In an Instant = Forever

[5thKingdom]

Here is how the NT defines "faith".“Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.”

No, HERE is how the NT defines the ORIGIN of (real) "faith"
You are talking about "faith" that has already been given as a GIFT.
First you said "faith" comes from inside a man... now you DEFLECT
to a different subject altogether... AFTER "faith" has been given.
You are a very confused boy.


Eph 2:8-9
For by grace are ye saved through faith; and
that [faith is] not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:
Not of works, lest any man should boast.


Try to focus and remember the issue.
The issue is not about "faith" that is already GIVEN to men,
the issue is WHERE did that "faith" come from?


Did it come from "inside a person" (as you claim)?
Or was it a GIFT from God (as the Bible teaches)?
It cannot be both.


So you keep pretending that "faith" comes from
"inside of a person" and THEN God sees what we have done.
And you keep BOASTING to the unsaved that they need to do
what YOU HAVE DONE to be saved. And we will see, in the end,
whether MAN is sovereign (and acts first) as you pretend or
whether GOD is sovereign (and acts first) as the Bible says.


.

 

[TibiasDad]

Your words are nonsense, as shown in the verse below.
Even "babes in Christ" understand this reality:
So your statement above is just a lie.


Eph 2:8-9
For by grace are ye saved through faith;
and that [faith is] not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:
Not of works, lest any man should boast.


If man's "belief" or man's "faith" resulted in salvation then
they could correctly boast to all the unsaved that they
were just not wise enough to DO THE WORK that
would save them... and that is ridiculous when
men are "chosen" before the world began,
"election" is not based on any work.

1) Sometimes, babes are fed the wrong diet!

2) The gift, singular, is salvation, which is accomplished by means of Grace and faith (both Dative case). Salvation/eternal life is the gift of God. (see Myers NT Commentary for his treatment.) To say the Grace is a gift, is redundant, for being undeserved and yet received is to identify it as a gift, essentially saying the gift of God is the Gift of God. Faith too, is Dative, meaning it too is the means of Salvation, and not the specific target of the "gift". Indeed, it is not an implausible thought to say that all three are included in the whole and are a corporate unity, but that does not mean that faith as a singularity is not a human capacity to be exercised of his own accord.
Grammatically, gift is pointed at what the rest of scripture calls salvation, eternal life. (Rom 6:23)

3) Belief is not a work, it is a realization of something as true, and that precipitates the actions worthy of belief. When God called Abram to pack up his household and go to where God would show him, it says Abraham believed and God counted it as righteousness, but how do we know that Abram believed? We know because he packed up and left! Belief is not a work, it is the creator of works!

No verse says you must be given belief/faith to be able to believe. You must be persuaded to belief. (2 Cor 5:11, Rom 8:38)

Doug

 

[TibiasDad]

Only ONE can be the TRUE GOSPEL... the other leads into hell.
I am MUCH more comfortable believing GOD is Sovereign
rather than MAN is sovereign...


But I agree with you that is the minority position...
because "narrow is the way..."

1) So then, that means Arminians are not saved?

2)

I am MUCH more comfortable believing GOD is Sovereign
rather than MAN is sovereign...

Me too! God is sovereign over all things, and God's Sovereignty granted man limited sovereignty over his own life choices. Both/and, not either/or!

3) The gate is narrow, because it can be entered only one way. The way is "thlibó", literally "constricted" or made hard or difficult by the taking up of the cross of Christ.
(thlibó, means (a) I make narrow (strictly: by pressure); I press upon, (b) I persecute, press hard. See Strong. It is often translated as "affliction" )

Doug

 

[TibiasDad]

Listen Doug, we both know there have been TWO major
theologies in the "church" since the time of the Apostles.
While going through several transformations and name
changes, one of those "gospels" is called Arminianism.


You follow that false gospel where MEN save themselves.

For nearly 400 years, the teachings on salvation, including those taught directly by the apostles, including man's responsibility to act in faith/believe for himself in what God has said regarding Christ, and the possibility of losing one's faith, or rather giving up one's belief in Christ. I am quite sure that the apostles would have corrected their prized students, to whom they entrusted the gospel for the next generation, had they been errant in their understanding of their teachers!

And since their soteriological teachings are consistently and overwhelming more consistent with Arminians' flow of thought, I think that we are on pretty solid ground both biblically and historically as to what the view of the Church has been. Not until Augustine in the fourth century did anyone, other than the heretical Gnostics, teach and it was another millennium + before it was ever remotely considered again, much less taught as authentic. So essentially, 14-1500 years passed and only one notable, if only in a historical perspective, Church apologist, Augustine, ever suggested things as you and other Reformed -like thinkers. I think that Augustine overreacted in his arguments to Pelagius and I think Calvin and Luther overreacted in response to the Catholic church's wrong teachings that had become a works oriented soteriology. Augustine and the Reformers were right to defend against these heretical teachings, but they too swung to far in the opposite direction.


Doug

 

[5thKingdom]

1) Sometimes, babes are fed the wrong diet!

I have no idea what that means... do you have a SCRIPTURE
that relates that to salvation?

2) The gift, singular, is salvation,

No sir, the GIFT is FAITH.
It is the FAITH God gives to His elect that saves.
Not man's faith that God SEES and then acts upon.
You know know that.

To say the Grace is a gift, is redundant,

But I did not say Grace is a Gift. I said FAITH is a Gift...
but it was not ME who said that... it was God:


Eph 2:8-9
For by grace are ye saved through faith;
and that [faith is] not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:
Not of works, lest any man should boast.


If faith was NOT a "GIFT OF GOD" then you could correctly
BOAST that you were smart enough to get saved and all the
unsaved were not as smart as you. Which (as a matter of fact)
is EXACTLY what you preach... you tell people "Do what I did"...
just put your "faith" in God like I did and you will be saved like me.
But that is a false "works gospel" because faith does not come
from man, in fact God says NO MAN will seek him, no, not one.

3) Belief is not a work,

Of course "belief" is a work, it's a decision men make
Of course "faith" is a work, it's a decision men make.

Before I sit in a chair I have to DECIDE to "believe" that
chair will hold my weight, I have to have "faith" that chair
will not break under my weight. For any (full grown) man
to argue that faith and belief is NOT a work does not even
pass the giggle test.

No verse says you must be given belief/faith to be able to believe.

Before you said NO VERSE says that faith is a GIFT of God.
And I showed you 2 Eph 8-9 (above) now you add "belief"
and again I show you the same verse.


Here is your problem Doug.
You correctly understand that God commands all men to
have faith in Jesus and to believe in Jesus... but then you
very conveniently REJECT or intentionally IGNORE all the
verses that say those actions are NOT POSSIBLE of men,
because of our fallen nature.


You just cannot wrap your mind around the reality that men
are RESPONSIBLE for doing what they cannot do. But that
is the reason why God had to "elect" or "choose" who He
would save by giving them the GIFT of "faith"... and that
choice was made before the foundation of the world and
without regard to anything that man would do on his own.


And so you are left dazed and confused because you refuse
to accept a Sovereign God and you insist on having a PART
in saving yourself. Well that's too bad because that is not
the Gospel of God... that is "another gospel" where
MAN is sovereign. That is a heresy... and no heretic
inherits the "Kingdom of God" [Gal 5:20]


Jim

 

[5thKingdom]

1) So then, that means Arminians are not saved?

The Bible teaching is clear. The WAY is very narrow.
The WAY is not that MEN are sovereign and they act before God.
The WAY is not that MEN have "faith" and God SEES their work
and then acts to save them. That is "another gospel"


Gal 1:8-9
But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.


There are basically TWO GOSPELS taught in the church since
it began. The True Gospel of Grace says that God is Sovereign
and man cannot be saved unless God "draws" him and ALL MEN
God draws "shall come" to Jesus and He will lose NONE of them
and raise ALL of them on the last day.


The second (false) "works gospel" teaches that MEN act first
(making MAN sovereign) and then God SEES their good work
and He saves them. In the "works gospel" (ultimately) men
put their "faith" first in THEIR DECISION... and THAT is why
it cannot save.


But this should not surprise you, this was the teaching of the
Apostles and early church and Reformers... nothing new here.

Me too! God is sovereign over all things, and God's Sovereignty granted man limited sovereignty over his own life choices. Both/and, not either/or!

No... that is not what the Bible says. The Bible does not say
that men have "limited sovereignty" (show me that Scripture!)
the Bible says that men are DEAD in their sin and cannot make
a move toward God. THAT is why NO MAN can come unless
the Father "draws" them first... and ALL MEN the Father draws
"shall come" and Christ will lose NONE of them.


Did Lazarus have "limited sovereignty"?
He is a picture of all unsaved men... completely DEAD.


You see... you INSIST on having some sovereignty when you
KNOW that Romans 1 and 2 is summed-up in Romans 3 saying
that NO MAN will seek God, no, not even one. Please tell me
what PART of NO MAN do you not understand?


Tell me Doug... where is your sovereignty in Romans 1-3?
Where is your sovereignty in John 6? The Bible NEVER teaches
man is sovereign (either partially or totally) and yet THAT is what
you insist on teaching. You say "BE LIKE ME", make a decision
to "trust" God and you will be saved. You are a boaster, and your
gospel is a boasting gospel... a "works gospel" that cannot save.

3) The gate is narrow, because it can be entered only one way. The way is "thlibó", literally "constricted" or made hard or difficult by the taking up of the cross of Christ.

You can play word games all you want. It changes nothing.
The Gospel teaches the church consists of both saved "wheat"
and unsaved "tares". Generally speaking, the saved "wheat" are
those who believe God is Sovereign from start to finish and there
is NOTHING they can do to become saved. That is the narrow way.
The unsaved "tares" believe they can initiate their own salvation.
That is the "broad" way... but it is "another gospel".


Some think they can save themselves by saying a sinner's prayer,
some think they can save themselves by making an altar call, some
think they can save themselves by taking water baptism, some think
they can save themselves by repenting of sins, some think they can
save themselves by "accepting" Christ into their hearts, some think
they can save themselves by "believing" or having "faith"...
but you see the common thread is it's always a "works gospel",
it's always a gospel where MEN are sovereign and INITIATE
the salvation process. And THAT is why it's "another gospel"
that cannot save. It is not a narrow way it's a very BROADWAY.


The Bible is very clear, even though men are RESPONSIBLE to
believe... it is not possible because they are DEAD like Lazarus.
God must FIRST call to them, then He must give them the ears
to hear and the will and strength to respond. God is Sovereign
and God (not man) initiates the process of salvation. Any other
gospel is a false "works gospel" that cannot save.


Although, I will grant you that the false "works gospel" where
men are sovereign and initiate the process of salvation is the
MAJORITY opinion in the church today... because the Bible
foretold that there would be FEW saved when Jesus Returns.


Jim

 

[TibiasDad]

You can play word games all you want. It changes nothing.

It’s the word of God in the original language; it’s not a game, but you are sloughing it off like it doesn’t matter. English does not do the Greek justice in many instances, and just taking the modern English meanings of words is a foolish venture when we have the kind of resources afforded us by today’s technology. The syntax and the original flavoring of the language is paramount. You disregard it at your own peril!

Doug

 

[5thKingdom]

For nearly 400 years, the teachings on salvation, including those taught directly by the apostles, including man's responsibility to act in faith/believe

You are arguing with yourself. I have always said the Gospel
teaches that men are RESPONSIBLE for "believing"... however
that is just HALF of the story. The Gospel also clearly says that
NO MAN will believe, no, not even ONE. What part of that do
you not understand?


In Romans 1 God talks about men who never hear the Gospel,
but they are still "without excuse" because He made them in a
way that He is KNOWN by them... but they do not seek Him.
This is no difference with those who DO hear the Gospel. They
are RESPONSIBLE to seek God but they will not, they are DEAD.


And so, because NO MAN can come to Christ on his own, God
has "elected" who He would save before the foundation of the
world and He "draws" those "chosen" to Christ. And ALL MEN
the Father draws "shall come" to Christ and He loses NONE.
That is the "whole counsel of God"... men are responsible but
NONE will believe unless God has "chosen" them to believe.
There is no need to preach half-truths... preach the whole truth.


You have cognitive dissonance. You understand the part about
men being RESPONSIBLE but you REJECT or intentionally IGNORE
the part about men are not able - they are DEAD. That NO MAN
will believe... unless they are elect and the Father "draws" them.
You insert "another gospel" that says MEN are sovereign and can
"trust" God on their own, and when God SEES their good works
THEN He will be free to save them. It is a laughable "works gospel".


You want to preach a HALF-TRUTH which makes MAN sovereign.
You want to preach a BOASTERS GOSPEL which says man can
initiate his own salvation... you preach: JUST DO WHAT I DID and
you can be saved just like me. That is pure delusion because you
are working on half-truths. You IGNORE that NO MAN can come.
You conveniently IGNORE Scriptures you don't like or you invent
things like "limited sovereignty" of man in order to overcome
what the Bible clearly teaches... that men are DEAD and
dead men cannot act.

... and the possibility of losing one's faith, or rather giving up one's
belief in Christ. I am quite sure that the apostles would have corrected their prized students, to whom they entrusted the gospel for the next generation, had they been errant in their understanding of their teachers!

But you are pretending again. There are PLENTY of passages that
talk about men who "fall away". The Apostles (and Reformers)
did not neglect teaching that reality. But you must remember the
CONTEXT of those passages. They are NOT talking about the saved
"wheat" in the church, they are talking about the unsaved "tares".
That is why you see MANY passages like this:


1Jn 2:19
They went out from us, but they were not of us;
for if they had been of us,they would no doubt have continued
with us: but they went out,that they might be made manifest
that they were not all of us.


The Bible is FULL of passages that talk about the unsaved "tares"
falling away. But the Bible does not have ONE VERSE that says
the saved "wheat" lose their salvation. So again we see that
your confusion is a result of picking verses you like and ignoring
verses you don't like (and/or not understanding the CONTEXT
of the church including both saved "wheat" sown by God and
unsaved "tares" sown by Satan)

And since their soteriological teachings are consistently and overwhelming more consistent with Arminians' flow of thought, I think that we are on pretty solid ground both biblically and historically as to what the view of the Church has been.

First, when you point to teachings of the RCC... you prove
absolutely NOTHING. Second, you are ASSUMING that the
"narrow way" was always the MAJORITY way, and that is not
a good assumption - that is the OPPOSITE of a good assumption.
You point to the BROAD WAY and say "see... this proves something"
Yes, it proves you have little discernment.


It was always a major PART of the Gospel that unsaved "tares"
would infiltrate the church and the "leaven" of their false doctrines
would corrupt the church - and eventually the entire Christian
"Kingdom of Heaven" [Mat 13]. In fact, read Revelations chapters
2 and 3 to see the extent of this corruption before 100AD.


Do you think that Jesus was JOKING when He taught that FEW
would find the "narrow way" and MANY would take the "broad way"?
Or do you pretend that only applied during a certain era? What would
that era be? It is the ENTIRE Christian "Kingdom of Heaven".
Again you show how you select passages you like and ignore
passages that contradict you "man is sovereign" gospel.

Not until Augustine in the fourth century did anyone, other than the heretical Gnostics, teach and it was another millennium + before it was ever remotely considered again, much less taught as authentic. So essentially, 14-1500 years passed and only one notable, if only in a historical perspective, Church apologist, Augustine, ever suggested things as you and other Reformed -like thinkers.

Again you pretend to yourself. We see in 2 thess 2 that the early
church expected Christ's return to be imminent... which means
they did not believe in a 1000 year period (other than their
current church age).


Secondly, you make the same mistake as many others thinking
the early Christian's understood Scripture better than after the
printing press was invented and the common man could finally
compare Scripture with Scripture.


The history of the world is a REFLECTION of God's salvation plan
over four temporal "Kingdoms of Heaven" which Jesus NAMED
in Scripture and the understanding of the Saints in each Kingdom
was better than the previous. God has revealed Bible truths in
a progressive manner. Obviously the Christian Saints understood
more than the Jewish Saints and obviously the Saints in 1500AD
understood much more than Saints in 300-500AD... which were
still fighting over the most basic teachings of the Gospel. I will
trust that you KNOW some church history and, therefore, you
KNOW this is just a historical fact.


Moreover, the Bible PROMISES the Last Saints "shall understand"
Biblical mysteries that remained "closed-up" and "sealed" to all the
previous Saints [Dan 12:4 and 12:8-10] and Jesus PROMISED the
Last Saints "shall see" the fulfillment of Great Tribulation prophecies
[Mat 24:15 and 24:33] and they would PREACH these mysteries as
the Seventh Trumpet "begins to sound" [Rev 10:7-11] During the
"Season and Time" on earth AFTER the 2nd Woe is past, but
BEFORE the 3rd Woe begins. [Rev 11:14]


So anything you say about the understanding of the Saints in
the early church or RCC has to be taken with a HUGE grain of salt.

I think that Augustine overreacted in his arguments to Pelagius and I think Calvin and Luther overreacted in response to the Catholic church's wrong teachings that had become a works oriented soteriology. Augustine and the Reformers were right to defend against these heretical teachings, but they too swung to far in the opposite direction.

In other words, you DO NOT believe in the Providence of God?
You do not believe that GOD was in control of WHAT was known
and WHEN it was known? And you reject the CONTEXT that the
church consisted of BOTH saved "wheat" and unsaved "tares" and
it would be ONLY the saved "wheat" that would be able to know
and follow the "narrow way" while the many unsaved "tares"
would follow the "BROAD WAY" that leads to their destruction?


Essentially you are rejecting the ENTIRE GOSPEL when you take
such a secular stand... I know you don't realize that, but it's true.
Please believe me when I tell you that God is in control and He has
ALWAYS been in control. That God (alone) ensured "His sheep"
would know what HE WANTED. It was never a matter of chance,
and it was never a matter of the works of man.


So... you have a choice. You can believe that God's Gospel is
represented by Arminianism where MEN are sovereign and initiate
their own salvation or you can accept it's God's Gospel that men
are DEAD and NO MAN seeks Him. That He had to "elect" certain
people before the foundation of the world and ONLY the "chosen"
would be "drawn" to Jesus.


One of these is the Gospel of God, the other a false Gospel.
Can you tell WHICH is the Gospel of the "wheat" and WHICH
is the (works) gospel of the "tares"? Now remember...
the MAJORITY gospel is the WRONG gospel.


Jim

 

[5thKingdom]

It’s the word of God in the original language; it’s not a game, but you are sloughing it off like it doesn’t matter. English does not do the Greek justice in many instances, and just taking the modern English meanings of words is a foolish venture when we have the kind of resources afforded us by today’s technology. The syntax and the original flavoring of the language is paramount. You disregard it at your own peril! Doug

Doug...

(1) That was not much of a response to my reply to you

(2) I do not need to understand Greek or Hebrew to know
that NO MAN means what it says.

(3) The Gospel is based on NO MAN will seek God and your
(false works) gospel is based on SOME MEN will seek God.
Why do I need Greek to tell the difference?

Jim

 

[Behold]

You say that "faith" is not a work and then, in the same breath,
you say it happens INSIDE a person

.

Yes, Faith that God accepts, to give you the New Birth happens inside the person's heart.
Only God can see it, as you can't see belief or trust inside a person.

 

[5thKingdom]

Yes, Faith that God accepts, to give you the New Birth happens inside the person's heart. Only God can see it, as you can't see belief or trust inside a person.

You say faith comes from within a man
and God SEES that good work and THEN
God is obligated to save that man.


But the Bible says the opposite. The Bible says
that God GIVES His elect saving faith as a GIFT
Gee... I wonder who is right, you or the Bible


Eph 2:8-9
For by grace are ye saved through faith;
and that [faith is] not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:
Not of works, lest any man should boast.


You are preaching a BOASTER GOSPEL.
A gospel that says DO WHAT I DID to be saved.
You preach that MAN is sovereign and MAN initiates
the salvation process by have having faith. And THEN
God "SEES" your good work of faith and God is obligated
to save you because of your good work of having faith.


Your "boaster gospel" says BE LIKE ME, DO WHAT I DID
and God will "SEE" your faith and be obligated to save you.


This is the second or third time I sent you this Scripture
that REFUTES your "Boaster gospel" and yet you are still
preaching that saving faith is NOT a GIFT from God.


.

 

[TibiasDad]

No... that is not what the Bible says. The Bible does not say
that men have "limited sovereignty" (show me that Scripture!)
the Bible says that men are DEAD in their sin and cannot make
a move toward God. THAT is why NO MAN can come unless
the Father "draws" them first... and ALL MEN the Father draws
"shall come" and Christ will lose NONE of them.

Gen 1:26Then God said, “Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals, a and over all the creatures that move along the ground.”
27So God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them;
male and female he created them.

1) Rulership is another word for sovereignty! That's why kings are called Sovereigns!

2)God created us in his image and a part of that image is personal sovereignty of volition.

Gen 2:15 The Lord God took the man and put him in the Garden of Eden to work it and take care of it. 16And the Lord God commanded the man, “You are free to eat from any tree in the garden; 17but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat from it you will certainly die.”

Here, God tells man that he is "free" to eat from whatever tree he chooses to eat from, but with the understanding that he will receive the due results of his choosing. God's Sovereignty does not step in and override the choices of man. They are man's to do with as man pleases! That is independent sovereignty displayed in vivid language!

Gen 2:19Now the Lord God had formed out of the ground all the wild animals and all the birds in the sky. He brought them to the man to see what he would name them; and whatever the man called each living creature, that was its name. 20So the man gave names to all the livestock, the birds in the sky and all the wild animals.

Here again, Moses writes of God giving independent sovereignty of volition to make the animals whatever Adam wanted to make them, independent of and unencumbered by God's thought on the matter!

So three times in the first two chapters of the Bible we have God giving independent sovereignty of volition to man that God does not impede or influence by his own sovereignty!

Doug

 

[5thKingdom]

Gen 1:26Then God said, “Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals, a and over all the creatures that move along the ground.”
Doug

So you have taken the notion of MAN'S "limited sovereignty"
in the salvation process... and attempted to PROVE that theory
by showing MAN has dominion over the animals of the earth.

I am so disappointed in you... is that REALLY the best you can do?
Frankly, I am embarrassed for you.

Jim

 

[5thKingdom]

So three times in the first two chapters of the Bible we have God giving independent sovereignty of volition to man that God does not impede or influence by his own sovereignty!Doug

We were NOT talking about man having dominion over animals.
We were talking about MAN being able to initiate the salvation
process... which YOU CLAIMED man has "limited sovereignty"
in that process.


I asked you to proved ONE VERSE from the Bible that teaches
man has the ability to initiate the salvation process... with the
"limited sovereignty" you claimed exists.


And you send me verses teaching man has dominion
over the animals of the earth.


That has absolutely NOTHING to do with the salvation process.
I cannot believe that is the best "proof" you can offer for you
theory that man initiates the salvation process... frankly, it's
just embarrassing to present such (unrelated) nonsense.


So we can now see you have NO SCRIPTURE to support
your theory of man being able to initiate the salvation process,
NO SCRIPTURE supporting a notion of man's "limited sovereignty"
I am so disappointed in you making such an argument without
having even ONE VERSE to support the heresy that man
initiates his own salvation.


And yet you still cannot see WHY Arminianism is "another gospel"
You still cannot admit to yourself that man cannot initiate the
salvation process and that is the "BROAD WAY" to destruction.


The REASON few men follow the "narrow way" to life is that
men (by nature) cannot accept the Sovereignty of God...
by nature men INSIST on having some part in their
salvation. It is just the nature of man to do so.


Only those God has elected can REALLY trust HIM to do
everything. That is WHY it is the "narrow way" that few find.


Jim

 

[5thKingdom]

Gen 1:26Then God said, “Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals, a and over all the creatures that move along the ground.”
27So God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them;
male and female he created them.

1) Rulership is another word for sovereignty! That's why kings are called Sovereigns!

2)God created us in his image and a part of that image is personal sovereignty of volition.

Gen 2:15 The Lord God took the man and put him in the Garden of Eden to work it and take care of it. 16And the Lord God commanded the man, “You are free to eat from any tree in the garden; 17but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat from it you will certainly die.”

Here, God tells man that he is "free" to eat from whatever tree he chooses to eat from, but with the understanding that he will receive the due results of his choosing. God's Sovereignty does not step in and override the choices of man. They are man's to do with as man pleases! That is independent sovereignty displayed in vivid language!

Gen 2:19Now the Lord God had formed out of the ground all the wild animals and all the birds in the sky. He brought them to the man to see what he would name them; and whatever the man called each living creature, that was its name. 20So the man gave names to all the livestock, the birds in the sky and all the wild animals.

Here again, Moses writes of God giving independent sovereignty of volition to make the animals whatever Adam wanted to make them, independent of and unencumbered by God's thought on the matter!

So three times in the first two chapters of the Bible we have God giving independent sovereignty of volition to man that God does not impede or influence by his own sovereignty!

Doug

BTW... just a a side note:

you cannot PROVE anything about men today by showing
Adam BEFORE the fall.

That fact is so obvious that it (should) go without saying.
Men AFTER the fall are not the same as men BEFORE the fall.

This has nothing to do with the points I made in the previous
messages about man's dominion over animals... it's just a
general point that I thought you should keep in mind because
you prove NOTHING when you point to the nature of man
in the Garden and you say that applies to men today.

That is the entire point of man being thrown OUT of the Garden.
Just a concept I thought you should remember.

Jim

 

[TibiasDad]

So you have taken the notion of MAN'S "limited sovereignty"
in the salvation process... and attempted to PROVE that theory
by showing MAN has dominion over the animals of the earth.

I am so disappointed in you... is that REALLY the best you can do?
Frankly, I am embarrassed for you.

Jim

1) While I appreciate your concern, our disappointed or lack thereof is should be, for both of us, a largely irrelevant issue, for we answer to only one Master.

2) As is the case with all poor arguments, you have cherry picked the part of the argument you think you can exploit to your advantage and disregard the unity of the whole!

The rulership over the physical creation is a singular aspect, not the whole, or even the foundation of the whole. Two weeks of the three specific expressions of man's independent sovereignty are directly related to his volition; the choice of what to eat, i.e, bananas or pomegranates, and/or to eat of Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil or any of the other trees in the garden, including the Tree of Life. These are independent of God's sovereignty.

Such sovereignty is not taken away by sin's contamination! Sin certainly effects a change is the way choice operates, but nothing besides a Divine edict would remove said sovereignty.

Doug

 

[TibiasDad]

We were NOT talking about man having dominion over animals.
We were talking about MAN being able to initiate the salvation
process... which YOU CLAIMED man has "limited sovereignty"
in that process.

Since I have not and do not assert that man can initiate salvation, or the the process thereof, you're arguing against a strawman.

Let me state unequivocally that forgiveness of sins can only with the one offended by sin. However, and purely for the sake of argument, even if your argument is true-- and again, it is not!-- God can never be obligated to act positively toward man at any time sans his own willingness. Your entire premise, that man initiates salvation, is self-stultifying!

Doug

 

[TibiasDad]

BTW... just a a side note:

you cannot PROVE anything about men today by showing
Adam BEFORE the fall.

That fact is so obvious that it (should) go without saying.
Men AFTER the fall are not the same as men BEFORE the fall.

This has nothing to do with the points I made in the previous
messages about man's dominion over animals... it's just a
general point that I thought you should keep in mind because
you prove NOTHING when you point to the nature of man
in the Garden and you say that applies to men today.

That is the entire point of man being thrown OUT of the Garden.
Just a concept I thought you should remember.

Jim

Jim,

First, allow me to express my appreciation for engaging with me in conversation and the general civility with which you have conducted yourself.

Now to your objection!

Man's sovereignty is as much a part of his internal make-up as it is with God's internal make-up. Other aspects of God's image, i.e, creativity, rationality, being relational, within man did not cease to be after the Fall, why should his sovereignty of volition?

Doug

 

[5thKingdom]

1) While I appreciate your concern, our disappointed or lack thereof is should be, for both of us, a largely irrelevant issue, for we answer to only one Master.

Do you think the MASTER of the unsaved "tares" in the church
is the SAME MASTER as the saved "wheat" in the church?
Of course not.

So why do you PRETEND Christians all have the SAME MASTER?
Seems very foolish (or naive) to me.

Jim

 

[5thKingdom]

Man's sovereignty is as much a part of his internal make-up as it is with God's internal make-up. Other aspects of God's image, i.e, creativity, rationality, being relational, within man did not cease to be after the Fall, why should his sovereignty of volition? Doug

You can argue that man has sovereignty to chose to wear
black socks or white socks today... and I will not disagree.
But what you cannot argue (with any Biblical support) is that
men have sovereignty in the process of their Salvation.


You cannot make that argument because (since Adam)
all men are born spiritually DEAD and cannot make a move
toward God. The Bible PROMISES that NO MAN will seek God,
no, not even one. So to argue to the contrary is to reject the
authority of Scripture.


It is GOD who is Sovereign in "choosing" or "electing" who he
will save... since ALL MEN are born DEAD and on their way to hell.


MAN is not sovereign in any part of the salvation process.
You claimed men had "limited sovereignty" in salvation but
then you could only "support" your claim by showing verses
that talk about Adam having dominion over the animals....
before the fall. If that is the BEST you can do, you failed.
If you can do better... then let me know.


So, I have appreciated the conversation also but you have
totally FAILED to show how man has ANY sovereignty in the
salvation process.


Jim