"Infused" or "Imputed"?

[sdowney717]

That violates these passages:

2 Peter 3:9
The Lord is not slow about His promise, as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing for any to perish but for all to come to repentance.

Acts 17:30
Therefore having overlooked the times of ignorance, God is now declaring to men that all people everywhere should repent,

All is all. If "some are not called to be saved," then all is not all.
All people is just that - no one is left out.

True statement.

Edited to add:

This sounds like you are defending that calvinistic heresy of limited atonement.

2 Corinthians 5:15
and He died for all, so that they who live might no longer live for themselves, but for Him who died and rose again on their behalf.

1 Peter 3:18
For Christ also died for sins once for all, the just for the unjust, so that He might bring us to God, having been put to death in the flesh, but made alive in the spirit;

Again - all means all, no one left out.

Regarding Issac, ask yourself, How did Abraham get a son? Isaac was a child of promise to Abraham from God, and believers are of the same source of promise God makes to Christ, that Christ would be given children of God by God to Christ. I am certain you will not understand any of this.

Hebrews 11:17-19New King James Version (NKJV)
The Faith of the Patriarchs
17 By faith Abraham, when he was tested, offered up Isaac, and he who had received the promises offered up his only begotten son, 18 of whom it was said, “In Isaac your seed shall be called,” 19 concluding that God was able to raise him up, even from the dead, from which he also received him in a figurative sense.

Galatians 3:29 And if you are Christ’s, then you are Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise.

Galatians 4:28 Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are children of promise. 29 But, as he who was born according to the flesh then persecuted him who was born according to the Spirit, even so it is now.

Romans 9:7
nor are they all children because they are the seed of Abraham; but, “In Isaac your seed shall be called.”

8 That is, those who are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God; but the children of the promise are counted as the seed. 9 For this is the word of promise: “At this time I will come and Sarah shall have a son.”

10 And not only this, but when Rebecca also had conceived by one man, even by our father Isaac 11 (for the children not yet being born, nor having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works but of Him who calls), 12 it was said to her, “The older shall serve the younger.” 13 As it is written, “Jacob I have loved, but Esau I have hated.”

 

[Dave-W]

The 2 peter verse you must read in context, and the you are the elect only, not the reprobate. Do you even believe in such a thing as the reprobate of whom Peter is talking prior to the verse you quoted?

Of course. But perhaps not the way you think.

Contrasted with these following where God is not willing for these others in the following verses to perish, so guess what, THEY WONT PERISH.

Of course they will. It is THEIR CHOICE to perish.

God does not want it, just like God hates divorce, but we know it happens. Similarly people harden their hearts to the Lord and never come to faith.

Three times the author of Hebrews quotes Ps 95: "Today if you hear His voice, do not harden your hearts..." If that was not possible there would be no reason to say that.

Plainly all of God's elect, God waits for with patience to repent. But God does not wait patiently for the wicked 'reprobate' to repent.

The sentence I bolded has no support in scripture to my knowledge. He waits for ALL.

And all means all.

 

[sdowney717]

Of course. But perhaps not the way you think.

Of course they will. It is THEIR CHOICE to perish.

God does not want it, just like God hates divorce, but we know it happens. Similarly people harden their hearts to the Lord and never come to faith.

Three times the author of Hebrews quotes Ps 95: "Today if you hear His voice, do not harden your hearts..." If that was not possible there would be no reason to say that.


The sentence I bolded has no support in scripture to my knowledge. He waits for ALL.

And all means all.

It is not God's will that any He gives to Christ perish, so He grants them that they will repent, grants repentance.
Your of the persuasion God grants all repentance, but they choose to not repent, which makes no sense.
Here for example

2 Timothy 2:24-26New King James Version (NKJV)
24 And a servant of the Lord must not quarrel but be gentle to all, able to teach, patient, 25 in humility correcting those who are in opposition, if God perhaps will grant them repentance, so that they may know the truth, 26 and that they may come to their senses and escape the snare of the devil, having been taken captive by him to do his will.

When God grants repentance, the people granted repentance actually do repent.
You can not comprehend any of this because you are hardened. People who are hardened have no understanding, they do not comprehend.

All those The father gives to Christ beforehand, as in the election according to grace are those He predestined to come to Christ, you don't believe that either.

All that the Father gives Me will come to Me

You must believe people get into the sheepfold some other way?

 

[Dave-W]

Your of the persuasion God grants all repentance, but they choose to not repent, which makes no sense.

Of course it makes perfect sense.
To say otherwise is to trash one thing God Himself holds sacred: our freedom of choice.

As many have said:

God has His part and we have our part.
We CANNOT do God's part and God WILL NOT do our part.

Freedom of choice is in "our part." He does not make the choice for us.

 

[sdowney717]

Of course it makes perfect sense.
To say otherwise is to trash one thing God Himself holds sacred: our freedom of choice.

As many have said:

God has His part and we have our part.
We CANNOT do God's part and God WILL NOT do our part.

Freedom of choice is in "our part." He does not make the choice for us.

Your just talking humanism.

Here is a verse.
'All that the Father gives Me will come to Me'

You must believe people get into the sheepfold some other way?
Only thieves and robber try to enter in outside of Christ.
Only God can give you to Christ. If He does not predestine you, you will never be a believer.

Examples of predestination
Romans 8:29
For whom He foreknew, He also predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son, that He might be the firstborn among many brethren.
In Context | Full Chapter | Other Translations
Romans 8:30
Moreover whom He predestined, these He also called; whom He called, these He also justified; and whom He justified, these He also glorified.
In Context | Full Chapter | Other Translations
Ephesians 1:5
having predestined us to adoption as sons by Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the good pleasure of His will,
In Context | Full Chapter | Other Translations
Ephesians 1:11
In Him also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestined according to the purpose of Him who works all things according to the counsel of His will,

 

[jax5434]

Imputed.
But I love the way we all stayed on topic.
God Bless
Jax

 

[EmSw]

It is not God's will that any He gives to Christ perish, so He grants them that they will repent, grants repentance.
Your of the persuasion God grants all repentance, but they choose to not repent, which makes no sense.

Does this make sense?

Acts 17:30
Truly, these times of ignorance God overlooked, but now commands all men everywhere to repent,

 

[sdowney717]

Does this make sense?

Acts 17:30
Truly, these times of ignorance God overlooked, but now commands all men everywhere to repent,

Sure. God commands all repent is not the same as granting repentance.

 

[DeaconDean]

Indeed. There is ALSO Prevenient Grace. John Wesley said this of it: "...the first wish to please God, the first dawn of light concerning His will, and the first slight transient conviction of having sinned against Him." (sermon #85)

http://www.etsjets.org/files/JETS-PDFs/12/12-3/12-3-pp143-149_JETS.pdf

Wesley described 3 forms of grace:

Our Wesleyan Heritage - The United Methodist Church

And John Wesley also believed that "Entire Sanctification" was achievable in this lifetime. He called it "moving on to perfection".

God Bless

Till all are one.

 

[DeaconDean]

And "infused," "imputed," or "imparted" are NOT "man added?"

If you'll look at the Greek word Paul used, in both cases, Philemon 18, and in Romans 4:4, its "imputed", both carry the same meaning:

"ἐλλογέω,v \{el-log-eh'-o}
1) to reckon in, set to one's account, lay to one's charge, impute " -Philemon 18


"λογίζομαι,v \{log-id'-zom-ahee}
1) to reckon, count, compute, calculate, count over 1a) to take into account, to make an account of 1a1) metaph. to pass to one's account, to impute 1a2) a thing is reckoned as or to be something, i.e. as availing for or equivalent to something, as having the like force and weight 1b) to number among, reckon with 1c) to reckon or account 2) to reckon inward, count up or weigh the reasons, to deliberate 3) by reckoning up all the reasons, to gather or infer 3a) to consider, take into account, weigh, meditate on 3b) to suppose, deem, judge 3c) to determine, purpose, decide " -Rom. 4:4

God Bless

Till all are one.

 

[DeaconDean]

You may read these two articles and revise your paper accordingly.

Righteousness and Merit

Justification in Catholic Teaching

God bless.

Oh boy, we gonna start this again?

FYI: when I researched this back in 2007, I did my research, I know what Catholicism teaches.

So please, no more links.

God Bless

Till all are one.

 

[DeaconDean]

And "infused," "imputed," or "imparted" are NOT "man added?"

As far as I know, infused and imparted are in this particular case.

God Bless

Till all are one.

 

[DeaconDean]

To me prevenient grace would be regeneration, because unless a man is regenerated they wont be interested in spiritual truths, but will consider them foolishness.

Believe it or not, That is what Jacobus (James) Arminus believed:

"Arminius commonly used the terms “prevenient” or “prevening” grace. In defining prevenient grace, Arminius was explicit to distinguish his views from the infamous British monk, Pelagius. Here is one such example: “That I may not be said, like Pelagius, to practice delusion in regard to the word ‘grace,’ I mean by it that which is the grace of Christ and which belongs to regeneration” [2].

Robert E. Picirilli further explains that the words prevenient or prevening mean “anticipating, going before, or preceding” (emphasis his) [3]. Picirilli further explains, “What Arminius meant by ‘prevenient grace’ was that grace precedes actual regeneration and which, except when finally resisted, inevitably leads to regeneration” [4]. Therefore, prevenient grace is the grace that precedes, enables, and leads to regeneration."

[2]Arminius Speaks: Essential Writings on Predestination, Free Will, and the Nature of God (Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 2011), 376.

[3] Robert E. Picirilli, Grace, Faith, and Free Will: Contrasting Views of Salvation: Calvinism & Arminianism (Nashville: Randall House, 2002), 153.

[4] Ibid., 153.

Source

God Bless

Till all are one.

 

[DeaconDean]

Which has been frequently observed in evangelical churches for well over a century.

One Radio preacher (I think it was Chuck Swindoll) talked about it. He said that a congregant of his came up to him one day and said that when he preached on salvation that a year earlier the guy had to get a tight grip on the pew to keep from running forward to accept Christ, but now it was not that hard to resist the urge.

We have free will. We can resist God when He calls us.

Here again, "free will" is a total different area than what I asked.

Arminians, Remonstrants, Methodists, and any other denomination that teaches contrary to Calvinism, uses Arminian argument that man's free will wasn't hurt as bad as Calvinists say it is. They deny "Total Depravity".

"Although human nature was seriously affected by the fall, man has not been left in a state of total spiritual helplessness. God graciously enables every sinner to repent and believe, but He does not interfere with man’s freedom. Each sinner possesses a free will, and his eternal destiny depends on how he uses it. Man’s freedom consists of his ability to choose good over evil in spiritual matters; his will is not enslaved to his sinful nature. The sinner has the power to either cooperate with God’s Spirit and be regenerated or resist God’s grace and perish."

Remonstrant View (Arminian) on: Free Will or Human Ability

So lets not veer down that avenue.

Stick to the topic please.

God Bless

Till all are one.

 

[DeaconDean]

One cannot be regenerated with out repenting of sins, confessing the Lordship of Jesus and placing faith in His death and resurrection.

I'm gonna have to call you on that one.

That may be the accepted view among Messanics, but for Protestants, mostly Calvinsts, Presbyterians, Baptists, etc., Repentence follows regeneration.

Repentance is the fruit of regeneration.

Cf. Abstract of Principles, 1858, James P. Boyce, Articles VIII, IX (Regeneration, VIII; Repentance, IX)

In fact, we see:

"We arrive, therefore, at the meaning of Christian repentance partly through the meaning of these Greek words, but also partly because it is exercised about a question of morals. It is seen that it involves a change in the outward life because such change is a result of the change of inward opinions. It also includes sorrow for sin because a change of view as to the nature of sin and of holiness must be accompanied by regret and sorrow as to the past acts of sin."

Abstract of Systematic Theology, James P. Boyce, 1858, Chapter XXXII, Repentance

You cannot have a change in outward life without having a change in inward opinions first.

Hence we come to the age old argument as R. C. Sproul puts it:

"Do I cooperate with God's grace before I am born again, or does the cooperation occur after?" Another way of asking this question is to ask if regeneration is monergistic or synergistic. Is it operative or cooperative? Is it effectual or dependent?

When my professor wrote "Regeneration precedes faith" on the blackboard, he was clearly siding with the monergistic answer. After a person is regenerated, that person cooperates by exercising faith and trust. But the first step is the work of God and of God alone."

Regeneration Precedes Faith, R. C. Sproul

In other words, God's Spirit draws you, regenerates you, then you exercise faith in repentance.

God Bless

Till all are one.

 

[DeaconDean]

In an article written by B.B. Warfield, he says:

"The theological use of the term "imputation" is probably rooted ultimately in the employment of the verb imputo in the Vulgate to translate the Greek verb logizesthai in Ps. xxxii. 2. This passage is quoted by Paul in Rom. iv. 8 and made one of the foundations of his argument that, in saving man, God sets to his credit a righteousness without works. It is only in these two passages, and in the two axiomatic statements of Rom. iv. 4 and v. 13 that the Vulgate uses imputo in this connection (cf., with special application, II Tim. iv. 16; Philemon 18)."

Imputation, By: B.B. Warfield

Lets check out his word shall we?

From the Latin Vulgate:

"ei autem qui operatur merces non inputatur secundum gratiam sed secundum debitum" -Rom. 4:4 Latin Vulgate

Well, even a blind squirrel finds a nut occasionally.

"usque ad legem enim peccatum erat in mundo peccatum autem non inputatur cum lex non est" -Rom. 5:13 Latin Vulgate

Maybe, just maybe, it don't mean impute.

Let me refer to a Latin Lexicon:

"imputō, imputāre, imputāvī, imputātus
inputō, inputāre, inputāvī, inputātus
puto
1 in
verb (1st conjugation)

imputō (inp-) āvī, ātus, āre 1 in+puto, to reckon, attribute, make account of, charge, ascribe, impute: data (munera), Ta.: beneficium mihi, Ph.: natum imputat illis, (the fate of) his son, O.: exercitui moras belli, Ta."

Source

Maybe that Lexicon is wrong, lets check another.

"impŭto (inp- ), āvi, ātum, 1, v. a. inputo,
I.to bring into the reckoning, enter into the account, to reckon, charge (not ante-Aug.; cf. deputo).
I. Lit.: “vilici servi longe plus imputant seminis jacti quam quod severint,” Col. 1, 7 fin.: “sumptus alicui ... viatica et vecturas,” Dig. 17, 2, 52, § 15: “in quartam hereditatis imputantur res, quas jure hereditario capit,” ib. 35, 2, 90: “haec in numerum trium tutelarum,” ib. 23, 2, 61.—
II. Trop., to enter into the account, to reckon, attribute as a merit or a fault to one's self or another; to make a boast of, to credit to, to charge, ascribe, impute to (for the Ciceron. assignare, ascribere): fatum dies imputat, Sen. de Ira, 3, 42; cf. Mart. 5, 20, 13: “hoc non imputo in solutum,” Sen. Ep. 8 fin.: “gaudent muneribus, sed nec data imputant, nec acceptis obligantur,” Tac. G. 21: “noli imputare vanum beneficium mihi,” Phaedr. 1, 22, 8; cf. Sen. Tranq. 6: “huic (Masinissae) imputari victum Hannibalem, huic captum Syphacem, huic Carthaginem deletam,” Just. 38, 6: “alii transeunt quaedam imputantque quod transeant,” Plin. Ep. 8, 21, 4; cf. Suet. Tib. 53: “ipsum sibi eripere tot beneficiorum occasiones, tam numerosam obligandi imputandique materiam,” Plin. Pan. 39, 3; so absol.: “cum quidam crimen ultro faterentur, nonnulli etiam imputarent,” made a merit of it, Suet. Ner. 36: saevit enim natumque objectat et imputat illis, charges upon them (his son's fate), Ov. M. 2, 400: “mortem senioribus imputat annis,” id. ib. 15, 470: “rebellandi tempus Atheniensibus,” Vell. 2, 23, 4: “an ei caedes imputanda sit, a quo jurgium coepit?” Quint. 5, 10, 72: “suum exsilium rei publicae imputaturus,” Sen. Ep. 86: “prospera omnes sibi vindicant, adversa uni imputantur,” Tac. Agr. 27: “alicui moras belli aut causas rebellandi,” id. ib. 34; id. H. 4, 14 fin.: “culpam nostram illi,” Plin. 18, 1, 1, § 2: “et tibi scilicet, qui requisisti, imputabis, si digna ne epistula quidem videbuntur,” Plin. Ep. 6, 20 fin.: “sibi imputent cur minus idoneum fidejussorem acceperint,” Dig. 42, 7, 1: “imputet ipse deus nectar mihi, fiet acetum,” may assign, give, Mart. 12, 48, 13: “otia parva nobis,” id. 4, 83, 2: “hoc solum erit certamen, quis mihi plurimum imputet,” Tac. H. 1, 38."

Source

Hum...

Interesting, very interesting

God Bless

Till all are one.

 

[Dave-W]

Sure. God commands all repent is not the same as granting repentance.

So you are saying God is commanding people to do something He knows they cannot do, and then He intentionally withholds their ability to comply?

How is that just?

 

[Dave-W]

That may be the accepted view among Messanics, but for Protestants, mostly Calvinsts, Presbyterians, Baptists, etc., Repentence follows regeneration.

Messianics are divided on that, probably due to the influence of Calvinism. (yes we have some of those)

I am following Wesley on that one.
The best exegesis on that is in Dr Derek Prince's Foundation Series.

Are you trying to imply that Methodists, Pentecostals et al are NOT protestant?

 

[EmSw]

Sure. God commands all repent is not the same as granting repentance.

So He commands all but only grants some? What kind of rationale is that?

That's like the government commands all drivers to register, but only grants some. Does a father command his all children to obey him, but only grants some to obey? If He commands all to repent, then I can assure you, He has granted all to repent.

Jesus said is we don't repent, then we will perish. So, are you saying God is guaranteeing some will perish because He doesn't grant them repentance? And how do you say you haven't created a monstrous God?

 

[sdowney717]

So you are saying God is commanding people to do something He knows they cannot do, and then He intentionally withholds their ability to comply?

How is that just?

God's justice demands your destruction. God's mercy is his choice for all have sinned. Do a study on mercy. God will be merciful and compassionate to whom he will while hardening whom he will.