"God-ordained sin"? 1 Kings 22:22-23, Exodus 4:21 and Genesis 50:20

[Ben johnson]

Well, you can "believe", but what good is only head knowledge?

What is the difference between "head-knowledge", and "true belief"? To ask that more pointedly --- what is the difference in the beginning faith of those in Lk8:13, and those in Lk8:15? If we start with the premise that "Only true faith WILL persevere", then we might assign "unsaved-head-knowledge" (only professing but not really saved) to those in verse 13. But would that be valid? It says, "They received the word with joy, and believed." By deciding "they didn't really believe SAVINGLY", it seems to me "deciding the outcome by presuming the beginning". The context of Luke8 makes no distinction between the beginning faith of those in 13, and the beginning faith of those in 15. It looks like their own PERSEVERANCE (or not) is what differentiated them.

That idea is furthered by passages like Matt22:2-14; all men were called the same, the king did NOT influence any, they either RECEIVED the invitation, or REFUSED. "Many are called, but few are chosen" --- the "few", are those who came and put-on righteousness. Not "those few whom the King has chosen".

OK, Jesus died on the cross? OK...NOW WHAT? How many people "brought up" in christian homes end up non-believers. They are preached and taught to believe in Christ but that obviously doesn't convict a spiritually discerned person. It isn't enough. Without God's Spirit, belief in the "cross" is superficial and thus meaningless. It is ONLY when the Holy Spirit bears witness to our spirit that genuine conviction of the heart and true repentence can occur. Then you become a child of God. Those who don't recieve the Holy Spirit will never be spiritually awakened and thus will never be children of God. They lead a life of self-centeredness and never are given the "gifts of the Spirit" or show "fruit of the Spirit". They are spritually dead vessels who have no grasp of spiritual truth or reality?

You're clearly espousing "They cannot TRULY believe, until the Spirit opens their hearts". But that idea isn't present in Scripture. Look at 1Cor2:14; this verse often is thought to mean "natural (unregenerated) men cannot believe in Jesus". But contextually, the spiritual things in verse 14 (that natural men cannot understand), are the same spiritual things spoken of in verse 12 --- things that are revealed by the RECEIVED Spirit.

The Spirit is received by belief. It is therefore belief, which receives the Spirit, that alters the "natural man" into a "spiritual man".

Well, I take this to read that it is only by God's grace that we are awakened spiritually and thus are given genuine faith to believe. Because this is "NOT OF OUR OWN DOING".

Can't be, Darceri. The "saving-faith" happened DURING the time "we were dead". Nowhere is "saving-faith", a unilateral gift from God. Please read Heb11:6, and see how "those who come to God must come by FAITH (must believe He IS), and that He rewards those who seek Him (not they seek whom He has chosen)."

again, "head knowledge belief" is useless. After looking at the whole passage, I take the phrase, "those who believe" to mean those believers who have been already spiritually blessed and convicted. For throughout the passage it mentions the power of God. It is God who enables our "saving faith" and thus genuine belief. It is not because "of our own doing". (See all comments above..... It all ties in.)

They believe through the foolishness. Do you agree that if "regeneration" was a prior and monergistic gift, and if "saving-faith" is also gifted by God, then the message would have ceased being foolish and then they believed?

Saying "believed through the foolishness", is equivalent to saying "WHEN we were dead in sins, God made us alive by grace, through faith".

Faith happened during "being dead". DURING "foolishness"...

Eph 2:8For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God

Please look again at John1:12-13; verse 13 clearly says "the begottenness is not of yourselves, but of God"; but verse 12 says that BECOMING begotten, is "by receiving Jesus, by believing in His name".

Faith is causal, not consequential to election.

Final comment:
It takes two things to bring us to genuine faith. One is the Spirit of God and the other is the Word of God (the Gospel message). BOTH ARE NEEDED.....Atheists can read the bible until they are blue in the face, but it is all "folly" to them.

Read Josh McDowell's, "Evidence that Demands a Verdict" --- he was an Atheist who tried to defeat Scripture, but became convicted and believed.

They never have recieved the Spirit of God to understand it yet. The Holy Spirit not only convicts of sin, He convinces men Jesus is the righteousness of God.

Look at the contrast between 2Tim3:15, and John5:39-47. In the first case "studying the Scripture leads to conviction to saving-faith"; in the second, Jesus rebukes them for "studying the Scripture and REFUSING to believe in Me".

He shows sinners that Jesus is the Way, the Truth, the Life, and that no one comes to the Father but by Him. If one tries to believe without the Holy Spirit ever being sent, they are doomed to fail and are the ones scripture says "they left us because they were never of us".

1Jn2:19 is best answered by 2Jn1:7-9; there are "those who go on ahead (go out from us), have not Jesus". But they certainly DID. Hence the warning to "watch yourselves that you not lose what was wrought."

What was wrought, was "salvation".

 

[nobdysfool]

And yet, these things were told to Ahab's FACE, BEFORE the battle --- he went into battle ANYWAY.

1Ki 22:30 And the king of Israel said to Jehoshaphat, "I will disguise myself and go into battle, but you wear your robes." And the king of Israel disguised himself and went into battle.

1Ki 22:34-37 But a certain man drew his bow at random and struck the king of Israel between the scale armor and the breastplate. Therefore he said to the driver of his chariot, "Turn around and carry me out of the battle, for I am wounded." (35) And the battle continued that day, and the king was propped up in his chariot facing the Syrians, until at evening he died. And the blood of the wound flowed into the bottom of the chariot. (36) And about sunset a cry went through the army, "Every man to his city, and every man to his country!" (37) So the king died, and was brought to Samaria. And they buried the king in Samaria.

You left out an important point that completely destroys your view. Yes, the prophecy was made to Ahab before the battle, and in contravention of all the other prophets, who assured Ahab that he would be victorious. Ahab thought he would cheat death by disguising himself, but he was killed anyway, by a "random" arrow. Thus, the word of Micaiah the Prophet was confirmed, and this shows that God did ordain the death of Ahab at Ramoth-gilead, and God used the lying spirit to encourage Ahab to do so, in spite of the word of the prophet Micaiah. Ahab believed his own prophets more than he believed the word of the Lord, even when it was revealed to him.

Ahab chose as God ordained that he do, and even Ahab's attempt to cheat the fate God had ordained availed him nothing.

By ordaining sin? No.

You deny what is right in front of you. You deny scripture itself.

No, it demonstrates the "Semitic View", where God is ascribed with things that men do themselves. We cannot discount all the verses that say "do not harden your heart ...away from God".

I think this so-called "Semitic view" is an invention of Ben. I have searched for reference to it, and so far have not found any support. Perhaps you should cite your proof for such a view. At any rate, a little though will show that this is a device of liberal theologians, (if that is where this came) to explain away any supernatural workings, and remove God from any Sovereignty over the affairs of men. If you believe in the inspiration of scripture, you should have nothing to do with such a God-dishonoring view.

Scripture is clear: God hardened Pharaoh's heart, and Pharaoh's subsequent actions are proof that Pharaoh did exactly as God had ordained that he do: harden his heart toward the Hebrews. There is no conflict between God hardening Pharaoh's heart, and Pharaoh hardening his own heart. You cannot refute scripture with scripture, because scripture does not contradict itself, and your statements in essence say that they do.

Yet the brothers made their own choice. We cannot perceive God as "authoring sin", on any level. God cannot tempt, cannot cause sin.

I didn't say that God "authored" their sin, or any sin. That is the device you use to shift the argument. God did not "make" them sin, He utilized that which He knew beforehand that they would do, to achieve His Purpose, which was to get Joseph to Egypt, where Joseph, under God's guidance and providence, could and would rise to a position of great power in Egypt, and would be in the position to save his brethren and family. The brothers "meant" (intended) their actions for evil against Joseph, but God "meant" (intended) the brothers' actions for good, not only for Joseph, but for the brothers and all of Joseph's family.

Stop trying to explain away God's clear control and ordination of events. Just because you can't conceive of how these things could be, does not mean that they are not. It is you and your understanding which must change, not God's Word.

Was it God's choice that so many Jews were killed in Nazi Germany? We cannot blame God for evil in the world.

Was it God's Will that Joshua and the Israelites slay all the inhabitants of Canaan? How is that different?

Blaming God is a false depiction. And, in debate, when the Nazi's are mentioned, or Hitler, it is generally accepted that the one who brings them up has run out of arguments, and is going for the emotional close. You have officially "jumped the shark".

Exactly it --- which does God do, receive our faith or cause it?

Scripture says "receive". Heb11:6.

No, Scripture says both. Jesus is the Author and Finisher of our faith. What do we have that has not been given to us? No man can believe apart from the Grace of God. Man does not believe to receive Grace, Man receives Grace in order to believe.

 

[nobdysfool]

You're clearly espousing "They cannot TRULY believe, until the Spirit opens their hearts". But that idea isn't present in Scripture. Look at 1Cor2:14; this verse often is thought to mean "natural (unregenerated) men cannot believe in Jesus". But contextually, the spiritual things in verse 14 (that natural men cannot understand), are the same spiritual things spoken of in verse 12 --- things that are revealed by the RECEIVED Spirit.

The Spirit is received by belief. It is therefore belief, which receives the Spirit, that alters the "natural man" into a "spiritual man".

Or, to put it another way, Ben believes that men, through the power of their own belief, regenerate themselves, so they can then receive the Spirit of Christ.

And yet you howl in protest when we say that you believe that men save themselves.

Ben, do you even proof-read what you write???

 

[Ben johnson]

As the question is worded, I don't think God ordains the sins of men. Romans 11:32 says God has "bound" all men over to disobedience so that He might have mercy on them all. I would say that God "permits" the sins of men. At least for a time.

Touche' --- nicely stated.

But other Calvinists say "no."

And when some Calvinists say "no", then we are in agreement on this.

I don't think God desires that mankind do sin. That conflicts with 1 Tim 2:4 which says God "wants all men to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth."

God is glorified by many things, but God is not glorified through blasphemy or by a refusal to acknowledge Him (Rev 16:9).

"And men were scorched with fierce heat, and they blasphemed the name of God who has the power over these plagues; and they did not repent, so as to give Him glory." Rev16:9

Awesome point, Lamor; it is REPENTANCE, not sin that gives God glory.

Yes, Ahab was responsible for his own choice and his own downfall. Ahab also was responsible for the death of Naboth and taking his vineyard. God judged him, then Ahab repented, and then God relented (1 Kings 21:18-29). Pretty fascinating how an unsaved man's repentance led God to relent from what He had already declared.

Are you sure you hold to "Calvinism"?

Yes, Pharaoh and God were "working together" on the hardening - but with the opposite results in mind.

The question remains --- does God harden anyone WITHOUT that person's consent? I say "no"; you say --- ????

God certainly did not "cause" the brothers to sin. Certainly Jacob and His sons were in a covenant relationship with God. So if one were to say God caused them to sin, then that would imply God causes His followers to sin. So I agree that these verses do not support the idea that God ordains - or causes - the sins of people.

Now how about Judas?

There is no way to deny the connection between John15:16, and John6:70. Jesus chose all twelve Disciples, and appointed them to bear fruit and their fruit remain. Not only was Judas chosen the same as the other 11, but the other 11 could LEAVE just as Judas was leaving (Jn6:67-70). What other understanding can there be of verses 67-70?

That's an interesting issue. What was God's role in Judas' life? Was Judas destined to betray Jesus?

No. His betrayal was FORETOLD, but not "fore-determined".

If Judas hadn't betrayed Jesus....then what would have happened?

Jesus would have been crucified, buried, and raised from the dead....

Excellent post, LamorakDesGalis.

 

[Ben johnson]

What else would you expect ? ....God desired a particular set of circumstances to occur, in order to achieve a desired result.....which is exactly what He got...one dead Ahab.

Hi, Moonbeam. The verse was offered as "proof of God ordaining sin". It doesn't, does it?

Ben...did God speak these words...Yes or No "...I will harden his heart, so that he will..." (Exod 4:21)

I'll answer you with the same question --- did Pharaoh SIN and harden his OWN heart, in 9:34?
And does Hebrews say "do not harden YOUR hearts ...by deceitful sin ...to falling away from the living God"?

Was God surprised at the final figure?...No...He knew what that figue would be before He made Adam.....I conclude that God had some purpose in the holocaust seeing as it is a fact of history....and like any other fact of history an integral part of a cohesive, unified, plan....unfathomable to us in its scope and intricacy.

But what is "fathomable", is that God does not tempt, and does not cause sin.

 

[Ben johnson]

I know that Ben insists that Judas was saved, and then forfeited his salvation, but it is clear that the Eleven (the Twelve minus Judas) were born from above just before Jesus was crucified. Judas was never born again. And he was ordained to his end by God.

He was "ordained to bear fruit that remained, just as the other 11 were". That's what Jesus said --- I believe it.

Ooops! Must have hit a nerve....

Not at all; you made "blanket statements" and "personal slights"; I said "now prove them".

You attempted to refute Piper, but you didn't succeed. If Piper was that easily refuted, he wouldn't be the theologian that he is.

Pick out one thing I said in response to him, that didn't refute him.

One thing you seem to be blind to is the unnatural regard you hold for your own posts, and the fact that you not-so-subtly try to equate your posts with scripture itself. You seem to fail to grasp that scripture must be rightly divided in order for it to carry any weight. Anyone can randomly quote scripture to bolster whatever view they want, but that quoting of scripture does not, in and of itself, make that view true or unassailable.

They were not "random quotes". Pick out one or two that was "random" and "weightless" --- and we'll discuss it.

...but you will not, because they were "pointed and Scripturally based". Anyone can say "you refuted nothing"; but credibility is established when you show validity in saying that.

Show the validity that "Ben didn't refute anything".

We'll get to specifics, but in the past, when you've been taken to task that way, you suddenly stop answering, and refuse to answer. That recently happened with Frumanchu, who pinned you down decisively. Now, you won't answer his posts at all. You don't like it when you're pinned and shown to be wrong.

No, I don't like what happens when I answer him; any answer that I give, leads to the same result.

 

[Ben johnson]

Ahab chose as God ordained that he do, and even Ahab's attempt to cheat the fate God had ordained availed him nothing.

By ordaining sin? No.

You deny what is right in front of you. You deny scripture itself.

God ordained his demise, consequential to his sin. God did not ordain his sin.

Please do a websearch on "Pharaoh hardened his own heart"; you'll find pages like this:

We recognize the Bible says that Pharaoh hardened his own heart, before it says that God hardened his heart (Ex. 9:12). God had made a reasonable demand upon Pharaoh (Ex. 5:5) saying, “Let my people go,” and Pharaoh had made up his mind not to heed it! Thus, there was both God’s part and Pharaoh’s part in the hardening process. The demand hardened Pharaoh’s heart, because it was made by the God of heaven and earth, the God Pharaoh neither respected, nor feared. Ultimately, it is within your power to determine the effect God’s demands for your life will have on you. The Hebrew writer said,

“Today, if you will hear his voice, harden not your heart”

(Heb. 3:15).

Copyright laws prevent me from citing more; but it's a short page, you will find it interesting. Look also at this one, especially the "conclusion".

No, Scripture says both. Jesus is the Author and Finisher of our faith.

We've discussed this many times --- Heb12:2. "Author" is "archegos", "leader/prince"; and "finisher" is "teleitoes", "chief example". If God authored our faith WITHOUT our consent, then why does the entire chapter of Heb12 speak of "falling away from salvation"? Shall we discuss it again?

What do we have that has not been given to us?

"Faith", is received by God, not given.

No man can believe apart from the Grace of God.

Correct --- and equally, God's grace does not save us apart from faith.

Man does not believe to receive Grace, Man receives Grace in order to believe.

Wrong; man "believes to receive grace". John1:12.

Or, to put it another way, Ben believes that men, through the power of their own belief, regenerate themselves, so they can then receive the Spirit of Christ.

You know what I believe; and you know this is a greater misrepresentation than anything Ben has been accused of.

 

[nobdysfool]

He was "ordained to bear fruit that remained, just as the other 11 were". That's what Jesus said --- I believe it.

Seems to me that his fruit did remain. it just wasn't the same as the other eleven....

Not at all; you made "blanket statements" and "personal slights"; I said "now prove them".

We have, many times. However, you won't admit to it, and just dismiss the proof of them and declare that we haven't.

Pick out one thing I said in response to him, that didn't refute him.

The only refutation of Piper that happened was inside your own mind.

They were not "random quotes". Pick out one or two that was "random" and "weightless" --- and we'll discuss it.
...but you will not, because they were "pointed and Scripturally based". Anyone can say "you refuted nothing"; but credibility is established when you show validity in saying that.

Again? That's your usual method, no matter how many times we do this, you claim that it has not been done.

Show the validity that "Ben didn't refute anything".

How about you show the validity that you have? Beyond your mere say-so. You refuse to recognize any refutation against you, so we can do the same.

No, I don't like what happens when I answer him; any answer that I give, leads to the same result.

Yeah, Fru kicks your butt!

You refuse to answer him, because his answers cut the legs out from under you.

It took you how many weeks to reply to me before you started this thread???

 

[nobdysfool]

God ordained his demise, consequential to his sin. God did not ordain his sin.

Ben, the demise of all men is ordained as a result of sin. Death is the consequences of sin. God ordained a delusion for Ahab, so that Ahab would fall. Is it a sin to prophesy falsely? Yes. Is it a sin to lie? yes. God ordained a lying spirit and false prophesy for Ahab, so that he would fall. So, yes, God does ordain sins, to further His Purpose. He uses the sins of men as tools. Your failure to understand that doesn't mean it isn't so.

Please do a websearch on "Pharaoh hardened his own heart"; you'll find pages like this: Copyright laws prevent me from citing more; but it's a short page, you will find it interesting. Look also at this one, especially the "conclusion".

Exodus 4:21 is the first mention, and it is God who says He will harden Pharaoh's heart. I don't care how many other sources you find to tickle your ears, scripture is plain and unambiguous. God said HE would harden Pharaoh's heart, long before it actually happened. Pharaoh did as God ordained that he do.

We've discussed this many times --- Heb12:2. "Author" is "archegos", "leader/prince"; and "finisher" is "teleitoes", "chief example".

You insist on the alternate, marginal NASB readings, because they support what you want to believe. How many times have we repeatedly refuted you on this? I've lost count. Your declaration that we haven't is false. Your refusal to accept it is well-known, but that doesn't make your view the correct one. You have never offered a compelling case for why your favorite definitions of those words should be favored over what nearly every other translation of the scriptures render them as. The only reason I can see is that as you have often stated before, you believe you are the equal (or better) of ANY theologian, armed only with a Bible and a lexicon, and you actually revel in your lack of education in theology, thinking that somehow ignorance is better than education.

Your desire to translate these words as you have done is clear, it is only with those definitions that the passage seems to uphold your view, while the correct translation blows a seriously huge hole in it.

If God authored our faith WITHOUT our consent, then why does the entire chapter of Heb12 speak of "falling away from salvation"?

Why is it so important that God not do anything without our consent? Why do you restrain God so? Why do you make man's "free will" the strongest power in the universe? Since when does God have to gain our "permission" to save us?

"Faith", is received by God, not given.

God both gives and receives faith,. Ben.

Correct --- and equally, God's grace does not save us apart from faith.

Grace enables faith. God is ALWAYS the first mover in man's salvation. ALWAYS.

Joh 1:13 who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God.

Wrong; man "believes to receive grace". John1:12.

Joh 1:12 But to all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God,

Not there, Ben. Grace enables faith.

You know what I believe; and you know this is a greater misrepresentation than anything Ben has been accused of.

It is not a misrepresentation, and I DO know what you believe, Ben. You just don't like it when we take it a little further logically, and when we strip away the double-talk, and speak plainly. You don't like it when we show that the logical outcome of your doctrines is exactly what I said. Deny it all you want, it doesn't change the fact that your doctrines teach that men initiate their own salvation by their own faith, while they are dead in sins, and that God's Grace comes into play AFTER the man has, by his own power, believed. Thus, you teach that men regenerate themselves.

 

[DArceri]

What is the difference between "head-knowledge", and "true belief"?

"True belief" is knowledge with full illumination. This can only happen when the Holy Spirit bears witness with our spirit.

--- what is the difference in the beginning faith of those in Lk8:13, and those in Lk8:15? If we start with the premise that "Only true faith WILL persevere", then we might assign "unsaved-head-knowledge" (only professing but not really saved) to those in verse 13. But would that be valid?

YES, it would be valid. See your next question below.

It says, "They received the word with joy, and believed."

You conveniently chopped up this verse and left out the next few verses:

13And the ones on the rock are those who, when they hear the word, receive it with joy. But these have no root; they believe for a while, and in time of testing fall away.

Note: To have no root means they never fully understood the message of God. This is a clear example of belief without full understanding (ie. wisdom of the Holy Spirit.)

The context of Luke8 makes no distinction between the beginning faith of those in 13, and the beginning faith of those in 15. It looks like their own PERSEVERANCE (or not) is what differentiated them.

Well lets look more fully at this verse:

15As for that in the good soil, they are those who, hearing the word, hold it fast in an honest and good heart, and bear fruit with patience.

This verse is clearly suggesting that the message sunk in and took root. They did not just have facts about the word of God, they fully understood it. The Gospel message took root and thus they then could produce fruit.

That idea is furthered by passages like Matt22:2-14; all men were called the same, the king did NOT influence any, they either RECEIVED the invitation, or REFUSED.

Well, this parable shows that man can reject the gift of the Holy Spirit. I never denied rejection of the Holy Spirit couldn't happen. BUT THAT BEING SAID, what does this have to do with our discussion of superficial 'head knowledge' belief vs. knowledge with full illumination"? AGAIN, one cannot have genuine belief and thus saving faith without His Spirit bearing witnessing to our spirit. Note: Scripture says the Spirit is like the wind. The wind blows where it wants and no one can see it. We need to be thankful that the Spirit has blown our way by God's grace.

Look at 1Cor2:14; this verse often is thought to mean "natural (unregenerated) men cannot believe in Jesus". But contextually, the spiritual things in verse 14 (that natural men cannot understand), are the same spiritual things spoken of in verse 12 --- things that are revealed by the RECEIVED Spirit.

Well,lets look at the preceding verses of 10 and 11 you conveniently left out:

10..these things God has revealed to us through the Spirit.
11..So also no one comprehends the thoughts of God except the Spirit of God.

God's Truth is not revealed to us until He enables us to understand it. We are not capable of understanding Spiritual truths as unregenerated beings. God's spiritual thoughts turn into spiritual words for us when He "illuminates" us.

The Spirit is received by belief. It is therefore belief, which receives the Spirit, that alters the "natural man" into a "spiritual man".

BEN, What comes BEFORE belief ? Don't we need to HEAR the message first? BUT, we need to hear with full understanding!!!!!! That can only happen if God "illuminates" His message to us. For those who hear the message without understanding the message, well, lets just say they need God's 'illumination' before they can ever be regenerated.

 

[Ben johnson]

"True belief" is knowledge with full illumination. This can only happen when the Holy Spirit bears witness with our spirit.

Hi, Darceri. The idea of "true (saving) belief cannot happen until the Spirit (previously) regenerates the heart", is not supported in Scripture. You cited 1Cor2:14, thinking that "things" included "salvation": "the natural (unregenerated) man cannot understand the things of God". But we showed how verse 12 says "those things are revealed by the received Spirit" --- so the SAME THINGS in both verses, are revealed by the received-by-BELIEF Spirit".

YES, it would be valid. See your next question below.

You conveniently chopped up this verse and left out the next few verses:

13And the ones on the rock are those who, when they hear the word, receive it with joy. But these have no root; they believe for a while, and in time of testing fall away.

Do they "fall" because they have no root"? Or do they "have no root because they fall"? IOW, are they called "bad soil" because they fall, or do they fall because they're bad soil?

This can be answered by Heb6:7-8. ONE soil is tilled to bear fruit; if it bears good fruit it's blessed --- but if it bears thorns/thistles, it is cursed and burned. The connection between the two passages (Lk8, and Heb6), cannot be denied. So this affirms that their consideration (and "label") consequent FROM their perseverance, not vice-versa.

There is no difference in their faiths at the start; it's only perseverance or not, that differentiates them.

Note: To have no root means they never fully understood the message of God. This is a clear example of belief without full understanding (ie. wisdom of the Holy Spirit)

No it doesn't --- it means "they fell". By saying "receive the Word with joy and believe", it does not convey "false belief". It was temptation (and affliction and persecution, see Mark) that caused their fall. And it was BY perseverance that the others were called "good fruit".

Hence --- it is perseverance that casts us as "good soil", and non-perseverance that casts us as "bad". Notice how Paul puts it in 1Tim4:16; we need diligence and perseverance --- for BY that perseverance we will save ourselves. That's what Paul wrote; any way to reject it?

Well, this parable shows that man can reject the gift of the Holy Spirit. I never denied rejection of the Holy Spirit couldn't happen. BUT THAT BEING SAID, what does this have to do with our discussion of superficial 'head knowledge' belief vs. knowledge with full illumination"? AGAIN, one cannot have genuine belief and thus saving faith without His Spirit bearing witnessing to our spirit. Note: Scripture says the Spirit is like the wind. The wind blows where it wants and no one can see it. We need to be thankful that the Spirit has blown our way by God's grace.

Because there's nothing that imposes "unsaved-head-knowledge" on these verses. Only "presumption of the conclusion". "Well they fell, so they must have had only superficial but not really saved knowledge".

Look at what Jesus said in Matt23:13; the words, "ARE ENTERING", means "saving knowledge" --- else they would only be SUPERFICIAL and not REALLY entering. With me? These same "are-entering" people, are then "stopped/shut-off-from-Heaven". By being deceived from belief.

Deception from belief, Scripturally is either by ungodly men, or by sin itself; it's "sin" in Heb3:12-14 and James 1:14-16 (these passages can't be denied), and it's "deceivers" in 1Jn2:26-28, 2Jn1:7-9, and Col2:6-8. (These can't be denied either.)

10..these things God has revealed to us through the Spirit.
11..So also no one comprehends the thoughts of God except the Spirit of God.

God's Truth is not revealed to us until He enables us to understand it. We are not capable of understanding Spiritual truths as unregenerated beings. God's spiritual thoughts turn into spiritual words for us when He "illuminates" us.

These "deeper things of the Spirit", do not include "salvation by Jesus". Unless you can remove the word "received", and/or propose that "the Spirit can be received WITHOUT belief", you're gonna hafta admit that "belief in Jesus is what opens one's heart to the deeper spiritual things".

BEN, What comes BEFORE belief ? Don't we need to HEAR the message first?

No --- 2Tim3:15 says "saving-belief comes from STUDYING the Scripture".

And you've not commented on the fact that Jesus rebuked the Jews, in Jn5:39-47 for "studying but REFUSING to believe".

BUT, we need to hear with full understanding!!!!!! That can only happen if God "illuminates" His message to us.

Support this with Scripture --- can you?

For those who hear the message without understanding the message, well, lets just say they need God's 'illumination' before they can ever be regenerated.

If "all men are called ('helkuo-dragged') to Jesus (Jn12:32), then that calling is sufficient to allow the opportunity of belief.

 

[Ben johnson]

@ NBF

How could I keep you in suspense? I'll tell you how, later...

 

[nobdysfool]

Apparently it takes you a while...no matter, I have other things to do toady. I'll check back later....

 

[moonbeam]

The verse was offered as "proof of God ordaining sin". It doesn't, does it?

Of course God ordained sin....if not....How did it get here?

I'll answer you with the same question --- did Pharaoh SIN and harden his OWN heart, in 9:34?
And does Hebrews say "do not harden YOUR hearts ...by deceitful sin ...to falling away from the living God"?

Yes....to both.

Ben...did God speak these words as recorded in scripture...Yes or No? "..I will harden his heart, so that he will.." (Exod 4:21)

But what is "fathomable", is that God does not tempt, and does not cause sin.

HE....HIMSELF, tempts no man to sin (agreed)......Satan does that for Him...look at Job.

 

[Ben johnson]

Seems to me that his fruit did remain. it just wasn't the same as the other eleven....

But Jesus ordained him just like the other eleven. You're proposing that "Jesus ordained Judas to be a child of Hell".

We have, many times. However, you won't admit to it, and just dismiss the proof of them and declare that we haven't.

Not true. I always respond to what you say, point by point; as demonstrated in this thread, you say "you're refuted", but don't point out how.

The only refutation of Piper that happened was inside your own mind.

Here's your chance (again) --- show me which refutation is wrong, and how it's wrong:

It's not "may well mean", it does mean that. And by stating "kings and all in authority", he clearly exceeds the scope of "few-saved".

God WANTS to be saved, those He does not WANT to be saved? Yes.

Yet God does not decree repentance, nor faith; in Heb11:6 God RECEIVES those who come to Him BY faith. In Acts10:34-35, "God is not partial; but he who reveres God and does right, is welcome." Notice that "partial" is defined as "God receives reverers/righteous".

By definition, God receiving those who are NOT reverers and who do NOT seek righteousness, as Reformed Theology asserts ("God regenerates the heart so that man CAN believe and CAN seek Him"), is the "partiality" that Peter just said "GOD IS NOT".

This has been soundly refuted, merely by reading Matt13:15: "They close their OWN eyes and ears lest they turn and I should heal them.""

Do you understand that? It has not been given to them to understand the Kingdom's mysteries because they closed their OWN eyes and ears.

Thus, Piper is fully refuted on this.

How can Piper read this, and ignore Rom11:21-23?

"Do not be arrogant towards the branches that were broken off; they were broken off for unbelief, you stand by faith. Behold the kindness and severity of God --- to those who fell, severity; but to you, God's kindness, if you CONTINUE in His kindness else YOU will ALSO be cut off. And they also --- if they do not continue in unbelief, they will be grafted in again."

There is no way to make that passage fit "predestined-faith". No way at all.

How can Piper read this, and ignore Rom11:21-23?

"Do not be arrogant towards the branches that were broken off; they were broken off for unbelief, you stand by faith. Behold the kindness and severity of God --- to those who fell, severity; but to you, God's kindness, if you CONTINUE in His kindness else YOU will ALSO be cut off. And they also --- if they do not continue in unbelief, they will be grafted in again."

There is no way to make that passage fit "predestined-faith". No way at all.

He soundly misses the point of James' words.
"God tempts no one; but each is tempted when enticed and carried away by his own lust. Then lust conceived brings sin, and sin brings death. DO NOT be deceived, beloved brethren." James1;13-16

Do not be deceived beloved brethren --- speaking to the SAVED.
Each is tempted when carried away by his own lust.
Lust concieved, births sin, and sin brings death.

Conspicuously using "thanatos", can only mean "death and Hell".

This verse is IDENTICAL to the Hebrews 3"8-14 passage, warning us "not to be deceived by deceitful sin to falling away from the living God, to DEATH".

And Piper completely misses the point, as he missed the point in Romans11:21-23...

Tell me which of these refutations aren't valid, and why.

 

[DArceri]

--- 2Tim3:15 says "saving-belief comes from STUDYING the Scripture".

AGAIN...You chop off and add your own words into scripture verses. I am done with this discussion since it is prooving quite taxing to respond to distorted verses.

Let me just bring up the whole passage and give my final comment on this matter after the passage:


2 Timothy 3:12-17
12Indeed, all who desire to live a godly life in Christ Jesus will be persecuted, 13while evil people and impostors will go on from bad to worse, deceiving and being deceived. 14But as for you, continue in what you have learned and have firmly believed, knowing from whom you learned it 15and how from childhood you have been acquainted with the sacred writings, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. 16 All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, 17that the man of God may be competent, equipped for every good work.

This passage is being preached to BELIEVERS IN CHRIST.... THEY ARE ALREADY SAVED.....We are told to read scripture daily to be "Spirit filled". YOU need to read about being "Spirit filled" vs. being "baptised with the Holy Spirit". We have many fillings, but only one baptism.

Again, PAUL is speaking TO JUSTIFIED BELEIVERS. The verse you quote and everything before and after it is about scripture being profitable for training in righteousness, correction,.....

God Bless.

 

[nobdysfool]

But Jesus ordained him just like the other eleven. You're proposing that "Jesus ordained Judas to be a child of Hell".
Not true. I always respond to what you say, point by point; as demonstrated in this thread, you say "you're refuted", but don't point out how.
Here's your chance (again) --- show me which refutation is wrong, and how it's wrong:


Tell me which of these refutations aren't valid, and why.

Ben, you did not give me Piper's quotes. What in the world would make you think that I would answer this as you have presented it?

Use yer head, man!

 

[Ben johnson]

Ben, you did not give me Piper's quotes. What in the world would make you think that I would answer this as you have presented it?

Post 7 has me quoting him and refuting what he wrote. In Post 4 Darcery posted a link to Piper...

 

[Ben johnson]

Seems to me that his fruit did remain. it just wasn't the same as the other eleven....

The context of Jn15:16 and 6:70, makes no distinction between how each of the 12 was chosen. You're asserting that Jesus "chose Judas to be a child of the devil". It says "I chose (all twelve of you!) to be Disciples, and appointed you that you should bear fruit, and that your fruit should remain". There's no way to think Jesus meant "I chose ONE of you to betray Me and to be sinful and that sinfulness should remain".

We have, many times. However, you won't admit to it, and just dismiss the proof of them and declare that we haven't.

Not fair. My "dismissing the proof" involves detailed and long posts, discussing each point with Scriptural refutation. Your "sound refutation of Ben", with respect, usually is just a statement "You've been refuted".

God ordained a lying spirit and false prophesy for Ahab, so that he would fall. So, yes, God does ordain sins, to further His Purpose. He uses the sins of men as tools. Your failure to understand that doesn't mean it isn't so.

Neither you nor I know exactly what those prophets said to Ahab --- when your wife asks "Honey does this make me look fat?" --- do you not say things like, " Sweetheart, I've always found you beautiful"?
Nevertheless, Ahab was told the truth before he went into battle. His pride was his downfall.

Exodus 4:21 is the first mention, and it is God who says He will harden Pharaoh's heart. I don't care how many other sources you find to tickle your ears, scripture is plain and unambiguous. God said HE would harden Pharaoh's heart, long before it actually happened. Pharaoh did as God ordained that he do.

You're still missing the fact that "Pharaoh hardened his own heart", is stated in Scripture. If Scripture says "God hardened him", and "Pharaoh hardened himself", then the two concepts must be equivalent.

You insist on the alternate, marginal NASB readings, because they support what you want to believe. How many times have we repeatedly refuted you on this? I've lost count. Your declaration that we haven't is false. Your refusal to accept it is well-known, but that doesn't make your view the correct one. You have never offered a compelling case for why your favorite definitions of those words should be favored over what nearly every other translation of the scriptures render them as.

The "compelling case" is the context of the chapter, and the rest of Scripture. In Heb12:7-9, submitting to God's discipline is clearly a choice --- "We had earthly fathers who disciplined us and we respected them; SHALL we not much rather BE subject to the Father of spirits, and live?" Verse 15 warns about "falling short of God's grace", and verse 25 is blatantly warning us not to "turn away from God, or we will not escape".

The only reason I can see is that as you have often stated before, you believe you are the equal (or better) of ANY theologian, armed only with a Bible and a lexicon, and you actually revel in your lack of education in theology, thinking that somehow ignorance is better than education.

Goodness; I've never said anything like that about you. But tell me --- do you believe that a person must have a degree in theology, or seminary, or Greek, to understand the Bible? Is the meaning of Scripture closed to lay-people?

Your desire to translate these words as you have done is clear, it is only with those definitions that the passage seems to uphold your view, while the correct translation blows a seriously huge hole in it.

No it doesn't; the meaning is supported by context, of the passage and context of the whole. That's why I quote so many verses in support of a verse. Because they all harmonize.

Why is it so important that God not do anything without our consent? Why do you restrain God so? Why do you make man's "free will" the strongest power in the universe? Since when does God have to gain our "permission" to save us?

"Important" to you, or to me, is irrelevant; what does Scripture state?
Scripture states that "saving-faith is fully a choice; and eternity is cast by our choice." That's why God is "just".
"God is just, and justifier of he WHO BELIEVES". Rom3:26

God both gives and receives faith,. Ben.

Nowhere is "saving-faith" given to men without their first believing. There is a "measure of faith given to BELIEVERS", in Rom12:3. There is the "spiritual gift of fatih given to one BELIEVER and not to another believer", in 1Cor12:9. But saving-faith is fully man's choice. And Jesus many times rebukes His listeners for NOT believing.

Grace enables faith. God is ALWAYS the first mover in man's salvation. ALWAYS.

Joh 1:13 who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God.

Joh 1:12 But to all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God,

Not there, Ben. Grace enables faith.

The "right to become His children", which is the "begottenness of verse 13", is given to those WHO believe. Begottenness conditions on faith; you want it to say that begottenness is by His sovereign choice, and faith conditions on begottenness.

Or, to put it another way, Ben believes that men, through the power of their own belief, regenerate themselves, so they can then receive the Spirit of Christ.

You know what I believe; and you know this is a greater misrepresentation than anything Ben has been accused of.

It is not a misrepresentation, and I DO know what you believe, Ben. You just don't like it when we take it a little further logically, and when we strip away the double-talk, and speak plainly. You don't like it when we show that the logical outcome of your doctrines is exactly what I said. Deny it all you want, it doesn't change the fact that your doctrines teach that men initiate their own salvation by their own faith, while they are dead in sins, and that God's Grace comes into play AFTER the man has, by his own power, believed. Thus, you teach that men regenerate themselves.

Directly stated --- each man is drawn ("helkuo-dragged") to Christ (Jn12:32), and each has the choice to believe savingly (Acts16:31). God receives the faith of those who come to Him (Heb11:6). Belief receives the Holy Spirit (Eph1:13), and it is the received/poured Holy Spirit by whom comes regeneration. Titus3:5-6

Regeneration is completely by the Holy Spirit, nothing of us; but regeneration is by the INDWELLING Spirit, and He indwells us after faith. "Sealed" (Eph1:13) is "poured" (Titus3:6, Acts10:45) is "received/gifted" (Acts10:46-47) is after belief (Eph1:13, Acts11:17).

Now that I've clearly explained my view, you'll never again post things like "Ben believes that men, through the power of their own belief, regenerate themselves, so they can then receive the Spirit of Christ. " --- right?

Saving-faith, per Eph2:5-8, happened during the time that "when we were dead in our sins, God saved us by grace THROUGH FAITH".

"Made alive", is through faith, not before, my friend.

 

[nobdysfool]

This will have to wait, as I have a full day. I will answer, you can count on it, because you have made some errors.