation to his exertions, efforts, or decisions. The Holy Spirit teaches the man God has set His love on, that he is less than a worm, that if he is cast into hell it would be right, and that the divine life in him was a free sovereign gift. I pointed out Hebrews 8 to you before and you conveniently did not address it.

What does it mean when God says "they will all know me" ? The passage does not say believers are ignorant of who God is until some pious reformed theologian comes along. No, it says God teaches them this, not books, or calvinists. Im sorry if this is not your experience or the experience of free will proponents you know.

Apparently Paul was not acquainted with your doctrine.

If you were to pick up Mr Gill, among other historic baptists, and did your own research, you would see that in their interpretation, Paul in Romans 9 is speaking against the questions of a hypothetical adversary, not instructing ignorant believers that God is sovereign.

 

[twin1954]

You wrote the following:

I provided the following response.


The point being . . . what we know about God’s absolute sovereignty is known, including its effects upon the act by which He saves us is understood, by us, because of His specific revelation in His Holy Word. It is NOT because of a mysteriously imputed knowledge of His grace. Genuine Arminians live in a happy inconsistency. They assert that regeneration is synergistic, but they with broken and contrite hearts proclaim their utter hopelessness without God’s saving grace. Their experience involves the hearing of the gospel and a whole-hearted agreement with its offer. The willingly confess that God is sovereign, they simply don't understand what that means - until it is explained to them and the Holy Ghost leads them into that truth.

What they may come to understand through the study of Romans, Ephesians, and other text is the leading role Gods voluntary acts played in bringing them to salvation.

If coming to a saving knowledge ALWAYS included gaining a fully developed understanding of God's sovereignty, the understanding of God’s sovereign grace as explained in detail in Romans, Ephesians, etc., it makes no sense for Paul to have written those letters to believers. By your premise, believers already know these things.

Moreover, the author of Hebrews even asserts that genuine believers occasionally need to be reminded of the complete absence of merit on their part.

“For when for the time ye ought to be teachers, ye have need that one teach you again which [be] the first principles of the oracles of God; and are become such as have need of milk, and not of strong meat. For every one that useth milk [is] unskilful in the word of righteousness: for he is a babe. But strong meat belongeth to them that are of full age, [even] those who by reason of use have their senses exercised to discern both good and evil. Therefore leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ, let us go on unto perfection; not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works, and of faith toward God,” (Heb 5:12-6:1 AV)

You are making a false assumption that isn't anywhere close to what I said. You are building a strawman in order to easily tear it down. You have put words in my mouth that don't fit and I would appreciate it if you would simply deal with what I actually say rather than what you hope I am saying. Is there any other God than the one revealed in the Scriptures? Does God reveal Himself to a sinner as anything less than God? And of course you didn't deal with the simple question of whether you can love God and hate His truth. I will not bother responding to your nonsense because it has nothing to do with anything I have posited. Saving knowledge of God isn't complete knowledge of God but it is knowledge of God as God. As you read the Scriptures what is the very first thing God always reveals about Himself? It is that He is God and there is none else. He can save or He can damn as He pleases. Every saved sinner knows at least that much. If that is not the sovereignty of God what is? Is it possible to believe in a God of whom you have never heard? Rom. 10:14. Is the god of the Arminain God? Not at all. The pygmy god of Arminianism is a figment of men's imaginations and is no more able to save than a knat can. Does God desire anything that He can't have? The Arminian god does. Is there anything God wants that He can't bring about? That is the god of Arminianism. If I preach to a sinner a god who wants to save but can't because he will not violate your free will am I preaching the one true God whom to know is life eternal? John 17:6 I am amazed that I am actually arguing these things with a Calvinist. I have as much care and compassion as anyone for the lost in church especially. I have family members who are lost as Arminians and I love them dearly but I will not allow my love and compassion for them cause me to compromise the truth of God and become sympathetic to their religion. Having some true things is not the same as having truth. The elect of God are chosen unto salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth. 2Thess. 2:13. There are so many passages of Scripture I could use to show that your argument is false but I suspect that you already know them. You simply are unwilling to to believe that the Arminian isn't saved because that would mean that you weren't as one. I wouldn't even try to judge whether you are saved now or not as I don't know. But I can say with all the dogmatism that is clear from the Scriptures that you weren't as an Arminan. I can also say that becoming a Calvinist didn't save you either. You were saved, if you truly are, when you saw in Christ alone all your salvation. If you haven't seen that yet you are still not saved.

 

[twin1954]

Mr msortwell, you are continuing to build a strawman. No one here is saying a regenerated sinner being able to articulate theology or doctrine. A regenerated believer would not attribute anything pertaining to salvation to his exertions, efforts, or decisions. The Holy Spirit teaches the man God has set His love on, that he is less than a worm, that if he is cast into hell it would be right, and that the divine life in him was a free sovereign gift. I pointed out Hebrews 8 to you before and you conveniently did not address it.

What does it mean when God says "they will all know me" ? The passage does not say believers are ignorant of who God is until some pious reformed theologian comes along. No, it says God teaches them this, not books, or calvinists. Im sorry if this is not your experience or the experience of free will proponents you know.




If you were to pick up Mr Gill, among other historic baptists, and did your own research, you would see that in their interpretation, Paul in Romans 9 is speaking against the questions of a hypothetical adversary, not instructing ignorant believers that God is sovereign.

I can't respond to your Pm because I don't have 15 posts. But your assumption is correct.