Please explain if no one is predestined

[Hammster]

So when you CAN'T answer you tell just say you did. There is no Scripture that states that regeneration proceeds faith ... not one.

Huh?

 

[Dr. Jack]

When your traditions are so strong, that you can be staring at the words, and don't see it. This is what lenses of traditions do to Scripture. I provided 1 John 5:1 to which you replied with ad hominem.

No sir, that is not the truth.

You said ...

1 John 5:1 Whoever believes that Jesus is the Christ is born of God. Regeneration precedes faith. Agreed? Good.

I then said ...

Is it your normal fashion to ask a question, then proceed to answer your own question, then proceed to acknowledge your own answer?

You first presented 1 John 5:1. Whoever believes that Jesus is the Christ is born of God.

Then you asked ...

Regeneration precedes faith. Agreed?

Then you answered ...

Good

Asking you if that was your normal fashion wasn't Ad hominem ... it was an honest question. Did you not answer your own question?

 

[Dr. Jack]

Please explain if no one is predestined

Do you know the difference between an interrogative and declarative sentence, or in this case a imperative sentence?

 

[Apologetic_Warrior]

Would you please define the "natural" man?

A natural man is a human being in which God the Holy Spirit does not dwell. A spiritual man is a human being in which God the Holy Spirit does dwell.

Do you agree or disagree? If not I would like for you to extend the same courtesy of answering the question, provided you have time and energy.

 

[Hammster]

Do you know the difference between an interrogative and declarative sentence, or in this case a imperative sentence?

I asked a question that you didn’t answer. And still haven’t.

 

[Dr. Jack]

And I

I asked a question that you didn’t answer. And still haven’t.

asked ... what question?

Now you can play the look yourself game; or you can simply ask your question.

 

[Dr. Jack]

A natural man is a human being in which God the Holy Spirit does not dwell. A spiritual man is a human being in which God the Holy Spirit does dwell.

Do you agree or disagree? If not I would like for you to extend the same courtesy of answering the question, provided you have time and energy.

Using the EXACT words you did ... No, I disagree.

In 1 Corinthians 2:14 we read ...

2:14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned. 1 Corinthians

The words "natural man" are rendered from the Greek ψυχικὸς ἄνθρωπος.

The Greek ψυχικός relates to that which is physical and relies on breath to live ... hence, it is an adjective describing the physical man. Now both of us are natural men, relying on air to breath, to stay physically alive.

Now in the next verse we read,

2:15 But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man. 1 Corinthians

The English "spiritual" is rendered from the Greek πνευματικός.

This is NOT referring to the physical man, but is referring to dependence up his spirit, rather than his physical being.

Man has a body (the physical person Greek σωμα); a spirit (that which God gave man which allows God to communicate with Him Greek πνεῦμα); and a soul, (the inner eternal man Greek ψυχή).

The lost man has a dead soul that is in need of being quickened (made alive). In 1 Corinthians 2:14 Paul is speaking to saved people who were carnal. They were living according to the desires of their physical flesh, instead of being subject to the HS via their spirit.

The purpose of the phrase "natural mam", was to relay the message that without the aid of their "spirit", they could not understand the things of God using only the power of their "natural man".

In the next verse, Paul then says, but, he that is spiritual πνευματικός, (dependent upon their spirit), can understand spiritual things.

So, the natural man isn't a man in whom God does NOT indwelling, he's a man who isn't yielding to the HS that does indwell him.

He that IS spiritual, is the man that IS yielded to the HS that is dwelling in him.

1:1 Paul called to be an apostle of Jesus Christ through the will of God, and Sosthenes our brother, 1:2 Unto the church of God which is at Corinth, to them that are sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints, with all that in every place call upon the name of Jesus Christ our Lord, both their's and our's: 1 Corinthians

This Epistle was written to "the church of God which is at Corinth, to them that are sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints"

Paul also says,

3:1 And I, brethren, could not speak unto you as unto spiritual, but as unto carnal, even as unto babes in Christ. 3:2 I have fed you with milk, and not with meat: for hitherto ye were not able to bear it, neither yet now are ye able. 3:3 For ye are yet carnal: for whereas there is among you envying, and strife, and divisions, are ye not carnal, and walk as men? 3:4 For while one saith, I am of Paul; and another, I am of Apollos; are ye not carnal? 1 Corinthians

and ...

5:1 It is reported commonly that there is fornication among you, and such fornication as is not so much as named among the Gentiles, that one should have his father's wife. 1 Corinthians

Paul was warning them of walking as "natural man", rather than 'spiritual man'.

 

[Dr. Jack]

A natural man is a human being in which God the Holy Spirit does not dwell. A spiritual man is a human being in which God the Holy Spirit does dwell.

Do you agree or disagree? If not I would like for you to extend the same courtesy of answering the question, provided you have time and energy.

Now just in case you don't agree with my definition of "natural" ... here are some verses for you to consider ...

15:44 It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body.
15:46 Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual. 1 Corinthians

The same English word, rendered from the same Greek work. Very clear.

 

[Apologetic_Warrior]

Using the EXACT words you did ... No, I disagree.

In 1 Corinthians 2:14 we read ...

2:14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned. 1 Corinthians

The words "natural man" are rendered from the Greek ψυχικὸς ἄνθρωπος.

The Greek ψυχικός relates to that which is physical and relies on breath to live ... hence, it is an adjective describing the physical man. Now both of us are natural men, relying on air to breath, to stay physically alive.

Here, I will provide several resources on that one word "natural".

Strong's Dictionary

G5591
ψυχικός
psuchikos
psoo-khee-kos'
From G5590; sensitive that is, animate (in distinction on the one hand from G4152, which is the higher or renovated nature; and on the other from G5446, which is the lower or bestial nature):—natural, sensual.​

Mickelson's Enhanced Strong's

G5591 ψυχικός psuchikos (psï-chiy-kos') adj.

1. (properly) soulish, pertaining to the soul. [Add “soulish” to your scriptural vocabulary; not yet in the English dictionary].
2. that which is motivated and controlled through the soul.
3. (by implication) worldy, focused on the natural senses, the world, and internal motivations (various instincts, needs, and wants).
4. (by extension) natural, sensual (as directly opposed to spiritual).
{(in distinction on the one hand from G4152, which is the higher or renovated nature; and on the other from G5446, which is the lower or bestial nature)}
[from G5590]
KJV: natural, sensual​

G5590 ψυχή psuche (psï-chee') n.
1. soul, inner being or life.
2. (literally) breath.
3. (figuratively) the heart's desire, the drive or passion of one's soul (i.e. that which brings satisfaction to one's being).
{(the animal sentient principle only, instinctual; thus distinguished on the one hand from G4151, which is the rational and immortal soul; and on the other from G2222, which is mere vitality, even of plants: these terms thus exactly correspond respectively to the Hebrew H5315, H7307 and H2416)}
[from G5594]
KJV: heart (+ -ily), life, mind, soul, + us, + you
Root(s): G5594
Compare: G4151, G2222, G4983, G2372, G3563​

Hastings Dictionary of the Bible

NATURAL.—The contrast between ‘natural’ (Gr. psychikos) and ‘spiritual’ (pneumatikos) is drawn out by St. Paul in 1 Corinthians 15:44-46. The natural body is derived from the first Adam, and is our body in so far as it is accommodated to, and limited by, the needs of the animal side of the human nature. In such a sense it is especially true that ‘the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God’ (1 Corinthians 2:14). Man derives his spiritual life from union with Christ (‘the last Adam’), but his present body is not adapted to the needs of this spiritual existence; hence the distinction made by St. Paul between the natural body (called the ‘body of death,’ Rom 7:24) and the spiritual body of the resurrection. The transference from the one to the other begins in this life, and the two beings are identical in so far as continuity creates an identity, but otherwise, owing to the operation of the union with Christ, distinct. T. A. Moxon.​

In conclusion, my thought is, while you do have a point about the natural body or physical body, the physical man also has a mind, heart, and soul. So the context of 1 Corinthians 2:14 points towards something like the natural soul in which the Holy Spirit does not dwell, and by natural in this context I do not mean anything like a physical soul, such is absurd. I think "physical" is also missing the intended meaning of Paul, to illustrate the verse rendered as such:

2:14 But the natural PHYSICAL man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

A physical body alone can neither think, feel, nor act upon the will and it's desires to receive or discern anything, and so in this strict physical sense you seem to be suggesting, the verse is rendered meaningless.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

When man responds, is he in the flesh or the Spirit?

How can a man be in the Spirit if he is still a sinner and unregenerated?

What actually happens is when the gospel is preached by a Spirit-filled preacher, it has power to bring the sinner to conviction of his sinfulness and that he is subject to the wrath of God. When presented with the gospel and the invitation to receive Christ, he has the choice to accept or reject it.

If he chooses to accept the gospel and receive Christ as Saviour, then he is regenerated by the Holy Spirit, is born again, receives a new heart and an enlivened spirit.

Because God knows in advance who is going to choose for Christ and who is not, He elects those who have chosen for Christ. But this does not take the freedom of choice away from the person just because God already knows he is going to choose for Christ. This is the correct sense of the Scripture that those who choose Christ are elected from the foundation of the world through the foreknowledge of God.

This means that God does not elect people before they have made their choice for Christ, and He does not reprobate people before they have chosen against Christ.

Election and predestination all depend on which way a person chooses - for or against Christ.

 

[Apologetic_Warrior]

@Dr. Jack To go with #409 this I'll quote from the International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, which explains exceptionally well in detail:

MAN, NATURAL

nat'-u-ral, nach'-u-ral (psuchikos anthropos): Man as he is by nature, contrasted with man as he becomes by grace. This phrase is exclusively Pauline.

I. Biblical Meaning.

The classical passage in which it occurs is 1 Corinthians 2:14 King James Version: "But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned." In his anthropology Paul uses four groups of descriptive adjectives in contrasted pairs:

(1) the old man and the new man (Romans 6:6; Ephesians 4:22; Colossians 3:9; Ephesians 2:15; Ephesians 4:24; Colossians 3:10);

(2) the outward man and the inward man (2 Corinthians 4:16; Romans 7:22; Ephesians 3:16);

(3) the carnal man and the spiritual man (Romans 8:1-14; 1 Corinthians 3:1; 1 Corinthians 3:3; 1 Corinthians 3:4);

(4) the natural man and the spiritual man (2 Corinthians 2:14; 2 Corinthians 3:3; 2 Corinthians 3:4; Ephesians 2:3; 1 Corinthians 2:15; 1 Corinthians 3:1; 1 Corinthians 14:37; 1 Corinthians 15:46; Galatians 6:1).

A study of these passages will show that the adjectives "old," "outward," "carnal," and "natural" describe man, from different points of view, prior to his conversion; while the adjectives "new," "inward" and "spiritual" describe him, from different points of view, after his conversion. To elucidate the meaning, the expositor must respect these antitheses and let the contrasted words throw light and meaning upon each other.

1. The Old Man:

The "old man" is the "natural man" considered chronologically--prior to that operation of the Holy Spirit by which he is renovated into the "new man."

The old house is the house as it was before it was remodeled; an old garment is the garment as it was before it was re-fashioned; and the "old man" is man as he was before he was regenerated and sanctified by the grace of the Spirit. "Our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin" (Romans 6:6 the King James Version). Here the "old man" is called the "body of sin," as the physical organism is called the body of the soul or spirit, and is to be "crucified" and "destroyed," in order that man may no longer be the "servant of sin." "Put off concerning the former conversation the old man, which is corrupt. .... Put on the new man, which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness" (Ephesians 4:22; Ephesians 4:24 the King James Version). Here the "old man" is said to be "corrupt," and we are called upon to "put it off." The figure is that of putting off old clothes which are unclean, and putting on those garments which have come from the wash clean and snowy white. We have the same idea, in different language and with a slightly different imagery.

When Paul calls the "natural man" the "old man," and describes it as the "body of sin" which is "corrupt" in its nature and "deeds," and tells us that it must be "crucified" and "destroyed" and "put off" in order that we may "not serve sin," but may have "righteousness" and "true holiness" and "knowledge" and the "image" of God, we get some conception of the moral meaning which he is endeavoring to convey by these contrasts (Galatians 5:19-24). He has reference to that sinful nature in man which is as old as the individual, as old as the race of which he is a member, which must be graciously renovated according to that gospel which he preached to Corinthians, Colossians, Ephesians, Romans and all the world.

See OLD MAN; MAN, I, 3.

2. The Outward Man:

The apostle also establishes a contrast between "the inward man" and "the outward man." "Though our outward man is decaying, yet our inward man is renewed day by day" (2 Corinthians 4:16). Now what sort of man is the "outward man" as contrasted with the "inward man"? In Greek, the exo-anthropos is set over against the eso-anthropos.

See OUTWARD MAN.

"The contrast here drawn between the `outward' and the `inward man,' though illustrated by the contrast in Romans 7:22 between the `law in the members' and `the inner man,' and in Ephesians 4:22; Col 3:9 between `the old man' and `the new man' is not precisely the same. Those contrasts relate to the difference between the sensual and the moral nature, `the flesh' and `the spirit'; this to the difference between the material and the spiritual nature" (Stanley, in the place cited.).

"The outward man" is the body, and "the inward man" is the soul, or immaterial principle in the human make-up. As the body is wasted by the afflictions of life, the soul is renewed; what is death to the body is life to the soul; as afflictions depotentiate man's physical organism, they impotentiate man's spiritual principle. That is, the afflictions of life, culminating in death itself, have diametrically opposite effects upon the body and upon the soul. They kill the one; they quicken the other.

"The inward man" is the whole human nature as renewed and indwelt and dominated by the Spirit of God as interpenetrated by the spirit of grace. As the one is broken down by the adverse dispensations of life, the other is upbuilt by the sanctifying discipline of the Spirit.

3. The Carnal Man:

There is another Pauline antithesis which it is necessary for us to interpret in order to understand what he means by the "natural man." It is the distinction which he draws between the "carnal mind" and the "spiritual mind." The critical reference is Romans 8:1-14. In this place the "carnal mind" is identified with the "law of death," and the "spiritual mind" is identified with the "law of the Spirit." These two "laws" are two principles and codes: the one makes man to be at "enmity against God" and leads to "death"; the other makes him the friend of God, and conducts to "life and peace." The word "carnal" connotes all that is fallen and sinful and unregenerate in man's nature. In its gross sense the "carnal" signifies that which is contrary to nature, or nature expressing itself in low and bestial forms of sin.

4. The Natural Man:

The "natural man" is the "old man," the "outward man," the "carnal man"--man as he is by nature, as he is firstborn, contra-distinguished to man as he is changed by the Spirit, as he is second-born or regenerated. There. is an "old" life, an "outward" life, a "carnal" life, a "natural" life, as contrasted with the "new" life, the "inward" life, the "spiritual" life, the "gracious" life. The "natural man" is a bold and vivid personification of that depraved nature which we inherit from Adam fallen, the source and seat of all actual and personal transgressions.

II. Theological Meaning.

We know what we mean by the nature of the lion, by the nature of the lamb. We are using perfectly comprehensible language when we speak of the lion as naturally fierce, and of the lamb when we say he is naturally gentle. We have reference to the dominant dispositions of these animals, that resultant of their qualities which defines their character and spontaneity. So we are perfectly plain when we say that man is naturally sinful. We are but saying that sinfulness is to man what fierceness is to the lion, what gentleness is to the lamb. The "natural man" is a figure of speech for that sinful human nature, common to us all. It is equivalent to the theological phrases: the "sinful inclination," the "evil disposition," the "apostate will," "original sin," "native depravity." It manifests itself in the understanding as blindness, in the heart as hardness, in the will as obstinacy.

See MAN.

Robert Alexander Webb
​

I probably should have just quoted this rather than trying to explain in my own words, but I used the Pauline formula to attempt at a short and lackluster "definition" if we even could call it that.

 

[Dr. Jack]

There are problems with all of this.

1) Paul is addressing believers that are living sin filled lives.
2) Paul literally calls them "carnal".
3). Roman's 8 points out the fact that despite the carnal behavior of things that happen in chapter 7, the believer can be assured he is not under condemnation. (OSAS)

Calvinism uses the terms unregenerate, and regenerated, but Scripture does not.

The discussion has been as to whether regeneration proceeds faith .... along with the suggestion that it is both logical, and theological. I disagree.

The word "regeneration" is rendered from the Greek παλιγγενεσία, meaning a rebirth.

Now please think with me for a moment: If the soul (or if as you say the spirit ... howbeit incorrect), of the lost is dead, and needs to be made alive; that would mean that that the soul that died because of sin; is now made whole. Salvation has been delivered.

Now if at the point of regeneration the soul is alive (which it is), what purpose would faith serve in the salvation process? It makes faith moot!

Logically, if regeneration is first, salvation is first, because salvation and regeneration are one in the same. What purpose then is there of faith, if salvation has already occurred?

Faith MUST proceed regeneration, or it serves no purpose.

 

[Hammster]

And I

asked ... what question?

Now you can play the look yourself game; or you can simply ask your question.

Please explain if no one is predestined

This is the second time I’ve linked you to the post where I’ve asked the question.

 

[Hammster]

How can a man be in the Spirit if he is still a sinner and unregenerated?

He cannot.

 

[Hammster]

There are problems with all of this.

1) Paul is addressing believers that are living sin filled lives.
2) Paul literally calls them "carnal".
3). Roman's 8 points out the fact that despite the carnal behavior of things that happen in chapter 7, the believer can be assured he is not under condemnation. (OSAS)

Calvinism uses the terms unregenerate, and regenerated, but Scripture does not.

The discussion has been as to whether regeneration proceeds faith .... along with the suggestion that it is both logical, and theological. I disagree.

The word "regeneration" is rendered from the Greek παλιγγενεσία, meaning a rebirth.

Now please think with me for a moment: If the soul (or if as you say the spirit ... howbeit incorrect), of the lost is dead, and needs to be made alive; that would mean that that the soul that died because of sin; is now made whole. Salvation has been delivered.

Now if at the point of regeneration the soul is alive (which it is), what purpose would faith serve in the salvation process? It makes faith moot!

Logically, if regeneration is first, salvation is first, because salvation and regeneration are one in the same. What purpose then is there of faith, if salvation has already occurred?

Faith MUST proceed regeneration, or it serves no purpose.

Good questions. Thanks for bringing them up.

Salvation is multifaceted. Scripture uses “saved” in mostly a generic sense. But there are also specific descriptions that can also be rendered as saved, or used interchangeably. Regenerate, justified, sanctified, redeemed, etc.

So in the Reformed Theology viewpoint, which can be supported with scripture, a man who is natural, dead, blind, etc., will not or cannot respond to the gospel because there’s nothing in him that has a desire to do so. He has a heart of stone.

Regeneration need to come first so that the man has that desire to respond. That’s why he goes from a heart of stone to a heart of flesh. With the new heart (new birth) he will believe. And with that exercise of faith, he is justified.

That’s so as life follows birth in nature, faith follows the new birth. A baby doesn’t need to be taught to breath. It just does so naturally.

Now, let me as you a question. If faith is what makes us righteous, what’s the point of regeneration if salvation has already occurred? I’m really only asking the question to make a point.

 

[Gregory95]

What or who causes one sinner to have faith and another to not have faith?

Is it not that person with a hardened heart will utterly refuse Christ

Only God can soften the heart

Once softened the free will of the person must choose to follow Christ

This is how it was for me

i was a hard hearted national socialist with no regard for life in general

As my world was destroyed until i had nothing even my truck broke down and i had to walk 10 miles one way for work to avoid loosing my home

This was God softening my heart as with nothing worldly left i had to decide

Double down on my evil belief or see what this Christ had to say

Upon reading while truly seeking God

This is when i found the truth that changed my life

i hope this helps!

Where does contentment come from? Some have it and some don't.

A person chooses what to believe. Those who seek truth will find it. The Bible says so. Acts 17:27 - God did this so that they would seek him and perhaps reach out for him and find him, though he is not far from any one of us.

Faith comes from the heart.

Rom 10:10 - For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you profess your faith and are saved.

The Calvinist view that God causes the elect to believe by regenerating them so they can believe is not found anywhere in Scripture. As much as Calvinists wish otherwise.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

Good questions. Thanks for bringing them up.

Salvation is multifaceted. Scripture uses “saved” in mostly a generic sense. But there are also specific descriptions that can also be rendered as saved, or used interchangeably. Regenerate, justified, sanctified, redeemed, etc.

So in the Reformed Theology viewpoint, which can be supported with scripture, a man who is natural, dead, blind, etc., will not or cannot respond to the gospel because there’s nothing in him that has a desire to do so. He has a heart of stone.

Regeneration need to come first so that the man has that desire to respond. That’s why he goes from a heart of stone to a heart of flesh. With the new heart (new birth) he will believe. And with that exercise of faith, he is justified.

That’s so as life follows birth in nature, faith follows the new birth. A baby doesn’t need to be taught to breath. It just does so naturally.

Now, let me as you a question. If faith is what makes us righteous, what’s the point of regeneration if salvation has already occurred? I’m really only asking the question to make a point.

I don't think that the Corinthians en-masse are sinful. If we read the beginning of 1 Corinthians, Paul does not describe them that way. But I agree that there were quite a number of shortcomings that Paul had to address with them. The fact that Paul had received a letter from a group of concerned believers in that church (which is now lost), shows that not all were going astray. The main fault is that the leaders were allowing someone in their midst to continue in incest and not disciplining that person. Other faults were disrespecting the Lord's Supper, party spirit, and doubts as to the resurrection of Christ, among others.

I don't believe Dr MacArthur who says that the Corinthian church was full of demons and paganism. I think he is prejudiced and using that idea to support his view that the current Charismatic church is full of falsehood, paganism and demons. Both churches had and have their faults and extremes, but the core of both is solidly in the Spirit.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

No sir, that is not the truth.

You said ...



I then said ...


You first presented 1 John 5:1. Whoever believes that Jesus is the Christ is born of God.

Then you asked ...


Then you answered ...


Asking you if that was your normal fashion wasn't Ad hominem ... it was an honest question. Did you not answer your own question?

What? Choosing to believe in Christ causes the person to be born again and therefore regenerated by the Spirit. The choice to believe comes first, then the regeneration. Even a trained chimpanzee would interpret that verse that way!

 

[Hammster]

I don't think that the Corinthians en-masse are sinful. If we read the beginning of 1 Corinthians, Paul does not describe them that way. But I agree that there were quite a number of shortcomings that Paul had to address with them. The fact that Paul had received a letter from a group of concerned believers in that church (which is now lost), shows that not all were going astray. The main fault is that the leaders were allowing someone in their midst to continue in incest and not disciplining that person. Other faults were disrespecting the Lord's Supper, party spirit, and doubts as to the resurrection of Christ, among others.

I don't believe Dr MacArthur who says that the Corinthian church was full of demons and paganism. I think he is prejudiced and using that idea to support his view that the current Charismatic church is full of falsehood, paganism and demons. Both churches had and have their faults and extremes, but the core of both is solidly in the Spirit.

I’m not quite sure how that addresses my post.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

I don't think that the Corinthians en-masse are sinful. If we read the beginning of 1 Corinthians, Paul does not describe them that way. But I agree that there were quite a number of shortcomings that Paul had to address with them. The fact that Paul had received a letter from a group of concerned believers in that church (which is now lost), shows that not all were going astray. The main fault is that the leaders were allowing someone in their midst to continue in incest and not disciplining that person. Other faults were disrespecting the Lord's Supper, party spirit, and doubts as to the resurrection of Christ, among others.

I don't believe Dr MacArthur who says that the Corinthian church was full of demons and paganism. I think he is prejudiced and using that idea to support his view that the current Charismatic church is full of falsehood, paganism and demons. Both churches had and have their faults and extremes, but the core of both is solidly in the Spirit.

I must have clicked on the wrong post! Senior moment!