• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

"Fatal Flaw" in predestinary theory

Status
Not open for further replies.

Ben johnson

Legend
Site Supporter
Feb 9, 2002
16,916
404
Oklahoma
Visit site
✟99,049.00
Faith
Christian
Quoted by NBF:
Looks to me as though JF5000 answered you quite handily, and correctly. Once again, you've been shown to be in error, due to your overarching "defeat Calvinism at all costs" attitude, which highlights your lack of correct knowledge of Calvinism, as well as your cavalier handling of scriptures. The truth is, you have too much invested in your current view, to admit to any errors.
Bold claims, NBF. But in my three responses, I completely overturned what he said.

Do you still think I'm "disingenuous/handily-correctly-refuted"?

I'm not seeing it...
 
Upvote 0
R

Rightglory

Guest
Mamaz,

The very statement that Christ became man, that Christ was man in all respects encludes the ability to sin. The fact that He did not sin is the very fact that makes Him the Savior of man. If Christ could not sin, He is worthless, because He did not overcome sin, He would have been unable to fulfill the law. Satan tempted Jesus for real. This was not a stage act.

Read these temptations carefully. Reformed theology glosses over the most profound aspects of who Christ is and what He accomplished for man.

So a Holy God can sin?
this very statement goes right to the heart of your whole theology. We are not even speaking of God, but Christ who is both God and man. It is the man part, the Human Nature of Christ that had the capablity of sin. The fact that Christ was able to fully submit His human will to the Divine will to be without sin is what makes Him who He is as the Incarnate Christ. You eliminate any aspect of man from Christ, Christ becomes meaningless for man. Because He was not really one of us, He was ONLY God. It is precisely why your whole theology regarding the will of man is the antithesis of Scripture. You take away the one thing that makes man a human being and is precisely the instrument by which man is being healed from sin in this life.

You may want to read scripture to a different level. For Christ was not born of men. He was born of God. He is God. All other men are born of men. Jesus was conceived not of the flesh but of the Holy Spirit.
Scripture says He was born of a women to be more precise. He may have been conceived by the Holy Spirit, but was born of flesh.

Once again your theology nullifies Christ as to who He really was, the God/Man. You keep Him as ONLY God. He never became man, just looked like a man. An image of a man. Totally and completely unscriptural.

Isn't any wonder that you would of necessity not believe God assumed our human natures when He, in your view, never was a man in the first place. But Christ did become man, dispite your interpretation. It was that Resurrection of our human natures in the Body of Christ that provides life to man. Death, physical death by Adam, life, physical life by Christ A perfect equation. No one escaped death by Adam, and no one will escape life by Christ. Christ lost none, John6:39. The pronoun "it" in that verse is referencing OUR human natures, He will raise IT in the last day. No exclusions.

IF this were true then He would not have had to be conceived of the Holy Spirit. He would just have had to be born as John the baptist was. But that is not the case with Christ.
Then you run to the very opposite extreme. Now you make Christ ONLY man, which if that were true, then any human being could save himself. But Scripture is quite clear that man cannot save Himself. Man can neither give himself life, that is raise himself from the grave, and could not atone of his own sin.

The answer was Christ, the God/man. Not ONLY God and NOT only man, but have BOTH THE DIVINE NATURE OF GOD AND THE HUMAN NATURE OF MAN. Conceived by the Holy Spirit, born of Mary, flesh. That is the mystery of the Incarnation. Christ the Savior of man, of the world.

My statement:....It is the essence of man. It is what makes man a human being and not an animal or any other created thing. Christ was tempted by the flesh just as we are.

Your response:...

Scripture to prove this please.

Satan tempting Christ, Matt 4:1-12 and Luke 4:11-13. Do you really think that this was just a friendly little chat that Jesus had with Satan?

Because we are human we can rise from the dead? Men cannot rise from the dead of thier own human accord. Jesus rose from the dead for a reason and it is not because He was Human.
Your statements come from totally misunderstanding of who is the Christ.

Man cannot raise himself from the dead, WHICH IS THE REASON THAT CHRIST WAS NEEDED. If man could save himself from death, from the fall, we would not need Christ. But Christ became man, so that we could be healed, part of that healing was to be given life, existance which was lost in the fall due to the condemnation of death to Adam. II Cor 4:14 and Rom 8:11 attest to this very fact.

Christ rose from the dead because He is the Giver of Life. He not only created us, but then also redeemed us from death, gave Life to man again. This LiFE is a physical life. Our spiritual life is a relational, or spiritual one. Because of physical death to Adam, God could not have a spiritual relationship with man for an eternity. Man would simply dissolve into nothingness as a mortal after a short terminal temporal life. Man, after the fall, NEEDED LIFE, and eternal existance once again, so that God could fulfil His purpose with man, which was to have a spiritual union for an eternity.


But this does not even address my statement. I am speaking about Christ's physcial resurrection and man's physical resurrection from death. Raising our mortal natures to life, immortalty.

Your response deals with man's spritual response to that Work of Christ whereby we enter into a spiritual union and communion with Christ. All men can have this union. All men were created to have this union, ALL men died, through the condemnation of Adam, and ALL men were restored to that capability, ability to have union and communion with Christ.

We enter by faith, and are saved by faith. Christ did not save our souls on the Cross. We were specifically created to do that before the fall. This union is what was lost BECAUSE of the fall. Christ did not save us from union, but to have union.

Once must know the truth of sin before one can understand the truth of Why Christ had to lay His life down for HIS sheep. Not all are His sheep.
He laid down His LIfe for THE SHEEP, so that those that believed could BECOME HIS SHEEP. Unless He saved the sheep, one cannot have a single His Sheep. You cannot have the latter without the former. It is why Christ was necessary, to restore the ability to have a spiritual relationship for an eternity to begin in the now.

God's intent is to have union with ALL MEN. That is why He created All MEN WITH A SOUL, IN HIS IMAGE. Man was created, was given the obligation to choose a relationship with God. Adam did and so must we. We are no different than Adam as a human being relative to that choice.

Sin is the least of the problems of man. If Christ only solved the problem of sin, we would still be mortal and dead. Our LIFE, our physical existance would cease upon our temporal demise. There is no eternity if Christ did not give LIFE to the WORLD. Sin is the result of being dead, being mortal. Death must be conquered, and that is precisely what Christ did. He rose from the dead, defeating death by death. Raising man's mortal nature to LIFE, immortality, an eternal existance.

A faith, or spiritual relationship cannot give man eternal life. Christ is the ONLY one who did it by His resurrection of our mortal natures, since it was with our nature that He rose from the dead. And then became glorified as well and appeared to the Apostles by entering the room not using the door.

That is absolutely correct that our nature is to sin. But our natures are NOT sin. We don't need to train our children because they are mortal, dead, under the influence of the flesh, the passions. And you are right that none are righteous, all are under sin. No man is without sin. It is the easist thing we can possibly do, is sin.
Then you move to this notion of natural man cannot understand. It has nothing to do with what we are discussing. It has to to with believers who are now in a spiritual union with Christ.

Man sins because he is fallen, mortal. We are sinners because we sin. Our natures are not sin. We are not born sinners. An impossibility since a baby upon birth has not done anything. Sin is something we do, thus once we do it, we can call ourselves sinners.
This goes right back to the Incarnation and understanding Who Christ is and the mystery of the Incarnation. Our natures could not possibly be sin if Christ assumed our natures. He would be sin right from the beginning. Sin is what we do, not first of all what we are. We become sinners by doing sin. Which is why we can curb sin. We do not need to sin. We can control sin. But that is dealing with the spiritual relationship we have with Christ. With the Help of the Holy Spirit we can sin less, we are able to control sin, but when we do sin we can also seek forgiveness of those sins and remain in that spiritual relationship.

We cannot change our nature. This is why one must be born again. Not of the will of man but of the Spirit of God.
wrong nature. We are on the physical nature topic, Your comment is speaking about our spiritual nature (relationship) with Christ. Being born again is a beginning point of that relationship, It is the renewal of a relationship for which we were created as human beings, but lost through Adam in the fall. Now that the fall has been corrected, an eternal existance given to all men, a person can believe in this Work of Christ, and by so doing, that faith justifies us and we enter into the relationship which was the purpose of Christ dying for us. To restore the possibility of that relationship for which we were created to be in with God.
 
Upvote 0
R

Rightglory

Guest
Mamaz,


It is His shed blood that is the New covenant.. It is through the cross of Christ that any man can be saved.
But the Blood ONLY enabled man to have a relationship in this life. This is where sin dwells, in this life. If God wanted to wait until man died, then an atonement is not necessary.
It is through the Cross that all men have BEEN SAVED. This is the resurrection to life. The physical the eternal existance given to every human being.
But the sacrifice of death, the blood also make it possible through the forgiveness of sin that we, as believers can work with God in a synergistic relationship for the salvation of our souls, starting in this life. Sin is the only problem man has in this life. Sin separates man from God. It is the atonement which propitiated the sin of the world, so that when a man desires to be IN Christ, He can repent of His sin, have them forgiven and enter into Christ. But while in Christ, we also sin, and those sins also need to be forgiven which we do by confession.
Christ does not cover sin which is a phrase you used, He gets rid of those sins we confess. We have been washed completely clean, we are completely righteous. But only for a short time since we will sin again and will need repentance, forgiveness and renewal. This is the journey to salvation, the salvation of our souls. A working relationship for which we were created to have with God. This is the work of Adam before the fall. This is what was restored by Christ being a victor over the fall, undoing what Adam did to mankind.
How can man will himself to not sin? When even out of our hearts come evil thoughts?
Let us take an extreme example of both an unbeliever and a believer.
An unbeliever can choose not to commit murder which is a sin. So can a believer do the same.
But each has committed other sins as well. Sins which each has done willfully or unvoluntary, unknowing. But ALL sin is man's responsibility. God does not sin, does not make man sin, does not compell man to sin. This is why when we are IN Christ, we are commanded to be perfect as He is perfect. Why Paul warns against all the grevious sins, the obvious sins. But when we do sin we have an advocate with the Father. He is an advocate because He has atoned for sin and now is able to forgive all sins. But ONLY those sins that are confessed will ever be forgiven.
THIS IS THE ONLY DISTINCTION BETWEEN A BELIEVER AND AN UNBELIVER. One is working with the Holy Spirit to cut off sinning, to sin less, and then seek repentance for those sins we do commit. An unbeliever is not working in faith to curb sin, and never seeks forgiveness of sins.
It is the faith factor that separates an unbeliever from a believer. Sin or the repentance from sin can change that relationship constantly with man. No man is precluded from believing and no man is precluded from falling.
Pecisely, but accepting Christ does not preclude you from either sinning, or sinning to such a extent that you fall from that relationship. Sin separates man from God. ONLY forgiveness reconciles man with God. So when a believer does sin, does not stop sinning, does not overcome bad habits, they must be actively repented of, he must seek forgiveness. If He does not, then he is willingly sinning and a willful sinner is no longer in Christ. A very simple understanding. Man cannot sin and remain IN Christ. It is man's total responsibility to work to curb sin, but if and when we sin to actively repent, to confess those sins. God DOES NOT ARBITRARILY FORGIVE SINS. If that were actually so, then, because God desires all men to have a relationship with Him, He could just forgive all sins, arbitrarily. Sin, our fallenness, is being used as a test of our desire, our faithfullness to be IN Christ. If we do not desire to remain, God will permit us to leave, since God cannot thwart the will of man. He created man to do this very thing. That when we do desire and do work to remain IN Christ, this is what glorifies God. If God was doing all of this for the beleiver, it would be a meaningless relationship. God would be glorifying Himself instead of man.
You cannot ask for forgiveness to just go out and do the same tomorrow believing that all you have to do is ask for forgiveness.. This is why it is the cross of Christ that brings obedience to Him..
And that is the very point that man is responsible for his sins. Not God. If we do just as you suggest here we are no longer in Christ. The Cross has nothing to do with bringing obedience. Obedience is a choice of man. But the Cross makes it possible for such a weak human being to have a means whereby even if he desires to be In Christ, and desires to curb his sinful ways and sin less, He still can remain IN Christ, as a sinner, to be able to have those sins removed, not just covered. He is made righteous again by confession and repentance. It is a daily occurance for a believer.
 
Upvote 0

Ben johnson

Legend
Site Supporter
Feb 9, 2002
16,916
404
Oklahoma
Visit site
✟99,049.00
Faith
Christian
Quoted by Behe'sBoy:
Please provide me one verse that states EXPLICITLY that if a CHRISTIAN sins and "falls away" that the will be cast into HELL.
It's not the "SINS" that condemn us --- it's the heart THAT sins. "Walking in sin", is inseparable from "disbelieving in Jesus".

James5:19-20 speaks of "wandering away from the truth" --- and if led back, "sins will be COVERED".

James1:14-16 speaks of "lust births sin, and sin brings death (thanatos!); do not be deceived beloved brethren."

Heb3:6-14 (and better 4:11) speaks of "being deceived by sin to falling away from the living God; we are partners in Christ IF we hold fast.... Therefore we must be diligent to enter His rest, lest anyone FALL by imitating their disobedience (and unbelief).

Do a search on "blameless" --- clearly, "blameful" and "sinful" are equivalent. Yet "blamelessness" is our choice in Col1:23 (read 21-23 --- our reconcilliation conditions on our steadfastness). Blamelessness is our choice in 2Pet3:14 (don't miss 17). God is capable of keeping us blameless in Jude24, but we keep ourselves in His love. We prove ourselves blameless in Philip2:15.

Rom6 is excellent; we are clearly given a choice --- to submit to Him, presenting our bodies as instruments of righteousness, to God; not yielding ourselves to sin.

It is not "sins" that condemn us; but the heart that sins. We can sin --- this proves that God is resistible --- and He is just resistible the NEXT time, when we can choose to sin again. Thus, the "fatal flaw" --- why doesn't God's sovereign regeneration prevent us from sinning?

I cited Heb10:26, if WE continue sinning willfully after having received FULL KNOWLEDGE (epignosis!) of the truth, His sacrifice no LONGER COVERS us. But we shall expect judgment and consuming fury of fire.

JF's answer to this was "That part of Hebrews does not apply to us".


Each of those Five-Ways, is really imposing upon Scripture, "not really".

....and I perceive, "yes really"...
 
Upvote 0

AndOne

Deliver me oh Lord, from evil men
Apr 20, 2002
7,477
462
Florida
✟28,628.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
Hebrews 10:26-27 falls right into line with Hebrews 6:4-6. "IF we deliberately keep on sinning..." doesn't necessarily mean that it is possible to.

So we're back to square one with this deal. If you are going to use these verses to support the "responsible grace" proposition then there is NO hope for the fallen Christian. NONE - and you are really going to have to twist it around to say there is.

If you hold to eternial security then there is no problem with these verses - mainly because they are conditional statements that if applied in context would show that the "fallen Christian" is not really Christian to begin with.
 
Upvote 0

Charis kai Dunamis

χάρις καὶ δύναμις
Dec 4, 2006
3,766
260
Chicago, Illinois
✟20,154.00
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
You have put words in my mouth, Ben. I think about 95% of your posts are you ascribing things to me that I never said. I will not waste my time with someone who can't even discuss something in a straightforward manner.

The least you could do is argue against what I believe in. You haven't done that; you have grossly misrepresented my words and my doctrinal beliefs.
 
Upvote 0
R

Rightglory

Guest
Mamaz,
But these do not support your view that nature is sin. What is supports is that nature sins, and can be washed clean. If our nature was sin, we would be dissolved by washing our natures away.
It is transgressions, sins, things we do that are washed away, not our natures.
Where did I ever say that our bodies are sin? I said that sin dwells in our mortal bodies.. It is engrained into our very being even at the time of concpetion..
Yes, dwells in, but is not sin. Sin itself is not engrained in us, but our mortal natures are what we are. We are born, concieved as mortals. This is the declaration of the fall. We inherit our fallenness, our mortality from Adam as a result of the condemnation of death against his sin.
I ask what it means and you quote the very scriptures that disagrees with your theological view point. But it is not the text itself, but your interpretation of them. Because these texts are saying exactly what I have been explaining. It is speaking of the physical aspect of our human nature. It is speaking of the physical change to that mortal nature that came about by Christ's resurrection from the dead. All men shall die once, and then be raised immortally, incorruptible in the last day at the Resurrection. All the dead shall be raised. There is absolutely nothing here about any spiritual relationship with Christ. It is all and ONLY about Christ reconciling the world, but specifically man to God.
Do you not understand that if they were truly believers they would not have went out from Him?
Yes, but a truly saved believer is a dead believer who now is unable to sin, and thus fall from Grace. A time in this life we are not finitely saved. That is the whole purpose of having a union with God in which man is held responsibile for that union. You have removed the whole purpose of God creating man in the first place. He put a commandment before Adam, a spiritual relationship, a union which was a choice for Adam and we have the
but we are not speaking of God just choosing, but choosing to be believers. None of the above texts even support your contention that a person is chosen to be a believer, not even predestined to be a believer.
The one that has the word "chose" in it John 15:16 is referencing the disciples. It is quite obvious that He did choose them, but He did not choose them to believe. It is this very verse that imparts authority to them as Apostles later which authority has been passed down from one generation to the next for 2000 years.
God chose Noah, Moses, Abraham and your text of Acts 13:17 also states this, but not a single one showing that God chooses individuals to salvation of their souls, or to become believers.
You better give me all those many more, instead, since these do not support your earlier statement.
But the answer is in John 12:32. God calls all men everywhere to repent. Acts 17:30
I agree that repentance is to turn from. But what do you turn to?
to the Righteousness IN Christ.
My question:...That is what scripture says, but that does not answer the statement. Why is it possible that immortality comes?
Your response:...
Not sure what you are asking. Please expound here for me.
Immortality comes through Christ's resurrection. We lost life through Adam, we regained it through Christ. Lost it with the first Adam, regained it with the Second Adam. As in Adam all die(became mortal), so also In Christ shall all be made alive (immortal).
It is the ONLY way any human being can be raised at the last day. Christ has overcome death, He has raised our mortal natures from death to life.
These are great texts but they are referring to two very distinct aspects of mans salvation. You are addressing ONLY the spiritual renewal, which is the salvation of our souls. That is it is all about the believer.
But Christ's work on the Cross made this all possible. What you are referring to is what was lost DUE TO THE FALL. Christ first saved us FROM THE FALL. From death the bondage to death, then sin by His Atonement. The salvation of our souls is the salvation from sin. He calls us to repentance, to enter into union because that is why we were created. This is what verse 10 is saying. The works of Righteouness, the works of faith, the works James is speaking about are these works we were created to do. Yet, most of the time, you want God to do these works under the guise that we are not saved by works. We are not, these are obligations to our committment to Christ. The works of the law man cannot do to save himself, which is why Christ was needed.
My statement:..And just how does this even answer the statment? So faith saved us, not Christ? Christ's coming served no purpose?
Your response:..
Answered above
But you did not answer above. You bypassed the whole Work of Christ on the Cross saving us from death and sin. You moved right into why that Work was necessary and into the relationship with Christ which is why Christ needed to save us in order to renew that relationship with God, fulfilling our purpose of existance and being created in the first place.
Spiritual life and ressurecton for the flesh profits nothing.
Not by any text in Scripture. If the resurrection of our mortal bodies does not take place, then this world is still condemned to death through Adam. That condemnation was physical, not spiritual. That physical death, separation of body and soul destroys the existance of the human being. We would return to dust as God stated in Gen 3:19. Unless you can find a way to get life, immortality, an eternal existance back into man, the spiritual union is null and void.
God created us to be human beings, body and soul. Paul speaks of the perfect human being as being a body, soul and union with God. Which is the culmination of the purpose of our existance. An existance that could not possible happen if man is condemned to death and remains in that state. Death is destruction, annihilation of the human being.

So rather than profits nothing it profits all. But in spiritual life the flesh profits nothing because it is the flesh that prevents the spiritual union. It is the flesh against the spirit of man as a believer.
 
Upvote 0
R

Rightglory

Guest
Jesusfreak5000.


I see another has the same problem as Nobdysfool. They cannot support what they say from scriptrue as scripture states it. You say Scripture is authoritative, but do not allow it to be authoritative. You cannot show that it is authoritative.
It is man's interpretation that becomes authoritative which only means that any interpretation cannot be refuted by scripture. Your interpretation become infallible and should not be questioned.
The protestant melieu is alive and well in this forum and thread.
This is the summation of what it means to say, "at least you could argue against what I believe". Ben has been doing just that with scripture. He is doing the same thing any person who understands scripture as it is stated and then puts that understanding against what the other person has stated. That it shows yours to be incorrect is not scriptures problem but yours.
Scripture has ONLY one meaning. It is describing ONLY one Revelation of God to man. It is His Gospel, not the gospel according to some man's opinion and brilliant interpretation. Some of the most brillant of the Churches theologians became heretics or supported heretical teachings, their own. Might be a reason for that. Man being the self centered egoistic creature that He is.
 
Upvote 0

Ben johnson

Legend
Site Supporter
Feb 9, 2002
16,916
404
Oklahoma
Visit site
✟99,049.00
Faith
Christian
Quoted by heymikey80:
It's like Tigger, desperately bouncing from verse to verse as if each is able to do something on its own. Sorry, Ben, the bounce has gone from your bungie.
Cowabungie! You're not serious!

(I like Tigger...)
Quote:
You're taking 1 Cor 9:25-27 to mean "salvation", eh? My refrain should've served as a warning to you. "Do you not know that in a race all the runners run, but only one receives the prize?" 1 Cor 9:24. Well, if this is salvation, I know this Jesus guy will be the One beating out all other to receive that prize. Not everything is soteriology.
When Paul says "we race for an imperishable wreath", what do you think that imperishable wreath is?
Quote:
"disqualified" is not a great word to span letters with, Ben.
Disqualified. Unapproved. Rejected. Adokimos.

What does 2Cor13:5 mean to you?
Quote:
Then you didn't recognize Jesus' original context and assertion, and so you aren't dealing with what Jesus actually said. Jesus couldn't possibly have been addressing someone who was once the servant of one person, then the servant of another. Yet that's how you applied the verse.
I was using it in the sense that "we cannot serve God AND sin". As Jesus said, "He who sins, is a slave to sin".

We are enslaved either to sin, or to God and His righteousness.

I used it correctly, Mike. Jesus said "No one can serve God and Mammon" --- Mamonas is translated "riches (where it is personified and opposed to God)".
 
Upvote 0

Ben johnson

Legend
Site Supporter
Feb 9, 2002
16,916
404
Oklahoma
Visit site
✟99,049.00
Faith
Christian
Quote:
Circumcision is by the Spirit. Circumcision is about the heart being circumcised, not the flesh. The Spirit performs it. The heart is changed. With the heart man then believes.
You will never find that doctrine in Scripture. Men believe and THEN their heart is changed. It's that way in Ezk36:26-27 ( & 11:18-21), it's in Rom10:9-10, it's in 2Cor4:3-4 ( & 3:16). Back up what you just said with Scripture, or consider changing your viewpoint.
Quote:
No reason to deny. Fits Reformed thought perfectly. The group isn't going to stop pursuing the results of their submissive faith to God by following a counterexample of unbelief. Paul is re-emphasizing their focus, not to lose their encouragement over defectors.
Hardly; it's in the context of "do not be deceived by deceitful sin to falling away from the living God; do not harden your hearts; we are partners in Christ IF we hold fast the beginning of our assurance firm until the end. Be diligent TO enter God's rest, lest anyone FALL by imitating their disobedience (unbelief)."

Undeniable concepts, Mike.
Quote:
1 - Paul's not using "lust". Quit adding words to Scripture.
You don't think Paul is using "flesh" in exactly the same way as James uses "lusts", in James1:14-16?
Quote:
2 - The relationship is a new Law, it operates according to completely new rules (Rom 8:2), it is not simply depriving every aspect of living in your flesh. You're entering words into a machine. You're in the flesh, Ben.
Which doctrine (Calvinism or Responsible Grace) re-defines words, asserts "subject changes" mid-verse, and proposes things like "fall means only lose crowns"?
 
Upvote 0

Ben johnson

Legend
Site Supporter
Feb 9, 2002
16,916
404
Oklahoma
Visit site
✟99,049.00
Faith
Christian
Quote:
And so too is the idea of a written code of performance for reward. That is not how the law of the Spirit works. Paul's saying exactly that: if you're looking for quid pro quo, paybacks for performance, you're sunk already. You're living by "the works of the flesh."
In Col2 he speaks of "indulgence of the flesh". This aligns with Peter's use of the word "sensuality", in 2:2:14-22.
Quote:
I assume you deal with lust like everyone else, so the point is overthrown by example.
Of course I meant it as James did, 1:14-16. The point stands.
Quote:
And in fact that example is normative. Mt 5:28-30. Do you meet these conditions, and all the others of the Sermon on the Mount? No? Then I would hope for your sake that by your definitions, lustful men will somehow enter the gates (kingdom?) of heaven.
Yes, I meet the criteria --- I do not lust after women.

I look forward to your answer to James1:14-16.
Quote:
But of course my definitions take this in an entirely different direction.
That's true.
Quote:
But then you knew that. Or you should know that if you're writing a book on Reformed thought. It's written all over Reformed thought.
That one can be "walking in sin, but remain saved"?

(Sincere question, meant no disrespect...)
 
Upvote 0

Ben johnson

Legend
Site Supporter
Feb 9, 2002
16,916
404
Oklahoma
Visit site
✟99,049.00
Faith
Christian
Quote:
The Rules have changed. Salvation can't be by the rules of Law. Salvation must be by the rules of the Spirit's re-creation. It has an effect in morality, and the Law can't even complain about those God moves in. That's because you're under the rule of the Spirit. And that's what Paul is pointing out.
Jesus came not to destroy the Law, but to fulfill it. They followed Law to BE righteous, we follow God's law because we ARE saved. "God's Law" prohibits the unrighteous, idolaters, covetous, drunkards, revilers, immoral, perverse, etcetera, from entering Heaven. 1Cor6:9-11, Eph5:5-6.
Quote:
You, however, are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if in fact the Spirit of God dwells in you. Anyone who does not have the Spirit of Christ does not belong to him. But if Christ is in you, although the body is dead because of sin, the Spirit is life because of righteousness. Rom 8:9-10
OK focus on this --- we are not in the flesh, we do not "walk after the flesh"; for "if we do we must die".

Support the premise that Rom8:12-14 does not mean "die spiritually"...
 
Upvote 0

Ben johnson

Legend
Site Supporter
Feb 9, 2002
16,916
404
Oklahoma
Visit site
✟99,049.00
Faith
Christian
Quote:
Counterquestion: why would Paul be arguing this if everyone automatically did it? Just to make it clear? Why need clarity when you have reality?'
Because we can "walk after the flesh".

...if we do, we must die...
Quote:
You didn't answer my question, and I answered yours above. This is becoming another tiring pattern in your vaults from verse to verse. Answer the question or don't sit around complaining others aren't answering yours.
your question? "Why would Paul argue this if everyone automatically did it?"

That's the point --- Paul would not; but you deny that "sin can deceive to spiritual death". Or is Heb3 yet another passage that "does not apply to us"?
 
Upvote 0

Ben johnson

Legend
Site Supporter
Feb 9, 2002
16,916
404
Oklahoma
Visit site
✟99,049.00
Faith
Christian
Quote:
I did assuredly answer what you said. Your denial is prima facie false. It's right there in my answer to what you quoted! A choice is a choice of coise of coise. But a wilful choice need not be a lightning strike out of the blue.
Back to the "fatal flaw"; we can choose sin.

If we do, we die.
Quote:
Created wills are still wills. Dependent choices are still choices. A man may think rationally, and yet his thoughts are still his, and thus his responsibility.
A man who can choose only one course, has only one choice; thus it's not a "choice".
Quote:
Nothing of the sort.
Then what? All of those verse are really saying "but don't sweat it, you can't REALLY fall away into sin"?
Quote:
Were you right, then your theology is sunk. Because Predestination is explicitly advocated in Scripture.
By "predestination", we're talking "predestined-SALVATION". Where "explicitly advocated"? It's not in Rom8. It's not in Eph1. Where is it?

"Take care about yourself and your teaching; PERSEVERE in these things; as you do you will save yourselves and those who hear you." Was that it? Nope, couldn't be...
Quote:
But you're wrong. And so fatalism is not advocated in Scripture.
I agree that fatalism is not advocated in Scripture.
...and I'm right that Calvinism has striking parallels to Fatalism...
 
Upvote 0

Ben johnson

Legend
Site Supporter
Feb 9, 2002
16,916
404
Oklahoma
Visit site
✟99,049.00
Faith
Christian
Quote:
That's a problem between you and the Writer of Scripture. But don't carry it over to people who believe Scripture and not you.
Do you believe Scripture? Then what's being taught in Heb3:6-14?
Quote:
In him we have obtained an inheritance, having been predestined according to the purpose of him who works all things according to the counsel of his will Ep 1:11
And the "purpose" and "His will", is expressly stated in John 6:40 --- that all who see Jesus and believe, be saved.

If we were predestined, why did Jesus praise unseen belief over seen belief, to Thomas in Jn20:29? Wouldn't both "beliefs" (seen, and unseen) --- be "predestined"?

Why is one greater?
Quote:
Scripture embraces Predestination. You simply deny it.
I have yet to see it.

...but I've seen plenty of "you-can-fall" verses...
 
Upvote 0

Ben johnson

Legend
Site Supporter
Feb 9, 2002
16,916
404
Oklahoma
Visit site
✟99,049.00
Faith
Christian
Quoted by Ben:
Apparently some Calvinists here think the "dedicated-wicked", can choose to "escape defilements" --- and through a SUPERFICIAL knowledge of the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. How do you read 2Pet2:20-22? (Don't forget verse 18, were the false prophets, and the false teachers, try to entice the truly-escaped back into sensuality...
Quoted by Mike:
Of course people can escape defilements and not be regenerated!
So --- why do we need Jesus, if we can be righteous WITHOUT Him?
Quote:
'What the true proverb says has happened to them: "The dog returns to its own vomit, and the sow, after washing herself, returns to wallow in the mire."' 2 Pt 2:22
First, that third-group is "truly escaped defilements" (verse 18).
Second, they were "escaped defilements through the true knowledge (epignosis!) of the LORD and SAVIOR Jesus.
Third, they KNEW the way of righteousness.

...and you stubbornly say "oh they were never saved".

What would Peter have had to say differently, if (in your view) he was trying to say "they were saved"?
 
Upvote 0

Ben johnson

Legend
Site Supporter
Feb 9, 2002
16,916
404
Oklahoma
Visit site
✟99,049.00
Faith
Christian
Quote:
You're saying anyone who has "barely escaped" is saved. Another mistake of believing that everything is about soteriology.
It wasn't that they were "barely escaped" (as the Textus Receptus says, or "truly escaped" as other Greek texts say) --- it was that they were escaped through the TRUE knowledge of the Lord and Savior Jesus, KNOWING the way of righteousness!
...but you say "they never knew it". Who should we believe, Mike?
Quote:
None of these verses say such, as we've discussed. Quite a few of them say the exact opposite. As you vault from verse to verse without demonstrating even one of them actually says what you assert it says, you simply return to your own refrain.
If you would cite them, you would see they do say what I've been asserting.
 
Upvote 0

AndOne

Deliver me oh Lord, from evil men
Apr 20, 2002
7,477
462
Florida
✟28,628.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
If we were predestined, why did Jesus praise unseen belief over seen belief, to Thomas in Jn20:29? Wouldn't both "beliefs" (seen, and unseen) --- be "predestined"?​
Why is one greater?


I don't believe the word "greater" was the term used to describe the faith of those who believe without seeing. If it was then you'd be able to use this verse to defend your position - but thankfully it doesn't.
 
Upvote 0

AndOne

Deliver me oh Lord, from evil men
Apr 20, 2002
7,477
462
Florida
✟28,628.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married

Yes, I meet the criteria --- I do not lust after women.

Let me get this straight - are you trying to tell us that since becoming saved you've never had an impure thought?
 
Reactions: heymikey80
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.