HELL

[bling]

Mark Quayle said:
Words sometimes push us around. We think we've overcome a mental contradiction, but all we've done is to put some words together. This is how you came up with your version of the Gospel, that has less than "little if any Biblical support."

I am not the one who posited the notion of a transaction. You did. I'm saying that if there is a transaction, it is between the Father and Son—not an arrangement by which we can purchase—er, "gain"— salvation.

Yet you claim that what they seek produces the very effect of salvation. It is therefore no strawman. That you at one point slough logic does not mean you can later separate the categories you sloughed together to argue against protests.

You make their "seeking relief" substantive, which, as you here even admit, (with, "at least for a while") it is not.

But, what you propose here is not only illogical, it is a stretch that the Gospel of the Bible does not include, nor imply. It is YOUR gospel.

In the story of the prodigal son we have a totally undeserving young man going home just seeking an undeserved job, so he can continue with some kind of life. He is seeking undeserved “relief”. Which is “logical” for him to do, but it is not macho, since starving to death in the pigsty is fully what he deserves.

Ha! WHAT??? Read it again. THE NATURAL MAN! The man living according to the flesh. The man governed by the flesh. The mind of the flesh. The sinful nature. The mind set on the flesh. The carnal mind. The corrupt nature. Have you no concept of the natural vs the spiritual? Your gospel transfers across the two categories, and that, by the power and will of the natural man!

Paul is addressing only Jewish and Gentile Christians in Rome.

Mark Quayle said:
In addition, the thing you pretend they can do, ("to simply, humbly, accept as charity"), requires understanding what it is that they are accepting. Until God regenerates them, they are clueless, spiritually speaking. "But the natural man does not accept the things of the Spirit of God; for they are foolishness to him, and he is not able to understand them, because spiritually they are discerned." 1 Cor 2:14 Furthermore, as the conversion requires, he cannot have salvific faith, he has no repentance, he has no love for God, he has no power of commitment, he has no standing, until God regenerates him, whose faith is not of his own making. All those things that are required in your so-called 'transaction', though you will deny it, are by the Spirit of God Himself having 'taken up residence' in the person, God who alone has those things in full measure.

Again, the prodigal son was just hoping that maybe his father would make him a slave/servant even though he fully did not deserve even to be the father’s slave, yet he was showered with unbelievable wonderful gift. We go to God, our enemy, to somehow get undeserved relieve from the burden we started/created and are showered with unbelievable gifts.

Still jumping categories. Do you not believe that surrendering is also committing to something? You are the one mentioning a transaction between the two parties. "ACCEPTING"?—Accepting WHAT?

In WW11, when an enemy soldier surrenders to his enemy, did he say: he would not try to escape, kill his enemy if he could and fight again if released? What is he accepting?

The soldier is willing to humble accept pure undeserved charity from his enemy.

That the prodigal (or the new believer) is "surprisingly showered with unbelievable wonderful gifts" is not in question. That is unrelated to the argument. Your exuberance does nothing to make your point.

No doubt. But GOD knows.

Nevertheless, you WILL always reject the invitation to the banquet because you know well enough in whom the banquet honors, which leaves you without excuse. (Romans 1). Only by the GRACE OF GOD will you be changed, and accept the invitation. Even those who, in your fantasy, "humbly accept undeserved charity", (which claim you make without Scriptural warrant), more closely resemble those who had insufficient oil in their lamps.

Look at this crowd in the parable and compare it to a huge wonderful prestigious crowd televised banquet you have seen honoring some distinguished person. Do people living under the bridge give honor by their presence to the distinguished person the banquet is for?

Are these street people deserving of the banquet?

Regretting your life decisions is definitely not sufficient to transform your soul. Only God can make that difference—not your 'humble' decisions as someone at enmity with God.

Can you demonstrate how someone at enmity with God even CAN be humble, while rejecting God? Do you not know that the CORE of sin is a proud rejection of God's Sovereignty? We are declaring independence, until God changes us. We are saying that we do not need God. We work against God continuously.

We are NOT good. No matter how small you whittle it down, there is no ability in man to do anything resulting in his salvation. It is entirely by Grace.

Everyone sooner or later will be humbled, so everyone can be humble, so humility itself is not a righteous trait, but the motive and timing of your humility can make it honorable. To be humble in your humiliating circumstances is natural, but to be humble in a glorious circumstance is righteous. The pigsty of life we spiral down to is naturally humbling.

 

[Mark Quayle]

The Gospel has to fit the notion of Love, since it is Love.
One of the ways people try to reason away the need to humble themselves to the point of accept pure undeserved charity from a sacrificial giver is to say: "You can't do it".

The Gospel cannot fit YOUR notion of Love. You interpret everything you read in Scripture according to your view of Love, as though that is what GOD is. You suppose to fit GOD into your head!!!

 

[Mark Quayle]

This as an example is addressing mature adults since babies cannot do this.
This is also going out to Jews who have the Law.
I fully agree that all people will not be saved of their own free will choice.
The "boastful" stood before Christ, so that might be addressing the Kingdom location.
And yes, God hates sin.

WHAT IS THE CAUSE OF WHY SOME DO AND SOME DON'T? SHOW THE DIFFERENCE.

IF one does so, of his own free will, and another doesn't, of his own free will, are you not admitting to causation by mere chance? Do you not see the tangled mess made by insisting on billions of spontaneous little first causes?

 

[Mark Quayle]

This as an example is addressing mature adults since babies cannot do this.
This is also going out to Jews who have the Law.
I fully agree that all people will not be saved of their own free will choice.
The "boastful" stood before Christ, so that might be addressing the Kingdom location.
And yes, God hates sin.

Show this from Scripture

 

[Mark Quayle]

From what is asked of people, we can assume it is only addressing people who can understand and do. Where do you find what babies must do?

Your reasoning is based on free will, as though it proves free will. Circular.

 

[Mark Quayle]

Right, selfishly motivated to do something is a sinful motivation.

Yet you would imply that this sinful motivation, yielding to the Gospel, humbly accepting the 'offer' without knowing what the offer is from one with whom that person is at enmity, pleases God. Explain.

 

[Mark Quayle]

In the story of the prodigal son we have a totally undeserving young man going home just seeking an undeserved job, so he can continue with some kind of life. He is seeking undeserved “relief”. Which is “logical” for him to do, but it is not macho, since starving to death in the pigsty is fully what he deserves.

You do remember this is a parable, no? Not all the particulars are relevant to the Gospel. What's more, the prodigal was ALREADY the man's son.

Paul is addressing only Jewish and Gentile Christians in Rome.

That's not what I'm asking. What is he talking about; what is he describing by "the natural mind", so obviously "vs the spiritual mind"?

Again, the prodigal son was just hoping that maybe his father would make him a slave/servant even though he fully did not deserve even to be the father’s slave, yet he was showered with unbelievable wonderful gift. We go to God, our enemy, to somehow get undeserved relieve from the burden we started/created and are showered with unbelievable gifts.

In WW11, when an enemy soldier surrenders to his enemy, did he say: he would not try to escape, kill his enemy if he could and fight again if released? What is he accepting?

The soldier is willing to humble accept pure undeserved charity from his enemy.

Look at this crowd in the parable and compare it to a huge wonderful prestigious crowd televised banquet you have seen honoring some distinguished person. Do people living under the bridge give honor by their presence to the distinguished person the banquet is for?

Are these street people deserving of the banquet?

Everyone sooner or later will be humbled, so everyone can be humble, so humility itself is not a righteous trait, but the motive and timing of your humility can make it honorable. To be humble in your humiliating circumstances is natural, but to be humble in a glorious circumstance is righteous. The pigsty of life we spiral down to is naturally humbling.

Keep stretching, my man. You are making up statements not in Scripture, with your version of the gospel. And then equivocating in an attempt to get them to make sense.

It is ONLY by the GRACE of GOD, we are saved; not of anything we can do—not of "humbly accepting undeserved charity" from an enemy. WE are not the hinge upon which salvation swings. It is by God's mere mercy, not of chance, not of some choosing well, not of humbling, not of despair, not of human choice. Rom 9 again. "16 It does not, therefore, depend on human desire or effort, but on God’s mercy."

 

[Rescued One]

From what is asked of people, we can assume it is only addressing people who can understand and do. Where do you find what babies must do?

I said NOTHING about babies. The Bible says nothing about "mature adults.."

 

[bling]

The Gospel cannot fit YOUR notion of Love. You interpret everything you read in Scripture according to your view of Love, as though that is what GOD is. You suppose to fit GOD into your head!!!

Yes my notion of God's Love could grossly underestimate how great it is since it goes beyond logic.

 

[Rescued One]

Right, selfishly motivated to do something is a sinful motivation.

The natural man is unable to please God! He CANNOT please God! God has to regenerate him. The natural man CANNOT make himself spiritual.

 

[bling]

I said NOTHING about babies. The Bible says nothing about "mature adults.."

The Bible does not address babies, young children or adults with a learning disability, so that is why I only address mature adults which the Bible must be talking about.

 

[bling]

WHAT IS THE CAUSE OF WHY SOME DO AND SOME DON'T? SHOW THE DIFFERENCE.

IF one does so, of his own free will, and another doesn't, of his own free will, are you not admitting to causation by mere chance? Do you not see the tangled mess made by insisting on billions of spontaneous little first causes?

All mature adults have their own free will gifted to them by God.
God can easily handle any "tangled mess".

 

[bling]

Show this from Scripture

Be more specific there are a lot of different ideas being expressed.

 

[bling]

Your reasoning is based on free will, as though it proves free will. Circular.

Verses supporting free will

Gen. 1-3 Did Adam and Eve have free will?

Exodus 35:29 “All the Israelite men and women who were willing brought to the Lord freewill offerings for all the work the Lord through Moses had commanded them to do.” Are these truly free will offerings?

Jonah 3: 10 “When God saw what they did and how they turned from their evil ways, he relented and did not bring on them the destruction he had threatened.” Did the people of Nineveh change what God said he would do?

How is this not saying that God’s actions are contingent on the choices of the people?

"You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; and it is they that bear witness about me, yet you refuse to come to me that you may have life." (John 5:39-40). Note that Jesus does not say, "you cannot come", which the Greek does not say here, but, "you refuse to come", in order that you may have eternal life. It was their own rejection of Jesus and the Gospel, that would damn their souls, and not because they were "unable" to make the "choice" themselves.

Christ is God here on earth. The “whomsoever” does not mean only the elect, but lots of people, who then made the choice to accept or reject Christ. "You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; and it is they that bear witness about me, yet you refuse to come to me that you may have life." (John 5:39-40)

To say: “Christ only reveals Himself to those who God have chosen to accept Him”, means God is guilty of not helping others to accept Christ.

John 15: 22 If I had not come and spoken to them, they would not be guilty of sin; but now they have no excuse for their sin.

If they have no free will, they have an excellent excuse for sinning?

There are all the “whosoever” verses making it contingent.
Did satan and the angels make an autonomous free will choice to rebel?

Jer. 18: 7 If at any time I announce that a nation or kingdom is to be uprooted, torn down and destroyed, 8 and if that nation I warned repents of its evil, then I will relent and not inflict on it the disaster I had planned. 9 And if at another time I announce that a nation or kingdom is to be built up and planted, 10 and if it does evil in my sight and does not obey me, then I will reconsider the good I had intended to do for it.

How is this not saying that God’s actions are contingent on the choices of people?
John 3:11… but still you people do not accept our testimony
1 Thes. 5: 16 Rejoice always, 17 pray continually, 18 give thanks in all circumstances; for this is God’s will for you in Christ Jesus.

19 Do not quench the Spirit. 20 Do not treat prophecies with contempt 21 but test them all; hold on to what is good, 22 reject every kind of evil.

 

[bling]

Yet you would imply that this sinful motivation, yielding to the Gospel, humbly accepting the 'offer' without knowing what the offer is from one with whom that person is at enmity, pleases God. Explain.

NO!!! yielding to the gospel comes after the person is showered with gifts.

 

[bling]

You do remember this is a parable, no? Not all the particulars are relevant to the Gospel. What's more, the prodigal was ALREADY the man's son.

Paul talks about us all being children of God. Can a son of God become dead spiritually?

That's not what I'm asking. What is he talking about; what is he describing by "the natural mind", so obviously "vs the spiritual mind"?

Paul is talking about what these Christian came from and where they are now.

Keep stretching, my man. You are making up statements not in Scripture, with your version of the gospel. And then equivocating in an attempt to get them to make sense.

It is ONLY by the GRACE of GOD, we are saved; not of anything we can do—not of "humbly accepting undeserved charity" from an enemy. WE are not the hinge upon which salvation swings. It is by God's mere mercy, not of chance, not of some choosing well, not of humbling, not of despair, not of human choice. Rom 9 again. "16 It does not, therefore, depend on human desire or effort, but on God’s mercy."

You're the one exalting the selfish (sinful act) of "humbly accepting pure undeserved charity", to some glorious hinge. It would be unloving of God to force His Love on us if we are unwilling to accept that Love.

 

[Mark Quayle]

All mature adults have their own free will gifted to them by God.
God can easily handle any "tangled mess".

One thing at a time. "All mature adults have their own free will gifted to them by God" —repeated assertion without scriptural warrant. And a non-answer to my question. But I will deal with it to press for an answer: HOW —even if that assertion is true— do some make one decision and some others make a different decision. WHY? What makes that difference? You never answer this question. You just kick the can down the road.

 

[bling]

The natural man is unable to please God! He CANNOT please God! God has to regenerate him. The natural man CANNOT make himself spiritual.

Right, God is not pleased with our sinning selfishly, but it does show a willingness to humbly accept His charity as charity.

 

[Rescued One]

The Bible does not address babies, young children or adults with a learning disability, so that is why I only address mature adults which the Bible must be talking about.

The Bible is not addressing only mature adults.

 

[Mark Quayle]

Paul talks about us all being children of God. Can a son of God become dead spiritually?

Paul is talking about what these Christian came from and where they are now.

You're the one exalting the selfish (sinful act) of "humbly accepting pure undeserved charity", to some glorious hinge. It would be unloving of God to force His Love on us if we are unwilling to accept that Love.

You're the one coming up with this unbiblical narrative to support your notion of Love. YOU, whether you admit it or not, hinge eternal security on it—Do you not say that if one does not "humbly accept pure undeserved charity" they will not be saved, and if they do, they will be saved. It is self-evident, then, that you hinge their eternal state upon that 'humble accepting', which you have not been able to prove possible, but only to assert that it is possible. Meanwhile I've shown you plenty of Scriptural warrant that the spiritually dead are not able to do anything that will please God, nor to motivate God to do anything for them, of their supposed 'free will'.