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

[DArceri]

Hi, Darceri. Calvinism founds on the perception that "depraved man will NEVER seek God, he cannot seek because his heart is too depraved. This conflicts with Heb11:6, which places God as "RECEIVING the faith of those who seek Him".

Ben,
I'm missing something here. The step by step belief process in the 'story' I related to you earlier shows that hearing the Word comes 1st. We need to hear the story of the Cross before we can have a chance to respond to it (and by God's grace, hopefully believe). And if by chance, like you suggest, a person can specifically seek the Word on his own, it is because God is either 'probing his heart', and/or, he has heard parts of the story of the Cross before and wants to hear more (ie. something 'made sense' to him before). Also Ben, God USES US for His glorious purpose and His pleasure. There are parts in the bible that get into this but I don't have those verses at the top of my head. He sends His children out into the world to preach His Word. We are to become "fishers of men" like He commands. Everything we do is to golrify Him. So Ben, I really have no clue what you're trying to say in your above comment. God gives the spiritually dead and discerned individual an urge to seek or hear the message for various reasons. Once he hears the message, it is God who 'wills' the individual's desire to hear and pursue more. Something deep down in his inner parts is wanting more of the message. This is the 'seeking' part. He goes from being spiritually dead, to spiritually curious (God probing the heart), to spiritually alive (God convicting the heart).

 

[nobdysfool]

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".

Scripture says that Jesus knew that Judas would betray Him from the beginning. So Jesus didn't choose Judas for a reason other than what he was predestined to do. The fruit Judas produced did last, in that it directly contributed to the Crucifixion of Christ, without which none of us would be saved. The fruit of the other eleven was the preaching and spreading of the gospel throughout the known world at that time, the planting of many churches, etc.

If Jesus hadn't chosen Judas, Judas would have been just another nameless zealot wanting to overthrow the Roman occupation, and we would have never heard of him. By calling Judas to be a Disciple, Jesus ensured that which Judas was predestined to do, i.e. betray Christ to the authorities, so that the predestined Crucifixion would take place exactly an precisely as God the Father had fore-ordained and the Father and Son had covenanted together to accomplish.

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".

There is a large body of posts made to you detailing the refutation we have provided. We can start mining and quoting those previous posts if you wish, (for all the good it would do), seeing how you dismiss them, and claim you have overturned things, even after we have decisively shown your position to be wrong. Your usual method is to wait a few weeks, then post the same errors again, as though we had not said a thing, and when we call you on it, you then claim that we do nothing but "say" we have refuted you.

I invite the readers to search through Ben's posts, and then bring them up in the context of the thread and see for yourselves whether we have answered his errors or not.

Quote:
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.

Much like you, Ahab didn't listen to the truth, he wanted his ears tickled. Ahab fell just as God had Purposed and ensured through the employment of secondary means and causes to infallibly bring it to pass. Did Ahab choose to go against God's Word? Yes. Did God know that Ahab would do so? Yes. Did God cause, through secondary agents, the deception by which Ahab thought he could win? Yes. Did you notice that Ahab at least partially believed Micaiah, and tried to avoid his certain fate by disguising himself? Was it truly a "random" arrow that killed him?

Your example of saying that which you know your wife wants to hear is inapplicable to this situation. It is a poor attempt to dodge the obvious implications of a scripture that undercuts your theology severely, and the fact that it has taken you literally weeks to try to answer it after I brought it up tells me that you are having some trouble dealing with it, hence the smokescreens and rabbit trails you're bringing up (again).

Quote:
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.

I am not "missing" that fact. I am simply pointing out that God said HE would harden Pharaoh's heart, and it is obvious from the subsequent account that Pharaoh, whose heart was hard to begin with, got even harder, in spite of the calamities that were brought upon Egypt. Even the hardest ruler would have yielded long before Pharaoh did, under ordinary circumstances, But God had said that HE would harden Pharaoh's heart so that His Glory and Power would be seen by all in the deliverance of His People from bondage. I see that God hardened Pharaoh's heart beyond that which Pharaoh himself would have done. So while Pharaoh hardened his heart, God hardened it even more, as God said He would do. Since God mentioned it first, subsequent events must be seen and understood in light of God's statement, rather than looking for a way to set aside God's own Words, as you are doing.

So no, they are not equivalent.

Quote:
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".

In a word, Ben: Baloney! You attempt to enlist all scripture as your backup, without any proof. Have you forgotten that we read the same scriptures, and see a completely different view? And we have shown how you re-word things, quote partial scriptures, ignore context, both immediate and overall, expend much effort in trying to explain away inconvenient scriptures, and in some cases even attempt to refute scripture with scripture, which is ludicrous and dishonest, because scripture does not and cannot contradict itself, so if there is a seeming contradiction, that is sure proof that your view has a problem.

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?

Ben, I have made the charge before, and you have never denied it. In fact, you DID agree that you believe that you are the equal of any theologian.

No, one does not have to have a degree to understand the Bible, but there are depths of meaning that are not readily apparent to the untrained and unlearned. True humility would have you deferring to those who have spent a lifetime in study and examination, realizing that they have a larger base of knowledge, study, and illumination to draw on than one like yourself, who is basically self-taught.

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.

No, what you do is wrest scriptures from their context to try and line them up in such a way you can make them seem to support your views. When we go back and look at them in context, your view evaporates like the morning fog. And when we bring up scriptures which show clear principles which destroy your views, you try to
explain them away, or claim that it contradicts other scriptures (interpreted your way), and claim that because of that, your view must prevail, and your view "overturns" our view, which we clearly show is established by the Word of God. We show that you are the one contradicting clear scripture, and yet you claim that we have not refuted your view, and you refuse to adjust or modify your view.

Quote:
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

You avoided the question, as you always do when cornered. Your "answer" basically states that eternity is up to us, that salvation is totally up to us (we make the choice), and then show that you have absolutely no concept of the Justice of God, but instead view it in human terms, and project it onto God. You won't allow that God is Just as a basic trait and component of His Character and very Being, He is only Just in your view if He leaves all choices up to man, and has no involvement in the making of those choices. The truth is, God is Just, and all He does is grounded in that fact, even that which might appear to be unjust from our point of view. It is our point of view which needs to change, not His Word.

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.

How can a man believe savingly without saving faith? You fail to see that saving faith is Grace from God. If man naturally possessed saving faith, there would be no need for God's Grace.

By Grace ye have been saved, through faith, and that not of yourselves, it is a gift of God, lest any man should boast.

What is not of ourselves? it can't be Grace, for that is from God. It can't be salvation, for that is also from God. The only thing that could be of ourselves is faith, and Paul says that even that is not of ourselves, but is rather a gift from God. So salvation, by Grace through faith, is ALL of God and NONE of man.

Your view gives man something of which he can boast: his own faith.

This is why I call your erroneous theology Shake 'n' Bake theology. "Jesus saved me, an' I helped!"

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.

Ben, you have no concept of the logical order of salvation events, the "ordo salutis". Just as the first event in our lives is natural birth (that is when all that follows can be realized), so the first event in our spiritual lives is the new birth (regeneration) which makes it possible for us to believe, to receive, to be Justified. We can't draw "spiritual breath" until we are first born again. Just as we have nothing to do with our natural birth (we didn't cause it, we don't decide when it will be, or how it will be), so it is with our spiritual new birth. We do not determine the time, the place, or the circumstances of the new birth. "the wind blows where it will, and you do not know where it comes from or where it is going. So it is with everyone who is born of the Spirit."

continued in next post

 

[nobdysfool]

continued from last post

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.

(Originally Posted by Ben)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?

I will continue to point out the logical conclusions of your erroneous views. I don't particularly care if you don't like having a light shown on the illogical inconsistencies of your view, because your view is misapplication of scripture, and wrong doctrines derived from poor handling of God's Word. We have, and will continue, to show how your view is erroneous, and we can and will start quoting previous refutations of your erroneous views.

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.

You have to read into the verses to get that erroneous view out of them. You assume your conclusions, and then claim your conclusions as "proof". The illogical nature of your arguments precludes any truth in them.

 

[Ben johnson]

How can a dead man believe, Ben?

All of Scripture says that "belief happens WHEN we are dead" --- and it it belief that changes us from "dead", to "alive".

A spiritually dead man is unresponsive to spiritual things

Show me this in Scripture. Can you?

the same as a physically dead man is unresponsive to physical things and stimuli. Lazarus did not raise himself from the grave...

Non sequitur, my friend.

and we did not raise ourselves from being dead in sins.

No one said we did. GOD raises us, and the Spirit regenerates us. But nothing occurs before belief.

Your theology teaches that we raise ourselves to spiritual life BEFORE the Spirit indwells. It is the Spirit which makes us alive spiritually.

No, I don't.

The biblical order is, God regenerates us,
we believe,
and then the Spirit indwells us.

You've never shown this to be "Biblical". Titus3:5-6 has a rare occurrance of "regenerate" --- and it happens to US, through the "poured-on-us" Spirit.

That places "pouring-on-us", before "regenerates-us".

You've never proven that "poured-on-us", means anything but "received-by-belief".

Regeneration > Faith > Indwelling. This is logically and biblically correct

Show me the verse, NBF. Your post to which I'm responding, cites not one verse.

Your theology has it that we believe,
the Spirit indwells us,
and THEN God regenerates us.

Faith > Indwelling > Regeneration. This is nearly backwards...

"Nearly" backwards?

... and cannot answer the question of HOW the spiritually dead man, while he is dead, believes and receives the Spirit of God into himself while he is yet unregenerate.

Each spiritually-dead man is called to salvation, and the call brings him to the door. He can believe, or turn away. I can give you verse after verse after verse where belief is a choice. That's the only explanation for Jesus' words in Jn5:39-47. It's why Jesus rebuked three cities in Matt11:21-24.

The Spirit cannot dwell in an unclean vessel, and until he is regenerated, he is unclean.

You said yourself that "indwelling" and "regeneration" are essentially simultaneous.

But you cannot change Paul's words, "WHEN we were dead in our sins, God made us alive ...by grace THROUGH FAITH".

Regeneration is the New Birth.

Think about what you just said. The "new birth" is "becoming one of God's children". Begottenness.

Begottenness is all of God, and nothing of us. Jn1:13.
...but do you see that those who RECEIVE Jesus, who BELIEVE in Him, those receive the right to become begotten?

Do you accept that "belief" precedes "becoming begotten", in Jn1:12?

Before anyone lives their life, they are physically born. So it is spiritually. A man must be born from above, in order to believe and receive the Spirit.

John3:3 uses "see", as in "physcially see (enter)". It does not mean "unless you are born from above, you cannot understand the Kingdom."

It's a "repetitive narrative"; verse 5 repeats verse 3 --- "see", is "ENTER".

I trust that others can see the logical falsehood of your view, Ben. It doesn't even make logical sense, let alone scriptural sense!

Lay aside what you've considered "logic", and please try to provide Scriptures to support what you've just said. I responded to your post, with many Bible verses. Show me how I'm understanding them wrong.

Show me, for instance, how "WHEN you were dead in your sins God made you alive, by grace THROUGH FAITH" --- show me how that doesn't place "saving-faith", as occurring WHEN we were dead --- not after.

 

[Ben johnson]

Ben.....I can't help but notice how you refuse to answer my question with a simple Yes or No as I have specifically asked you on five occasions now (my posts 17-34-44-48-52)

Why are you reluctant to acknowledge publicly, with a yes or no.....the very words that God, Himself, has spoken?

Could it be because you don't believe God actually spoke them?......is that what you believe Ben?....that God did not actually speak the words recorded in Exod 4:21?

This is what I suspect is the real reason behind your refusal to answer with a unequivocal yes or no.....so lets try again for a straight answer


Ben...did God speak these words as recorded in scripture "..I will harden his heart, so that he will.." (Exod 4:21)

Yes or No?

Patience, my friend. I've answered it a couple of times. I'm working on an answer you'll accept.

 

[Ben johnson]

Ben,
I'm missing something here. The step by step belief process in the 'story' I related to you earlier shows that hearing the Word comes 1st. We need to hear the story of the Cross before we can have a chance to respond to it (and by God's grace, hopefully believe).

It's not "by God's grace", Darceri. It's "By God's grace, through our faith".

Notice that Rom10 says "HOW can they believe, if they have not heard?" If believing is tied to hearing, then how could it be predestined?

And if by chance, like you suggest, a person can specifically seek the Word on his own, it is because God is either 'probing his heart', and/or, he has heard parts of the story of the Cross before and wants to hear more (ie. something 'made sense' to him before).

I agree. Our difference is that I perceive Scripture to say "ALL have been truly called to salvation".

Also Ben, God USES US for His glorious purpose and His pleasure. There are parts in the bible that get into this but I don't have those verses at the top of my head. He sends His children out into the world to preach His Word. We are to become "fishers of men" like He commands.

Our preaching, is active; not passive. Preaching leads men to salvation; preaching (and believing) are not the consequence of what God chose.

Everything we do is to golrify Him. So Ben, I really have no clue what you're trying to say in your above comment.

It's a question of sequence, Darceri. Do men believe BECAUSE they have been regenerated? Or is regeneration from the "received-by-belief" ("poured") Spirit?

The time when this difference between us doesn't matter, is when we agree on seeking God with all that we are, and walking consciously in Jesus.

The time when it matters, is when one of us thinks that it's God's responsibility to build our faith and perseverance.

God gives the spiritually dead and discerned individual an urge to seek or hear the message for various reasons. Once he hears the message, it is God who 'wills' the individual's desire to hear and pursue more.

Show me this in Scripture. In Acts2:37, it was being told "You waited for the Messiah --- but He CAME, and you KILLED Him" that caused their conviction and belief. In 2Cor7:9, it was sorrow at what Paul had WRITTEN that caused their repentance.

In all of Scripture, repentance is a choice --- and by us, not by God.

Something deep down in his inner parts is wanting more of the message. This is the 'seeking' part. He goes from being spiritually dead, to spiritually curious (God probing the heart), to spiritually alive (God convicting the heart).

Please read Heb11:6 again, where men come to God BY faith, He rewards those WHO seek --- rather than "God comes to us and gifts faith, and THEN we seek".

Please read Acts10:34-35 --- where "God favoring people who have NOT (yet) revered Him or pursued righteousness", is the PARTIALITY that Peter says "God is NOT".


"God is not partial, BUT he who reveres God and does right, is WELCOME.

God's position is receiving our faith, not causing it.

God gives the spiritually dead and discerned individual an urge to seek or hear the message for various reasons. Once he hears the message, it is God who 'wills' the individual's desire to hear and pursue more

Please explain to me how "saving-faith" did not happen "WHEN (while!) we were dead in sins", in Eph2:5-8.

Explain to me how we are saved by "God's will IN us", rather than our own faith receiving His grace.

"This is the will of God, that all who see Jesus AND BELIEVE may be saved." Jn6:40

It doesn't say "And of all who see Jesus and believe, God wills some to believe."

 

[Ben johnson]

Scripture says that Jesus knew that Judas would betray Him from the beginning. So Jesus didn't choose Judas for a reason other than what he was predestined to do. The fruit Judas produced did last, in that it directly contributed to the Crucifixion of Christ, without which none of us would be saved. The fruit of the other eleven was the preaching and spreading of the gospel throughout the known world at that time, the planting of many churches, etc.

Judas was chosen the same as the others; and conversely, the others would "leave" the same as Judas was leaving. There's no other meaning of Jesus' words, at the end of Jn6.

If Jesus hadn't chosen Judas, Judas would have been just another nameless zealot wanting to overthrow the Roman occupation, and we would have never heard of him. By calling Judas to be a Disciple, Jesus ensured that which Judas was predestined to do, i.e. betray Christ to the authorities, so that the predestined Crucifixion would take place exactly an precisely as God the Father had fore-ordained and the Father and Son had covenanted together to accomplish.

He probably chose Judas to show us that anyone can fall.

"Are YOU leaving, too?"
"Did I not choose ALL TWELVE, and one is a devil?"

There is a large body of posts made to you detailing the refutation we have provided. We can start mining and quoting those previous posts if you wish, (for all the good it would do), seeing how you dismiss them, and claim you have overturned things, even after we have decisively shown your position to be wrong. Your usual method is to wait a few weeks, then post the same errors again, as though we had not said a thing, and when we call you on it, you then claim that we do nothing but "say" we have refuted you.

I invite the readers to search through Ben's posts, and then bring them up in the context of the thread and see for yourselves whether we have answered his errors or not.

Please DO.

In a word, Ben: Baloney! You attempt to enlist all scripture as your backup, without any proof. Have you forgotten that we read the same scriptures, and see a completely different view? And we have shown how you re-word things, quote partial scriptures, ignore context, both immediate and overall, expend much effort in trying to explain away inconvenient scriptures, and in some cases even attempt to refute scripture with scripture, which is ludicrous and dishonest, because scripture does not and cannot contradict itself, so if there is a seeming contradiction, that is sure proof that your view has a problem.

Then tell my your understanding of Heb12:7-9, 15, and 25.

No, one does not have to have a degree to understand the Bible]/quote]I agree.

True humility would have you deferring to those who have spent a lifetime in study and examination, realizing that they have a larger base of knowledge, study, and illumination to draw on than one like yourself, who is basically self-taught.

Not when certain positions are clearly contradicted by Scripture.

How can a man believe savingly without saving faith?

"Believe savingly", is "saving-faith".

You fail to see that saving faith is Grace from God.

Yes, I "fail to see it". And I fail to see it, because of verses like Heb11:6.
"Without faith it is impossible to please God; for he who comes to God, must believe that he IS (must come BY faith), and that God is a rewarder of those who SEEK Him."

And verses like Rom10:10. "With the HEART man BELIEVES..."

If man naturally possessed saving faith, there would be no need for God's Grace.

What if it's not "natural"? What if it's the consequence of the sincere and real call to salvation, for every man?

"And if I be lifted up, I will CALL (helkuo-drag) ALL MEN to Myself." Jn12:32

By Grace ye have been saved, through faith, and that not of yourselves, it is a gift of God, lest any man should boast.

What is not of ourselves? it can't be Grace, for that is from God. It can't be salvation, for that is also from God. The only thing that could be of ourselves is faith...

Nope --- "dia pisis" is a prepositional phrase, not some kind of "second-subject". The subject is the entire opening phrase, "By grace through faith have you been saved".

THAT (meaning "that salvation") is not of ourselves, IT (meaning "that salvation") is the gift of God...

and Paul says that even that is not of ourselves, but is rather a gift from God.

It is a gift, given by grace --- received by faith.

So salvation, by Grace through faith, is ALL of God and NONE of man.

I see --- and how do you fit what you just said, to Rom2:6-8?

Your view gives man something of which he can boast: his own faith.

Faith is the conviction of man's own wretchedness, the necessity of a Savior. It is recognition of NOTHING righteous in himself, and it is full and complete surrender to Him. It is coming to understand that of ourselves, we deserve ONLY to be cast into Hell. So we walk with extreme grattitude for His love and graceful sacrifice.

Where, in all that, is there anything in ourselves to boast?

This is why I call your erroneous theology Shake 'n' Bake theology. "Jesus saved me, an' I helped!"

Our part in salvation, is clear in passages like 2Tim1:12-14: "I know whom I have believed, and am convinced that He is able to guard what I have entrusted to Him. Now --- guard, by the Holy Spirit who indwells you, the treasure (eternal life!) entrusted to you."

It's clear in 1Tim4:16: "Pay close attention to yourself and to your doctrine; persevere in these things; as you DO you will save yourselves and those who hear you."

 

[Rick Otto]

Eph 2:8 - Show Context For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:

ALL of For by grace are ye saved through faith="that"
I see you finaly ammended your approach to agree w/that, but now you are trying to switch the subject to salvation alone, excluding the means.

THAT (meaning "that salvation") is not of ourselves, IT (meaning "that salvation") is the gift of God...

Rom12:3 For I say, through the grace given unto me, to every man that is among you, not to think of himself more highly than he ought to think; but to think soberly, according as God hath dealt to every man the measure of faith.
Heb12:2 Looking unto Jesus the author and finisher of our faith; who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame, and is set down at the right hand of the throne of God.

 

[moonbeam]

Patience, my friend. I've answered it a couple of times. I'm working on an answer you'll accept.

Ben.....I can't help but notice how you continue in your obstinate unbelief...clearly exhibited for all to witness...by your stubborn...calculated...refusal to answer my question with a simple Yes or No as I have specifically asked you on six occasions now (my posts 17-34-44-48-52-60)

Why are you reluctant to acknowledge publicly, with a yes or no.....the very words that God, Himself, has spoken?

Could it be because you don't believe God actually spoke them?......is that what you believe Ben?....that God did not actually speak the words recorded in Exod 4:21?

This is what I suspect is the real reason behind your refusal to answer with a unequivocal yes or no.....so lets try again for a straight answer


Ben...did God speak these words as recorded in scripture "I will harden his heart, so that he will" (Exod 4:21)

Yes or No?

 

[nobdysfool]

Patience, my friend. I've answered it a couple of times. I'm working on an answer you'll accept.

Instead of "working on an answer he will accept", why not just answer him? You don't have to work, he's already told you exactly what it is you need to do: answer Yes, or No to a simple question.

You just have to choose one of them, and then stick with it. So think carefully before you answer, but don't make it harder than what it is..


When a simple yes or no question is answered with an entire treatise, obfuscation abounds.

 

[DArceri]

It's not "by God's grace", Darceri. It's "By God's grace, through our faith".

Hey Ben.
This only bolsters my argument. How can a spiritually dead person have faith? God 1st opens the heart. Only then is faith possible.
Faith is a gift from God, a supernatural virtue infused by Him, yet given to man through the grace of God and the Holy Spirit, who moves the heart and converts it to God, who opens the eyes of the mind and 'makes it easy for all to accept and believe the truth'.

Ben,
NOTE that 'FAITH' is also listed as one of the fruits of the Spirit:GAL 5:22, 23 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control.

Posted by Ben johnson,
Notice that Rom10 says "HOW can they believe, if they have not heard?" If believing is tied to hearing, then how could it be predestined?

Simple answer. We are Christ's ambassadors. We are commanded to evangelize. God uses us for His purpose. He uses us as His "mouthpiece" to reach those that are His (ie. those that He foreknew before the foundation of the world)....

You see Ben, We ONLY plant the seed, God waters.

Posted by Ben johnson,
Darceri. Do men believe BECAUSE they have been regenerated? Or is regeneration from the "received-by-belief" ("poured") Spirit?

Regeneration or being BORN-AGAIN comes from a spiritual rebirth. That only can happen IF ONE HAS BEEN GIVEN THE ABILITY TO MAKE SENSE OF "GODLY" THINGS. Bottom line Ben, we are basically arguing about who is responsible for our belief IN CHRIST. I say it is from God 'awakening us' to the meaning of the Cross (ie. being "illuminated" or "enlightened" from HEARING the Word of GOD). Ben, you say the non-believing, spiritually dead, 'ungodly' individual can understand 'godly things' and thus will seek Him. Scripture says that is impossible. 2 COR 4:6 For it is God who commanded light to shine out of darkness, who has shone in our hearts to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ.

[quote]Posted by Ben johnson,
In Acts2:37, it was being told "You waited for the Messiah --- but He CAME, and you KILLED Him" that caused their conviction and belief. In 2Cor7:9, it was sorrow at what Paul had WRITTEN that caused their repentance.[/quote] The ESV version says: "Now when they heard this, they were cut to the heart,..." Ben, this clearly proves my point again. One cannot be convicted or "cut to the heart" if there was not a full understanding of the meaning of Cross. They finally realized that Jesus was the MESSIAH. It was a spiritual awakening from Paul's message.

In all of Scripture, repentance is a choice --- and by us, not by God.

BEN, TWO THINGS:
1st, One needs to understand what he has done wrong before he can repent. Right?
2nd, You left out the second half of a verse again. It needs to be "godly" repentence. Godly repentence means to 'agree with God' that He is right and you are wrong. It means seeing your sin as God sees it. 2 Cor 7:10 For godly sorrow produces repentance leading to salvation, not to be regretted; but the sorrow of the world produces death.

Posted by Ben Johnson,
"This is the will of God, that all who see Jesus AND BELIEVE may be saved." Jn6:40

THIS is a true statement. Those who believe in Christ will be saved. What's your point? This states that ONLY those whose eyes have been opened (believers in Christ) are His children and thus saved.

BTW, AGAIN YOU LEAVE OUT the verse immediately before it: 39 This is the will of the Father who sent Me, that of all He has given Me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up at the last day.

THIS BACKS UP OSAS THEOLOGY......

Posted by darceri,
God gives the spiritually dead and discerned individual an urge to seek or hear the message for various reasons. Once he hears the message, it is God who 'wills' the individual's desire to hear and pursue more.


Posted by Ben johnson,

Show me this in Scripture.

Ben, these passages show that we are all born spiritually dead (in "darkness"). "THERE IS NONE WHO SEEKS AFTER GOD." It is only God who can spiritually awaken us:

Roms 3:11 There is none righteous, no, not one;
11 There is none who understands;
There is none who seeks after God.

Eph 6:13 But all things that are exposed are made manifest by the light, for whatever makes manifest is light.
Eph 6:14 Therefore He says:
“ Awake, you who sleep,
Arise from the dead,
And Christ will give you light.”

Eph 6:20 giving thanks always for all things to God

2 Cor 4:6 For it is God who commanded light to shine out of darkness, who has shone in our hearts to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ.

 

[nobdysfool]

All of Scripture says that "belief happens WHEN we are dead" ---

"All of scripture"? Not so.

and it it belief that changes us from "dead", to "alive".

Then you cannot avoid the clear fact that you have just stated that men spiritually resurrect themselves from spiritually dead, to spiritually alive.

Show me this in Scripture. Can you?

1Co 2:14 The natural person does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him, and he is not able to understand them because they are spiritually discerned.

No matter how you try to twist and turn, this verse shoots down your doctrines. And, before you try to tell me that the "spiritual things" in this verse are the same as in verse 12, you ignore the fact that those things in verse 12 are revealed to those who have received the Spirit, i.e. they are not "natural men" anymore. While they are natural (unregenerate), they can not discern or understand spiritual things. And don't give me that baloney that the Gospel is not one of those spiritual things that the natural man cannot understand, because if the Gospel is not spiritual, then you cannot avoid saying that the Gospel is carnal. If the Gospel is not spiritual, it cannot produce a spiritual result.

a physically dead man is unresponsive to physical things and stimuli. Lazarus did not raise himself from the grave...

Non sequitur, my friend.

How so? The comparison between physical and spiritual was used by Jesus Himself.

and we did not raise ourselves from being dead in sins.

No one said we did. GOD raises us, and the Spirit regenerates us. But nothing occurs before belief.

Ben, you say that we are raised while we are dead, by OUR belief. That is the same as saying that we raise ourselves from death to life, by our own belief, and THEN the Spirit regenerates us. Regeneration is the raising from the dead, Ben! You are stating a stark impossibility!! If a man is spiritually dead, he cannot do anything spiritual. Being regenerated is a spiritual event, because it is initiated by the Spirit. A dead man cannot do anything. He must first be made alive. That applies to the spiritual as well as the physical. Using a physical truism to explain a spiritual truism is a valid and accepted teaching tool, which Jesus Himself used.

Your theology teaches that we raise ourselves to spiritual life BEFORE the Spirit indwells. It is the Spirit which makes us alive spiritually.

No, I don't.

Yes, you do. You are trying to deny the very thing you have been saying, because I have poked more holes in it than a block of Swiss cheese.

You've never shown this to be "Biblical". Titus3:5-6 has a rare occurrance of "regenerate" --- and it happens to US, through the "poured-on-us" Spirit.

It has been shown to you more times than I can count, Ben.

Tit 3:5-6 He saved us, not because of works done by us in righteousness, but according to His own mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewal of the Holy Spirit, (6) whom He poured out on us richly through Jesus Christ our Savior,

"Washing of regeneration" and "renewal of the Holy Spirit" are equivalent terms. They say the same thing two different ways, for emphasis. This kind of terminology is used through the Bible. Case in point, Gen 42:2; Gen 43:8; Num 4:19; Deu 33:6; 2 Kings 18:32; and so on.

The source of regeneration and renewal is the Spirit of God who is provided to us through Jesus Christ. You are trying to see a sequence here that is not in the text. Regeneration is a washing and renewal. It is done by the Spirit being poured ON us, not in us. It is done prior to indwelling. The Spirit does not indwell until AFTER regeneration and renewal, because the Spirit will not and cannot inhabit an unclean vessel.

That places "pouring-on-us", before "regenerates-us".

No, it doesn't. You are reading into the verse a sequence that is not there, and trying to claim an utter impossibility. You have been shown this time after time, and yet you insist on stating this falsehood. We have refuted your view on this utterly and completely. I have just done so, again.

You've never proven that "poured-on-us", means anything but "received-by-belief".

I have just shown you that "poured on us" IS the cause of regeneration. Poured ON us is not the same as "received IN us". We receive the Spirit AFTER faith and repentance. We are regenerated by the Spirit of God SO THAT we can repent and believe, and THEN we receive the Spirit indwelling us.

Show me the verse, NBF. Your post to which I'm responding, cites not one verse.

Which does not negate my point at all. You're trying to deflect what you don't want to hear.

"Nearly" backwards? Each spiritually-dead man is called to salvation, and the call brings him to the door. He can believe, or turn away.

That cannot be established from scripture, contextually considered. You assume an ability in unregenerate, spiritually dead men that scripture specifically says they do not have, that of choosing Christ apart from the Holy Spirit regenerating them to spiritual life so that they may understand the spiritual content of the Gospel. The "call" given to all men is not regenerating, it is actually condemning, because it calls them to account to God for their sins. The call given to those whom the Spirit regenerates is effectual and it is irresistible, in that those given this call infallibly believe and are justified before God.

I can give you verse after verse after verse where belief is a choice.

And I can show you in every case that your view ignores the context and who it is being spoken to.

That's the only explanation for Jesus' words in Jn5:39-47. It's why Jesus rebuked three cities in Matt11:21-24.

Joh 5:39-47 You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; and it is they that bear witness about me, (40) yet you refuse to come to me that you may have life. (41) I do not receive glory from people. (42) But I know that you do not have the love of God within you. (43) I have come in my Father's name, and you do not receive me. If another comes in his own name, you will receive him. (44) How can you believe, when you receive glory from one another and do not seek the glory that comes from the only God? (45) Do not think that I will accuse you to the Father. There is one who accuses you: Moses, on whom you have set your hope. (46) For if you believed Moses, you would believe me; for he wrote of me. (47) But if you do not believe his writings, how will you believe my words?"

Did Jesus speak these words before or after He had preached and taught? Was not this speech in itself a teaching? What Jesus did was expose their hypocrisy and unbelief in even what they had, the Pentateuch. If they didn't even believe the words of Moses, who spoke of Jesus, how could they believe Him? They considered themselves believers, but Jesus showed that they were liars, and did not believe at all. They trusted in their position as "God's Chosen People" because they were Hebrews (seeking the glory of men), rather than the Glory of God, which their scriptures spoke of, and taught. Jesus rebuked them for being hypocrites and liars. I do believe that the Son of God has that right.

You said yourself that "indwelling" and "regeneration" are essentially simultaneous.

Actually I said that regeneration and indwelling are essentially simultaneous in temporal terms, but definitely separate and not equivalent in logical terms. And in these discussions we are speaking of the logical progression of events, not the temporal. At least I am, and I have consistently done so. You have jumped back and forth between temporal and logical as it suits you, with no regard for the confusion you create in your wake.

But you cannot change Paul's words, "WHEN we were dead in our sins, God made us alive ...by grace THROUGH FAITH".

Eph 2:5-6 even when we were dead in our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ--by grace you have been saved-- (6) and raised us up with Him and seated us with Him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus,

No, that is not what the scripture says. God is the one who makes us alive, not by our faith, but by His Grace. What you are trying to do is say that God made us alive by our faith. That is emphatically not true, because it inevitably follows that it was our own faith which caused us to be made alive, and that God responded to something we did in order to make us alive, which removes Grace from the equation.

Think about what you just said. The "new birth" is "becoming one of God's children". Begottenness.

What does it mean to be begotten? It means more than to be born, it means adoption, which is to give the rights to the family fortune, so to speak. You want to equate adoption with the new birth. If we are born again of God, we did nothing to make that happen. NOTHING. Not faith, not choice, not merit, not works. NOTHING. If we are begotten of God, it was He who did so, monergistically and unilaterally, and we trace our spiritual lineage to Him because of what He did, and not because of anything we did. He adopted us, we did not cause Him to adopt us. Your false doctrine teaches that we did something to cause him to birth us, i.e. we believed. That is backwards. Because He birthed us, we believe Those who believe are then adopted.

Begottenness is all of God, and nothing of us. Jn1:13.

Read that again, until it sinks in, Ben. Quit trying to claim even a small portion of the credit for the Grace of God.

...but do you see that those who RECEIVE Jesus, who BELIEVE in Him, those receive the right to become begotten?

Joh 1:12-13 But to all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God, (13) who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God.

Basic sentence structure shows that you view is exactly backwards. Those who believe WERE born of God (prior action), not by their will, or by their lineage, or by anything other that God and God alone. They believe and have the right to begottenness BECAUSE the were born from above. The birth comes first, then the belief., and then the adoption, logically speaking.

These verses alone shoots down your whole doctrine.

Do you accept that "belief" precedes "becoming begotten", in Jn1:12?

Do you accept that birth precedes belief in these same verses?

John3:3 uses "see", as in "physcially see (enter)". It does not mean "unless you are born from above, you cannot understand the Kingdom."

It's a "repetitive narrative"; verse 5 repeats verse 3 --- "see", is "ENTER".

The word used means to see, to perceive, to understand, as in, "I 'see' what you're saying". It does not mean to physically see (the Kingdom of God is of a spiritual nature, not physical, at this time), it means to understand, to perceive. It is not the equivalent of verse 5 which says unless one is born again, one cannot enter the Kingdom, for that should be obvious, that one cannot enter unless one is (already) born again. Jesus makes the point of stating that one must understand and one must be born again, to enter the Kingdom. Two different things. You want them to be the same, because if they are not, your doctrine sinks like a stone in water.

Lay aside what you've considered "logic", and please try to provide Scriptures to support what you've just said. I responded to your post, with many Bible verses. Show me how I'm understanding them wrong.

I am patiently trying to do just that, Ben, show you where you are wrong. But you're not listening, nor do you truly want to. Logic presents you a problem, because you cannot argue logically, and logic shows major deficiencies in your doctrine which you aren't willing to face, especially since you have so much invested in it now, with your "book", and all. If you were to change your doctrine, your book would have to undergo a major re-write, or it would have to be scrapped. You are not willing to do either.

Show me, for instance, how "WHEN you were dead in your sins God made you alive, by grace THROUGH FAITH" --- show me how that doesn't place "saving-faith", as occurring WHEN we were dead --- not after.

I have done so, many times, as well as in this post. The real question is, are you listening, and will you consider that you could be wrong?

You hang your entire doctrine on the idea that man has the innate ability to choose Christ, and that places the initiation of salvation on man, rather than God. It robs God of Glory rightly due Him. It makes man's so-called "free will" the most powerful thing in Creation, more powerful than even God.

 

[Rick Otto]

Originally Posted by Ben
I can give you verse after verse after verse where belief is a choice.

Choice is predestined.

 

[cygnusx1]

Originally Posted by Ben
I can give you verse after verse after verse where belief is a choice.

Choice is predestined.

yes bro Risck , but some like a paradox others hate em ..... it's real hot here

 

[Ben johnson]

Hey Ben.
This only bolsters my argument. How can a spiritually dead person have faith? God 1st opens the heart. Only then is faith possible.

Hi, Darceri.
Paul wrote "When we were dead in our sins, God made us alive ...through faith". faith happened when we were dead, not "after we were made alive".

Faith is a gift from God, a supernatural virtue infused by Him, yet given to man through the grace of God and the Holy Spirit, who moves the heart and converts it to God, who opens the eyes of the mind and 'makes it easy for all to accept and believe the truth'.

You're not proposing "easy", you're proposing "impossible NOT to". You're proposing that Paul really meant "by grace THROUGH GRACE have you been saved", in Eph2:8.

And somehow a will that is "impossible to choose against", is still "free".

Ben,
NOTE that 'FAITH' is also listed as one of the fruits of the Spirit:GAL 5:22, 23 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control.

These are fuits we can CHOOSE. Nowhere is "saving-faith" unilaterally gifted. Not in Gal5, not in Rom12:3 ("a measure of faith given to each BELIEVER"), not in 1Cor12:9 (a spiritual gift of faith given to one BELIEVER and not to another).

Do you see how Gal5:19-23, warns us what fruit we should have? This reflects on what Peter said, in 2:1:5-10. First, a man is presented who WAS purified (had to hvae been saved); but now LACKS godly qualities, has FORGOTTEN his former purification from sins. We're warned, "Therefore (against that example), we must be all the more diligent to make certain of our calling and election --- as long as these fruits are ours, we will not stumble (ptaio-become-wretched). In THIS way the gates of Heaven will BE (abundantly) provided to us."

I've heard some say "there is an ABUNDANT entrance to Heaven for the righteous, and a SPARSE entrance for the unrighteous-but-saved." An unrighteous man can enter Heaven? No. Eph5:5-6!

Simple answer. We are Christ's ambassadors. We are commanded to evangelize. God uses us for His purpose. He uses us as His "mouthpiece" to reach those that are His (ie. those that He foreknew before the foundation of the world)....

No, believing, is tied to hearing. It's the same idea as when Jesus said to Thomas: "You believe BECAUSE you see? Blessed are those who have NOT seen, and yet believe. Jesus praised unseen belief, higher than seen belief. And there's no way He would do that, if both beliefs were sovereignly ordained.

Thomas refused to believe unless he saw --- a choice. Jesus said, "Greater faith have those who believe without seeing."

You see Ben, We ONLY plant the seed, God waters.

And the field can NURTURE the seed, or pluck it out.

Regeneration or being BORN-AGAIN comes from a spiritual rebirth. That only can happen IF ONE HAS BEEN GIVEN THE ABILITY TO MAKE SENSE OF "GODLY" THINGS. Bottom line Ben, we are basically arguing about who is responsible for our belief IN CHRIST.

Yes, we are.

I say it is from God 'awakening us' to the meaning of the Cross (ie. being "illuminated" or "enlightened" from HEARING the Word of GOD).

Will you consider that every person has the same call to salvation? How can we ignore Jesus in John12:32? "All men", means "all men". Just like "God commands all men to repent" (Acts17:30) means "all men".

Ben, you say the non-believing, spiritually dead, 'ungodly' individual can understand 'godly things' and thus will seek Him. Scripture says that is impossible. 2 COR 4:6 For it is God who commanded light to shine out of darkness, who has shone in our hearts to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ.

Please read the context. In 4:3-4, the god of this world has veiled their hearts so they CANNOT believe. But in verse 3:16, "When a man turns to the Lord, (then!) the veil over his heart is removed!"

The ESV version says: "Now when they heard this, they were cut to the heart,..." Ben, this clearly proves my point again. One cannot be convicted or "cut to the heart" if there was not a full understanding of the meaning of Cross. They finally realized that Jesus was the MESSIAH. It was a spiritual awakening from Paul's message.

It was the realization that caused belief; not God's choice.

BEN, TWO THINGS:
1st, One needs to understand what he has done wrong before he can repent. Right?
2nd, You left out the second half of a verse again. It needs to be "godly" repentence. Godly repentence means to 'agree with God' that He is right and you are wrong. It means seeing your sin as God sees it. 2 Cor 7:10 For godly sorrow produces repentance leading to salvation, not to be regretted; but the sorrow of the world produces death.

You are perceiving that "sovereign choice caused godly sorrow, which caused repentance". While I perceive that "sorrow that leads to repentance, is godly; sorrow that does not lead to repentance, is worldly."

It's the same question as we discussed in Lk8:13-15. You see the thirteeners as falling away, BECAUSE they were "bad soil". While I see it as saying "they were CALLED bad soil BECAUSE they fell away." Which of us is right?

That passage in Luke, connects directly with Heb6:7-8. One tilled field, produces either good fruit (and is blessed), or thorns/thistles (and is cursed). So the blessing or curse is consequential to the fruit. Therefore, "bad soil" or "good soil" is a label CONSEQUENTIAL to their perseverance.

Perseverance, therefore, classes them as "good", or "bad". That's the difference. Will you consider that "their sorrow is 'godly', IF it leads to repentance, and 'worldly' IF it does not"?

THIS is a true statement. Those who believe in Christ will be saved. What's your point? This states that ONLY those whose eyes have been opened (believers in Christ) are His children and thus saved.

Who opens our eyes? Contrast 2Cor4:3-4 ("the god of this world has veiled their minds that they may not see the gospel of the glory of Christ"), with 2Cor3:16 ("when a man turns to the Lord, (then!) the veil is removed").

BTW, AGAIN YOU LEAVE OUT the verse immediately before it: 39 This is the will of the Father who sent Me, that of all He has given Me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up at the last day.

THIS BACKS UP OSAS THEOLOGY......

No, it doesn't. Please read Jesus' prayer to God in Jn17:6: "Father, those Thou hast given Me out of the world --- Thine they WERE, and Thou gavest them to Me."

What could "Thine-the-were" mean, except "they believed in God"? That part of John6 is Jesus asserting His authority (answering their question --- see verse 42). He's saying, "Those who come to Me, are AUTHORIZED by God --- _I_ am authorized by God." So instead of "they were given to Jesus TO believe", it instead reflects John8:42: "If God were your Father ('Thine they were'), then you would love Me ('He gives you to Me'); for I came from the Father."

God gives the spiritually dead and discerned individual an urge to seek or hear the message for various reasons. Once he hears the message, it is God who 'wills' the individual's desire to hear and pursue more.

I've never seen "God wills anyone to hear our pursue more". Because, conversely, God would have to will the rest, NOT to hear or pursue.

...and "God does not decree ANY to perish". 2Pet3:9
(That cannot mean "God does not decree-to-persish any-whom-He's-decreed-to-be-SAVED", makes no sense; He does not decree ANY to perish, but makes room for ALL to repent.)

Ben, these passages show that we are all born spiritually dead (in "darkness"). "THERE IS NONE WHO SEEKS AFTER GOD." It is only God who can spiritually awaken us:

Roms 3:11 There is none righteous, no, not one;
11 There is none who understands;
There is none who seeks after God.

This is a lamentation, and is only quoting Psalms 14 & 53. It does not deny "he who seeks, finds" (Matt7:7), and "when you seek Me with all your heart you will find Me" (Jer29:11-13). It's similar to in Genesis6, where first he says "the hearts of man were only evil continually", but then recognizes that "Noah was righteous".

Noah found favor with God becuase he was righteous, he was not righteous because God favored him. God favors no one. Acts10:34-35

Eph 6:13 But all things that are exposed are made manifest by the light, for whatever makes manifest is light.

Men either come to the light, because they pursue righteousness, or hide in the darkness because they pursue sin. Jn3:18.

Eph 6:14 Therefore He says:
“ Awake, you who sleep,
Arise from the dead,
And Christ will give you light.”

Awake from the dead? I thought you said it was GOD who awakeded US?

Eph 6:20 giving thanks always for all things to God

Please read Eph4:17-19, and tell me if it's written to the saved, and if it reads as a real warning not to walk in sin.

2 Cor 4:6 For it is God who commanded light to shine out of darkness, who has shone in our hearts to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ.

Already discussed this; "turning to God", precedes "unveiling our hearts to Jesus Christ". How can we deny it? (2Cor3:16)

 

[cygnusx1]

Already discussed this; "turning to God", precedes "unveiling our hearts to Jesus Christ". How can we deny it? (2Cor3:16)

‘Can we possibly, without utter absurdity, maintain that there first existed in anyone the good virtue of a good will, to entitle him to the removal of his heart of stone? How can we say this, when all the time this heart of stone itself signifies precisely a will of the hardest kind, a will that is absolutely inflexible against God? For if a good will comes first, there is obviously no longer a heart of stone.’


Augustine, On Grace and Free Will, 29



​

‘For we are now speaking of the desire for goodness. If they want to say that this begins from ourselves and is then perfected by God, let them see how they can answer the apostle when he says, “Not that we are sufficient of ourselves to claim anything as coming from us, but our sufficiency is from God” (2 Cor. 3:5)’​

 

[Ben johnson]

"All of scripture"? Not so.

Show me where in Scripture "belief happens AFTER we were made alive". If you can, then tell me how you explain the contradiction with Eph2:5-8.

Then you cannot avoid the clear fact that you have just stated that men spiritually resurrect themselves from spiritually dead, to spiritually alive.

No, I said "men's faith receives God's resurrection and begottenness". Jn1:12-13

1Co 2:14 The natural person does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him, and he is not able to understand them because they are spiritually discerned.

No matter how you try to twist and turn, this verse shoots down your doctrines. And, before you try to tell me that the "spiritual things" in this verse are the same as in verse 12, you ignore the fact that those things in verse 12 are revealed to those who have received the Spirit, i.e. they are not "natural men" anymore. While they are natural (unregenerate), they can not discern or understand spiritual things. And don't give me that baloney that the Gospel is not one of those spiritual things that the natural man cannot understand, because if the Gospel is not spiritual, then you cannot avoid saying that the Gospel is carnal. If the Gospel is not spiritual, it cannot produce a spiritual result.

The "spiritual things" in verse 14, are the same "spiritual things" as in verse 12; the "spiritual things" in verse 12 are revealed by the RECEIVED Spirit. Make a choice, NBF:

1. The "things" in verse 12, are not the same "things" as in verse 14.
2. The word "received" does not mean "received-by-belief".
3. "received Spirit", means "by belief" --- and it is the RECEIVED Spirit who reveals spiritual things. So the "natural man", is one who has refused to believe in Christ.

I don't see a possible #4; do you? Or does one of those choices reflect your understanding?

Ben, you say that we are raised while we are dead, by OUR belief. That is the same as saying that we raise ourselves from death to life, by our own belief, and THEN the Spirit regenerates us. Regeneration is the raising from the dead, Ben! You are stating a stark impossibility!!

No, I'm stating what Paul stated, in Titus3:5-6; regeneration is by the "poured" Spirit, and "poured" denotes "belief".
"Poured" is "received" is "gifted" is "fell-upon", is "after belief". Acts10:43-47, 11:17 Same as "sealed, after belief" Eph1:17.

If a man is spiritually dead, he cannot do anything spiritual.

Apparently he can believe in Jesus.

Being regenerated is a spiritual event, because it is initiated by the Spirit.

It's "by belief". As Paul said, "WHEN we were dead, God made us alive --- through faith".

A dead man cannot do anything. He must first be made alive.

Is that in the Bible, NBF?

That applies to the spiritual as well as the physical. Using a physical truism to explain a spiritual truism is a valid and accepted teaching tool, which Jesus Himself used.

Unless it conflicts Scripture.

Yes, you do. You are trying to deny the very thing you have been saying, because I have poked more holes in it than a block of Swiss cheese.

There are no holes in what I've said. Let's see which number understanding you pick from above...

Tit 3:5-6 He saved us, not because of works done by us in righteousness, but according to His own mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewal of the Holy Spirit, (6) whom He poured out on us richly through Jesus Christ our Savior,

"Washing of regeneration" and "renewal of the Holy Spirit" are equivalent terms. They say the same thing two different ways, for emphasis. This kind of terminology is used through the Bible. Case in point, Gen 42:2; Gen 43:8; Num 4:19; Deu 33:6; 2 Kings 18:32; and so on.

The source of regeneration and renewal is the Spirit of God who is provided to us through Jesus Christ. You are trying to see a sequence here that is not in the text. Regeneration is a washing and renewal. It is done by the Spirit being poured ON us, not in us. It is done prior to indwelling. The Spirit does not indwell until AFTER regeneration and renewal, because the Spirit will not and cannot inhabit an unclean vessel.

It's past tense. The Spirit WAS poured --- and through the poured Spirit comes regeneration. I propose that "poured" is "received" is "sealed" --- can you refute that proposal?

No, it doesn't. You are reading into the verse a sequence that is not there, and trying to claim an utter impossibility. You have been shown this time after time, and yet you insist on stating this falsehood. We have refuted your view on this utterly and completely. I have just done so, again.

Acts uses the same exact word, "ekcheo-poured". Acts says "after belief". You're proposing that "it's a DIFFERENT 'poured', doesn't mean RECEIVED."

Titus says "poured through OUR SAVIOR Jesus". How does that not mean "belief"?

I have just shown you that "poured on us" IS the cause of regeneration.

You haven't shown it.

Poured ON us is not the same as "received IN us".

Acts10:43-47 says "poured", and "gifted", and "fell-upon", and "RECEIVED". Acts11:17 says "received AFTER BELIEF". How does the same word "poured", contextually stating "poured Spirit", not mean the same in both passages?

Poured after belief. It's the same as "sealed", in Eph1:13.

We receive the Spirit AFTER faith and repentance.

Exactly that.

We are regenerated by the Spirit of God SO THAT we can repent and believe, and THEN we receive the Spirit indwelling us.

You're proposing a DIFFERENT "poured" in Titus3:6, than in Acts10:45.

Why?

Did Jesus speak these words before or after He had preached and taught? Was not this speech in itself a teaching? What Jesus did was expose their hypocrisy and unbelief in even what they had, the Pentateuch. If they didn't even believe the words of Moses, who spoke of Jesus, how could they believe Him? They considered themselves believers, but Jesus showed that they were liars, and did not believe at all. They trusted in their position as "God's Chosen People" because they were Hebrews (seeking the glory of men), rather than the Glory of God, which their scriptures spoke of, and taught. Jesus rebuked them for being hypocrites and liars. I do believe that the Son of God has that right.

So why was He rebuking, those who were chosen to not believe? He condemned them for REFUSING to believe. What's the point --- if their unbelief was predestined?

He was rebuking them TOWARDS belief, showing that "they weren't really seeking God".

Actually I said that regeneration and indwelling are essentially simultaneous in temporal terms, but definitely separate and not equivalent in logical terms. And in these discussions we are speaking of the logical progression of events, not the temporal. At least I am, and I have consistently done so. You have jumped back and forth between temporal and logical as it suits you, with no regard for the confusion you create in your wake.

You and I agree; "regeneration" and "indwelling" are "simultaneous"; and that's the problem --- you're putting regeneration before.
No, I haven't; the Spirit indwells by belief, and at the moment He indwells, He regenerates.[/b] Perfect consitency.

No, that is not what the scripture says. God is the one who makes us alive, not by our faith, but by His Grace. What you are trying to do is say that God made us alive by our faith. That is emphatically not true, because it inevitably follows that it was our own faith which caused us to be made alive, and that God responded to something we did in order to make us alive, which removes Grace from the equation.

How can you deny "through faith"? Paul wrote it, I believe it...

What does it mean to be begotten? It means more than to be born, it means adoption, which is to give the rights to the family fortune, so to speak. You want to equate adoption with the new birth. If we are born again of God, we did nothing to make that happen. NOTHING. Not faith, not choice, not merit, not works. NOTHING. If we are begotten of God, it was He who did so, monergistically and unilaterally, and we trace our spiritual lineage to Him because of what He did, and not because of anything we did. He adopted us, we did not cause Him to adopt us. Your false doctrine teaches that we did something to cause him to birth us, i.e. we believed. That is backwards. Because He birthed us, we believe Those who believe are then adopted.

Being "born of God", is different than being "begotten of God"? Or different from "being adopted as SONS"?

No, it's not.

Basic sentence structure shows that you view is exactly backwards. Those who believe WERE born of God (prior action), not by their will, or by their lineage, or by anything other that God and God alone. They believe and have the right to begottenness BECAUSE the were born from above. The birth comes first, then the belief., and then the adoption, logically speaking.

These verses alone shoots down your whole doctrine.

No, it doesn't. Adoption is given to those WHO believe. It's undeniable. I think you're beginning to see that, because you're struggling to resist what John wrote.

The word used means to see, to perceive, to understand, as in, "I 'see' what you're saying". It does not mean to physically see (the Kingdom of God is of a spiritual nature, not physical, at this time), it means to understand, to perceive. It is not the equivalent of verse 5 which says unless one is born again, one cannot enter the Kingdom, for that should be obvious, that one cannot enter unless one is (already) born again. Jesus makes the point of stating that one must understand and one must be born again, to enter the Kingdom. Two different things. You want them to be the same, because if they are not, your doctrine sinks like a stone in water.

There's nothing in the context to deny that "see" is "enter". Further, Jesus rebukes Nick for "being a teacher and not knowing this". Such a rebuke is unnecessary for "predestined-faith".

I like to use four verses, which say the same thing. "Unless _____, you won't go to Heaven."
Lk13:3 (unless you repent)
Matt18:3-4 (unless you're humbled as children)
Matt7:21 (unless you do the will of the Father)
John3:3-6 (unless you're born again)

It is "born again" which is the umbrella under which the others reside. "Born again", is "become begotten as SONS". It's "by believing in and receiving Jesus".

I am patiently trying to do just that, Ben, show you where you are wrong. But you're not listening, nor do you truly want to. Logic presents you a problem, because you cannot argue logically, and logic shows major deficiencies in your doctrine which you aren't willing to face, especially since you have so much invested in it now, with your "book", and all. If you were to change your doctrine, your book would have to undergo a major re-write, or it would have to be scrapped. You are not willing to do either.

I'm willing to follow Scripture.

I have done so, many times, as well as in this post. The real question is, are you listening, and will you consider that you could be wrong?

"Right", or "wrong", for either of us, is determined by what they wrote. This post is long because I've responded to every point. I've presented Scriptural dictate that overturns every point. Unless you can show me where I've failed, then my view aligns with Scripture. I gave you another "numbered-choice", so that we can narrow down our differences. You can pick a number (1-3), recount a #4, or not respond. It's always your choice.

You hang your entire doctrine on the idea that man has the innate ability to choose Christ, and that places the initiation of salvation on man, rather than God. It robs God of Glory rightly due Him. It makes man's so-called "free will" the most powerful thing in Creation, more powerful than even God.

I've explained my position again in this post, by answering ever one of your points.

I do appreciate your conversation, NBF. I believe that as others read this, they will be strengthened in Christ.

...and so will you and I...

 

[moonbeam]

Ben johnson's public display of unbelief...continues

Perhaps the LORD has hardened his heart like Pharaoh in Exod 4:21....possible?

Patience, my friend. I've answered it a couple of times. I'm working on an answer you'll accept.

Ben.....I can't help but notice how you continue in your obstinate unbelief...clearly exhibited for all to witness...by your stubborn...calculated...refusal to answer my question with a simple Yes or No as I have specifically asked you on seven occasions now (my posts 17+34+44+48+52+60+69).....Ben,how long must this go on?

Why are you reluctant to acknowledge publicly, with a yes or no.....the very words that God, Himself, has spoken?

Could it be because you don't believe God actually spoke them?......is that what you believe Ben?....that God did not actually speak the words recorded in Exod 4:21?

This is what I suspect is the real reason behind your refusal to answer with a unequivocal yes or no.....so lets try again for a straight answer


Ben...did God speak these words as recorded in scripture "..I will harden his heart, so that he will.." (Exod 4:21)

Yes or No?

 

[cygnusx1]

Hi, Darceri.
Paul wrote "When we were dead in our sins, God made us alive ...through faith".

saved through faith yes , sanctified and justified through faith , yes , but made alive by faith ?

scripture please !

 

[nobdysfool]

saved through faith yes , sanctified and justified through faith , yes , but made alive by faith ?

scripture please !

Don't hold your breath.....