The Tulip is broken

[A New Dawn]

very interesting post.


*congrats*

Thanks, Steve.

 

[nobdysfool]

He was trying to back up his " Well, the 98% of the world to whom you (Calvinists) extend no hope" remark. How he gets that out of what he claims to be his source is certainly not evident. I want to see him prove that remark. I don't believe he can.

 

[Van]

Is see Oworm says I have consistently denied that faith originates from God. This is of course a false statement. No quote will be forthcoming to support this falsehood.

Next, like an avalanche, he repeats the request for me to provide sources for the Greek grammar construction of James 2:5. I provided a source for Ephesians 2:8 and response was to say D. Wallace's view was not correct. So the request for a source is simply a way to change the subject. Just read James 2:5 folks, God's election unto salvation is based on the characteristics of the individual chosen, therefore the Calvinist doctrine of "Unconditional Election" is false doctrine.

The TULIP is broken and trying to change the subject to my sources simply demonstrates the Calvinists have no answer to James 2:5.

 

[Van]

THE GIFT OF FAITH?

It has been asserted that the Bible says that God gives to each person that is saved, the gift of faith because in his or her total depravity, they could not believe and place their trust in Christ. However, this is yet another false teaching.

But lets address one stumbling block at the first, otherwise, everything that follows will be rejected. Everything has a cause, except God who is the Uncaused Cause. Therefore, God directly or indirectly causes all things. It is God that gave man the capacity to choose, to accept or reject the gospel, and so it is correct, in this sense, to say God gave us the gift of faith. But, to take this further and to say God compelled us with irresistible grace to accept the gospel because we are otherwise precluded is unnecessary and wrong.

Faith can be facts, as is the body of information Christians believe in. Faith can be the act of accepting the facts as truths - to put faith to Christ. And, after one has accepted and trusted in the facts, placed their faith in God and His Christ, the faith becomes the believer’s assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen. Finally, Faith can mean fidelity, how faithfully we follow the leading of the Holy Spirit as we walk humbly with our Lord.

Certainly, the facts and information of Christ are a gift from God – His revealing grace. God gave His Son so that whosoever believes in Him shall not perish but have eternal life. When we readily accept this gift of faith (the body of knowledge concerning God and Christ as revealed in His word), the faith becomes our faith or faith in us. So the bone of contention is not that God is the source of our faith, or that our faith in Christ was brought to us by the power of the Holy Spirit, but rather whether we readily accepted the gospel and hence the gift of faith, or if the Holy Spirit enabled our acceptance through magic mind manipulation. What Calvinists claim is that the gift of faith is the Holy Spirit enabling our acceptance of the gospel through magic mind manipulation. The correct view in my opinion is that God gave us through the Holy Spirit the gospel of Christ and the gospel is powerful and convicting, but the conviction is ours.

The gift of revealing grace, is not in dispute. Nor is the gift of salvation. But sandwiched between these is our response to the gift of revealing grace. Here is how Spurgeon described the gift of revealing grace: “Well can I remember the manner in which I learned the doctrines of grace in a single instant. Born, as all of us are by nature, an Arminian, I still believed the old things I had heard continually from the pulpit, and did not see the grace of God. When I was coming to Christ, I thought I was doing it all myself, and though I sought the Lord earnestly, I had no idea the Lord was seeking me. I do not think the young convert is at first aware of this. I can recall the very day and hour when first I received those truths in my own soul—when they were, as John Bunyan says, burnt into my heart as with a hot iron, and I can recollect how I felt that I had grown on a sudden from a babe into a man—that I had made progress in Scriptural knowledge, through having found, once for all, the clue to the truth of God. One week-night, when I was sitting in the house of God, I was not thinking much about the preacher's sermon, for I did not believe it. The thought struck me, How did you come to be a Christian? I sought the Lord. But how did you come to seek the Lord? The truth flashed across my mind in a moment—I should not have sought Him unless there had been some previous influence in my mind to make me seek Him. I prayed, thought I, but then I asked myself, How came I to pray? I was induced to pray by reading the Scriptures. How came I to read the Scriptures? I did read them, but what led me to do so? Then, in a moment, I saw that God was at the bottom of it all, and that He was the Author of my faith, and so the whole doctrine of grace opened up to me, and from that doctrine I have not departed to this day, and I desire to make this my constant confession, "I ascribe my change wholly to God."

What does the Bible actually teach concerning the gift of faith? Is it simply the revealing grace of God, which is not in dispute, or the enabling grace of God that allows us to respond to the gospel.

John 6:29 says, “Jesus answered them and said to them, “This is the work of God, that you believe in Him who He has sent.” Some contend that this verse is indicating that God works within preselected individuals and gives them the faith to believe in Christ.
However, Jesus is teaching no such thing. Jesus first makes the point that those that were seeking Him were doing so not because of the signs they had seen, but because they had actually partaken of a miracle, for they had been filled with the loaves. But then Jesus moves on to his next point, that they should not “work” for food that perishes, but rather should “work” for food that does not perish, which is the Son of Man which has God’s seal of approval, being demonstrated by the miracle of the loaves. In response the seekers ask, “What shall we do, that we may work the works of God?” At this point we encounter our verse (John 6:29). So in context the verse is teaching that rather than seek perishable stuff, they should seek the imperishable Son of Man, and this “work” is accomplished by believing in the Son of Man sent by the Father. When Jesus says, “this is the work of God” He is referring the work God requires of man, and this work is to believe in the Son of Man. God sent His Son into the world to save that which was lost. He anointed Christ with power to perform signs and wonders to demonstrate that Jesus was from God. This authenticated message of redemption is the revealing grace of God, “that you believe in Him who He has sent.” Thus the passage teaches that God’s revealing grace is the source and basis of our faith, but does not teach the character alteration envisioned by enabling grace.

Ephesians 2:8 says, “For by grace you have been saved through faith and that not of yourselves, (it is) the gift of God.” The gift of salvation is given by God accepting our faith, passing over our sins and spiritually baptizing us into Christ. Also the faith, the facts and information concerning His Son are also a gift because God gave His only begotten Son…. God grants salvation to those that believe in His Son.


Some use 2 Timothy 1:9 to support the idea that we were selected as individuals before the world began. But lets look at the text:

(God) “who saved us and called us with a Holy calling, not according to our works, but according to His own purpose and grace which was granted us in Christ Jesus from all eternity.”

The question we must ask is: What was granted us? The answer of course is grace, according to the plan of salvation in Jesus Christ, His anointed. When did God grant grace to all in Jesus Christ? From all eternity, before the world began. Does this passage say God individually selected us? No. And the inference that He did is unnecessary and wrong because it excludes our faith. It does not rob God of honor to say by grace through faith are we saved. Look at Ephesians 2:8-9.

Note also 2 Timothy 1:10, which says, (God’s purpose and grace) “…now has been revealed by the appearing of our Savior, Christ Jesus, who abolished death, and brought life and immortality to light through the gospel.” And the heart of the gospel is this: For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish but have eternal life. Therefore 2 Timothy 1:9 says that God’s purpose and grace was granted to us in Christ, generically from all eternity. Subsequently, during our lifetime God granted us grace individually bringing His plan to fruition. God chose us individually based on accepting our faith in His Son, and He blessed us with the indwelling of the Holy Spirit who gifted us so that we can build up and expand the church according to our Holy calling or area of giftedness. God did not grant us salvation based on our works, nor did He indwell us with the Holy Spirit and call us to a Holy calling because of our works, it was according to His purpose and grace (all those who believe in Jesus shall be saved). This passage does not support the inner call, “the gift of faith.”

Another verse used to support the idea that faith (verb-act of belief) is given to us before we are saved is Romans 12:3 which says, “For through the grace given me, I say to every man among you not to think more highly of himself than he ought to think; but to think so as to have sound judgment, as God as allotted to each a measure of faith.” What is asserted is that this measure of faith is allotted before salvation and is the means of salvation. But lets look at the context and see if we can figure out what Paul is actually saying. Each one of us, who is saved and indwelt with the Holy Spirit is gifted to build up the body of Christ. But we are not all given all the same gifts, for some are teachers, and some are leaders and some are servants. Each has been allotted a measure, a sphere of influence, an area of calling so that together we can build up the body of believers until we all attain the unity of faith, which is to be Christ-like.

The concept of the “unity of the faith” doubles back on itself. We, as believers are being conformed to the image of Christ, and so we are incomplete “Christians.” Others in the faith, the church, are also incomplete. But collectively, as members of one body, we work together to achieve the unity of the faith in two ways. We build each other up, and thus help each other to more completely conform to the image of Christ. And, collectively, with differing gifts, the church more completely than any one individual, is being built up to the unity (Christ likeness) of the faith. Each of us has a role in the body of Christ, enabled by gifts from the Holy Spirit, and this is our measure of faith, our part in the unity of the faith. Before we all attain the unity of the faith (individually and collectively), we have a measure of faith, and no one should think his measure is more important to obtaining the unity of the faith than fellow servants of Christ. Do we judge another man’s servants? The measure of faith is the enablement of Christ’s gift through the in dwelling of the Holy Spirit. (Ephesians 4:1-13) In summary, Romans 12:3 is clearly talking about the gifts of the Spirit following salvation.

Similarly, 1 Corinthians 12:7-9 is talking about separate gifts of the spirit after salvation, and since the gift of faith in view here is not given to everyone, it can have nothing to do with salvation. Based on 1 Corinthians 13:2, the gift of faith appears to be strong trust and no doubt, so that (using Jesus’ hyperbole) they could move mountains. These people would lead the way in training others to grow in faith and lean not on their own understanding.

Philippians 1:29 says, “For to you it has been granted for Christ’s sake, not only to believe in Him, but also to suffer for His sake.” Similar to other passages where the term “granted” is used, an inference can be drawn as to how something is granted. Thus, it is asserted that this verse says the ability to believe is granted which overcomes spiritual inability. But the inference is unnecessary. God granted salvation, repentance, and belief when He gave His Son, the object of our faith, so that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have eternal life. Those that love Christ are willing to march through fire for His sake, to bring mercy to a lost world

In John 2:11, it says that after seeing the signs Jesus performed at the wedding in Cana, His disciples believed, or put faith (verb) in Him. They saw or heard something that they accepted as true and placed their trust in that truth.

John 7:17 says that those who are willing to do the will of God, who are committed to God, they will be able to accept the gospel as true.

John 7:31 says that many believed or put faith in Him, again convinced by seeing miracles. The text is clear, we are convinced by and accept the powerful gospel of Christ.

Galatians 2:16 says that knowing a man is not justified by works of the Law but through faith (noun-facts) of Christ Jesus, even we have believed (put faith-verb) in (or to) Jesus Christ..."

Bottom line, anytime faith might be a pre-salvation gift, the facts or information of Christ is in view and since God gave His only begotten Son, that information is a gift, but a gift received externally and accepted internally by us when we put our trust in Christ.

At the end of the day, there is no credible support for the concept that foreseen pre-selected individuals are given the gift of faith (verb) to enable salvation, and everyone else is disabled by their total depravity. As demonstrated above, the passages used to support this pre-salvation gift of faith actually refer to pre-salvation information concerning Christ or post salvation gifts of the indwelt Holy Spirit.

 

[oworm]

Is see Oworm says I have consistently denied that faith originates from God. This is of course a false statement. No quote will be forthcoming to support this falsehood.

Interesting that you would require a quote to be forthcoming to supprt my statements and yet you consistently provide no quotes from your sources to support your own claim that the greek text of Ephesians 2:8 precludes that faith is a gift from God. You simply state it and expect that it should be accepted as authoritative merely because you said it.

Van. you simply cannot cite sources and provide no quotes to substantiate your argument. Every reader of this thread I am sure will agree on this?

Next, like an avalanche, he repeats the request for me to provide sources for the Greek grammar construction of James 2:5.

Such a request surely seems reasonable. Why would anyone not want the claims of another to be substantiated when the claim is made that a foreign languages grammar precludes an interpretation that the claiment submits is not there? Especially when the claimant claims external sources in support of his argument but fails to provide citational quotes!

I provided a source for Ephesians 2:8

Van,all you did was mention a name,a book and some page numbers. That is not providing the source. Citational quotes from the source are the norm here and especially for the benefit of the majority who dont own the material you claim supports your assertion. Given that you can be so verbose in other posts I see no hardship in quoting some text from your source that pertain to the references that you have given. Why won't you do that Van?

and response was to say D. Wallace's view was not correct.

I don't recall categorically stateing that Dr Wallaces view was incorrect. I may have said something to the effect that just because a scholar states something doesn't mean that he is correct. That is different from making an absolute assertion,especially when I have no quote from him and even moreso since I only have your second had interpretation of something that he may or may not have said. That does not mean that his exegesis is correct but it does mean that until I see his own words I will not make an assertive statement in response.
Please provide a link or quote to the post where I said that Dr Wallace was incorrect in his grammatical exegesis of Ehp 2:8 that faith as a gift from God is excluded from the text.

So the request for a source is simply a way to change the subject.

Change the subject? I am incredulous Van. The quote below from the first page of this thread shows that I am very much addressing the subject.

http://christianforums.com/showpost.php?p=48121413&postcount=5

Ephesians 2:8 says salvation is a gift, not that our faith is a gift. Greek grammar precludes that the idea was that faith was a gift because the gender of the word translated "faith" does not agree with the gender of the pronoun "that" in the phrase "and that not of yourselves, it is a gift of God.

Just read James 2:5 folks, God's election unto salvation is based on the characteristics of the individual chosen, therefore the Calvinist doctrine of "Unconditional Election" is false doctrine.
The TULIP is broken and trying to change the subject to my sources simply demonstrates the Calvinists have no answer to James 2:5.

Change the subject??? Van it was YOU who made these claims to sources that you claimed supported your own implied knowledge of the greek text.

I am very much trying to keep this subject on topic Van. That is why I keep coming back to the point you made many posts ago that the greek grammar of Ehp 2:8 precludes that faith is a gift from God. You did this as far back as post 5 and then you raised it again and implied that Dr Wallace in his book "Greek Grammar,beyond the basics" exegetical interpretation of Ehp 2:8 precludes that faith is a gift.

 

[oworm]

Folks
At the bottom of this post is a link to where you can purchase the principle source that Van claims supports his view that the greek grammar of Eph 2:8 precludes that faith is a gift from God.

Since Van has consistently failed to actually provide the quotes verbatim that he implies are contained within this work. Namely, that the greek grammar of Eph 2:8 precludes that faith is a gift from God, I have taken to ordering this book myself so that I can check and quote from the page numbers mentioned earlier by Van.
Once we can assertain Dr Wallaces position on Eph 2:8 within this book as posited by Van then maybe we can move forward with the argument in a structured and orderly fashion.

http://www.amazon.com/Grammar-Beyond-Basics-Daniel-Wallace/dp/0310218950

 

[Van]

ROFLOL, anyone can google those pages, they are on the internet. You continue to post falsehoods.

Did you accept D. Wallace's view of Ephesians 2:8? Nope. So what is the purpose of requesting a source, if not to change the subject? Folks, Oworm simply wants to change the subject because the TULIP is broken.

Are we to believe none of the Calvinists know the Greek grammar construction of James 2:5. Again, it can be googled.

Oworm made a false statement concerning my view and as of yet has not said he blundered.

 

[oworm]

ROFLOL, anyone can google those pages, they are on the internet.

Please provide a link to the appropriate google pages

 

[oworm]

ROFLOL, anyone can google those pages, they are on the internet. You continue to post falsehoods.

Link please?

Did you accept D. Wallace's view of Ephesians 2:8? Nope. So what is the purpose of requesting a source, if not to change the subject?

I have not seen Wallaces view. I cannot accept or reject what I have not seen!

 

[oworm]

Van
I cannot google those pages.Every time I try I get taken to a page where I can purchase Dr Wallaces book (which I have already ordered) Maybe Can you please provide the specific links that you speak of and then I can read them and respond appropriately? Thanks

 

[nobdysfool]

Seems to me that the pages don't actually exist on the internet, or, there is a very specific address that must be entered, and that address is being withheld. When you get the book, the prevarication and avoidance will end. As it is, it is being used as yet another opportunity to bash Calvinists, and to sully their character. What does that say about the character of the "basher"??? One cannot sling mud without getting it on themselves.

 

[oworm]

ROFLOL, anyone can google those pages, they are on the internet.

Well I am scratching my head and wondering where these pages are. I have googled them and I find no trace. I have gone the Daniel B Wallaces web site here http://www.bible.org/author.php?author_id=1&scid=0 but when I scroll down through all his written articles I find no trace of anything written which addresses the assertion of Van that the greek grammar of Ephesians 2:8 precludes faith is a gift from God.

Then I went to his faculty page http://www.dts.edu/about/faculty/dwallace/ and still I can find no resources or searchable media that will lead me to Vans assertion that Dr Wallace claims that the greek grammar of Ephesians 2:8 precludes that faith is a gift from God.

Finally I went to the center for the study of New Testament Manuscripts http://www.csntm.org/ where Dr Williams is Executive director and I can find no resources that will take me to anything written by Dr Williams that claims that the Greek Grammar of Ephesians 2:8 precludes that faith is a gift from God.

I think I have exhausted all the possibilities except one.
I have emailed Dr Wallace directly and asked him to clarify this for us. Hopefully we can get some clarity on this part of the discussion and move on.

 

[bling]

Van
I cannot google those pages.Every time I try I get taken to a page where I can purchase Dr Wallaces book (which I have already ordered) Maybe Can you please provide the specific links that you speak of and then I can read them and respond appropriately? Thanks

Oworm,
I do not know much of Dr Wallace but I gave you: Barnes and Robertson for my references on another tread. I agree with Van on this one; you can google and get Greek scholars take on the passage. I have not found anyone who really understands Greek grammar come up with a different interpretation. Here is what I said:

I can look up genders and dust off my Greek New Testament, but here is what Barnes and Robertson have to say and they do an honest job as far as I can tell:

And that not of yourselves - That is,salvation does not proceed from yourselves. The word rendered "that" - ͂ touto - is in the neuter gender, and the word "faith" - ́ pistis - is in the feminine. The word "that," therefore, does not refer particularly to faith, as being the gift of God, but to "the salvation by grace" of which he had been speaking. This is the interpretation of the passage which is the most obvious, and which is now generally conceded to be the true one; see Bloomfield. Many critics, however, as Doddridge, Beza, Piscator, and Chrysostom, maintain that the word "that" ( ͂ touto ) refers to "faith" ( ́ pistis ); and Doddridge maintains that such a use is common in the New Testament. As a matter of grammar this opinion is certainly doubtful, if not untenable; but as a matter of theology it is a question of very little importance.

Robertson, on the topic of pronouns, wrote:
9. Gender and Number of outos. ... In general, like other adjectives, outos agrees with its substantive in gender and number, whether predicate or attributive. ... In Eph. 2:8 , ..., there is no reference to pisteos in touto, but rather to the idea of salvation in the clause before. (A. T. Robertson, A Grammar of the New Testament, p.704)
​

Robertson, on the topic of particles, wrote:
(ii) Kai. ... The Mere Connective ('And') ... kai tauta (frequent in ancient Greek). See in particular Eph. 2:8 , kai touto ouk ex umon, where touto refers to the whole conception, not to chariti. (A. T. Robertson, A Grammar of the New Testament, pp. 1181-1182)
​

Robertson, on the topic of prepositions, wrote:
(d) dia ... 3. 'Passing Between' or 'Through.' The idea of interval between leads naturally to that of passing between two objects or parts of objects. 'Through' is thus not the original meaning of dia, but is a very common one. ... The agent may also be expressed by dia. This function was also performed in the ancient Greek, through, when means or instrument was meant, the instrumental case was commonly employed. dia is thus used with inanimate and animate objects. Here, of course, the agent is conceived as coming in between the non-attainmnet and the attainment of the object in view. ... Abstract ideas are frequently so expressed, as sesosmenoi dia pisteos (Eph. 2:8 ), ... (A. T. Robertson, A Grammar of the New Testament, pp. 580-582)
​

"Gift" and "faith," are both nouns and would not need to agree. However, agreement in gender is necessary between a pronoun and its antecedent. The demonstrative pronoun will change its gender to match the previous noun (or other substantive) to which it refers.

This verse tells us that the antecedent for "This" is also the "gift of God." But the "gift" cannot be "faith" because there is no agreement in gender between "faith" and the demonstrative pronoun, "touto" (This).

You call look up lots of Greek scholars work and let me know if you find any one disagreeing with this, because I have not among scholars.

 

[A New Dawn]

ROFLOL, anyone can google those pages, they are on the internet. You continue to post falsehoods.

Did you accept D. Wallace's view of Ephesians 2:8? Nope. So what is the purpose of requesting a source, if not to change the subject? Folks, Oworm simply wants to change the subject because the TULIP is broken.

Are we to believe none of the Calvinists know the Greek grammar construction of James 2:5. Again, it can be googled.

Oworm made a false statement concerning my view and as of yet has not said he blundered.

Because without providing a reference for your argument, it is of no value. If you wish to waste your time writing posts that no one will read or pay attention to because they contain no usable information, go ahead, but I won't read things that can't be verified.

 

[oworm]

Oworm,
I do not know much of Dr Wallace but I gave you: Barnes and Robertson for my references on another tread. I agree with Van on this one; you can google and get Greek scholars take on the passage. I have not found anyone who really understands Greek grammar come up with a different interpretation. Here is what I said:

I can look up genders and dust off my Greek New Testament, but here is what Barnes and Robertson have to say and they do an honest job as far as I can tell:

And that not of yourselves - That is,salvation does not proceed from yourselves. The word rendered "that" - ͂ touto - is in the neuter gender, and the word "faith" - ́ pistis - is in the feminine. The word "that," therefore, does not refer particularly to faith, as being the gift of God, but to "the salvation by grace" of which he had been speaking. This is the interpretation of the passage which is the most obvious, and which is now generally conceded to be the true one; see Bloomfield. Many critics, however, as Doddridge, Beza, Piscator, and Chrysostom, maintain that the word "that" ( ͂ touto ) refers to "faith" ( ́ pistis ); and Doddridge maintains that such a use is common in the New Testament. As a matter of grammar this opinion is certainly doubtful, if not untenable; but as a matter of theology it is a question of very little importance.

Robertson, on the topic of pronouns, wrote:
9. Gender and Number of outos. ... In general, like other adjectives, outos agrees with its substantive in gender and number, whether predicate or attributive. ... In Eph. 2:8, ..., there is no reference to pisteos in touto, but rather to the idea of salvation in the clause before. (A. T. Robertson, A Grammar of the New Testament, p.704)​

Robertson, on the topic of particles, wrote:
(ii) Kai. ... The Mere Connective ('And') ... kai tauta (frequent in ancient Greek). See in particular Eph. 2:8, kai touto ouk ex umon, where touto refers to the whole conception, not to chariti. (A. T. Robertson, A Grammar of the New Testament, pp. 1181-1182)​

Robertson, on the topic of prepositions, wrote:
(d) dia ... 3. 'Passing Between' or 'Through.' The idea of interval between leads naturally to that of passing between two objects or parts of objects. 'Through' is thus not the original meaning of dia, but is a very common one. ... The agent may also be expressed by dia. This function was also performed in the ancient Greek, through, when means or instrument was meant, the instrumental case was commonly employed. dia is thus used with inanimate and animate objects. Here, of course, the agent is conceived as coming in between the non-attainmnet and the attainment of the object in view. ... Abstract ideas are frequently so expressed, as sesosmenoi dia pisteos (Eph. 2:8), ... (A. T. Robertson, A Grammar of the New Testament, pp. 580-582)​

"Gift" and "faith," are both nouns and would not need to agree. However, agreement in gender is necessary between a pronoun and its antecedent. The demonstrative pronoun will change its gender to match the previous noun (or other substantive) to which it refers.

This verse tells us that the antecedent for "This" is also the "gift of God." But the "gift" cannot be "faith" because there is no agreement in gender between "faith" and the demonstrative pronoun, "touto" (This).

You call look up lots of Greek scholars work and let me know if you find any one disagreeing with this, because I have not among scholars.

Bling
Van was very specific as to his source. I just want him to give me a verbatim quote from the specific source that he claims.

 

[oworm]

Interesting that Van says in this thread that the greek grammar of Eph 2:8 precludes that faith is a gift from God and in another thread he says this;

2 Thessalonians 2:13 says He chooses folks for salvation through faith in the truth. He does not put faith in everyone. That is not His plan.

 

[nobdysfool]

It's so hard to keep track when one is involved in deception and an agenda of hatred for and vilification of Calvinism. So many lies to keep track of....

 

[cygnusx1]

Interesting that Van says in this thread that the greek grammar of Eph 2:8 precludes that faith is a gift from God and in another thread he says this;



Originally Posted by Van

2 Thessalonians 2:13 says He chooses folks for salvation through faith in the truth. He does not put faith in everyone. That is not His plan.
​

​

good observation bro !!!


how I miss finding those contradictions in van's post's bro , they were always stunning to discover ..

 

[cygnusx1]

Charles Hodge has it right ;


Charles Hodge (1797 – 1878) was the principal of Princeton Theological Seminary between 1851 and 1878. He was one of the greatest exponents and defenders of historical Calvinism in America during the 19th century.
From his commentary on Ephesians:

Vs. 8, 9. These verses confirm the preceding declaration. The manifestation of the grace of God is the great end of redemption. This is plain, for salvation is entirely of grace. Ye are saved by grace; ye are saved by faith and not by works; and even faith is not of yourselves, it is the gift of God. We have then here a manifold assertion, affirmative and negative, of the gratuitous nature of salvation. It is not only said in general, ‘ye are saved by grace,’ but further that salvation is by faith, i. e. by simply receiving or apprehending the offered blessing. From the very nature of faith, as an act of assent and trust, it excludes the idea of merit. If by faith, it is of grace; if of works, it is of debt; as the apostle argues in Rom. 4, 4. 5. Faith, therefore, is the mere causa apprehendens, the simple act of accepting, and not the ground on which salvation is bestowed. Not of works. The apostle says works, without qualification or limitation. It is not, therefore, ceremonial, as distinguished from good works; or legal, as distinguished from evangelical or gracious works; but works of all kinds as distinguished from faith, which are excluded. Salvation is in no sense, and in no degree, of works; for to him that worketh the reward is a matter of debt. But salvation is of grace and therefore not of works lest any man should boast. That the guilty should stand before God with self-complacency, and refer his salvation in any measure to his own merit, is so abhorrent to all right feeling that Paul assumes it (Rom. 4, 2) as an intuitive truth, that no man can boast before God. And to all who have any proper sense of the holiness of God and of the evil of sin, it is an intuition; and therefore a gratuitous salvation, a salvation which excludes with works all ground of boasting, is the only salvation suited to the relation of guilty men to God.


The only point in the interpretation of these verses of any doubt, relates to the second clause. What is said to be the gift of God? Is it salvation, or faith? The words καὶ τοῦτο only serve to render more proninent the matter referred to. Compare Rom. 13, 11. 1 Cor. 6, 6. Phil. 1, 28. Heb. 11, 12. They may relate to faith (τὸ πιστεύει&#957, or to the salvation spoken of (σεσωσμένους εἶνα&#953. Beza, following the fathers, prefers the former reference; Calvin, with most of the modern commentators, the latter. The reasons in favour of the former interpretation are, 1. It best suits the design of the passage. The object of the apostle is to show the gratuitous nature of salvation. This is most effectually done by saying, ‘Ye are not only saved by faith in opposition to works, but your very faith is not of yourselves, it is the gift of God.’ 2. The other interpretation makes the passage tautological. To say: ‘Ye are saved by faith; not of yourselves; your salvation is the gift of God; it is not of works,’ is saying the same thing over and over without any progress. Whereas to say: ‘Ye are saved through faith (and that not of yourselves it is the gift of God), not of works,’ is not repetitious; the parenthetical clause instead of being redundant does good service and greatly increases the force of the passage. 3. According to this interpretation the antithesis between faith and works, so common in Paul’s writings, is preserved. ‘Ye are saved by faith, not by works, lest any man should boast.’ The middle clause of the verse is therefore parenthetical, and refers not to the main idea ye are saved, but to the subordinate one through faith, and is designed to show how entirely salvation is of grace, since even faith by which we apprehend the offered mercy, is the gift of God. 4. The analogy of Scripture is in favor of this view of the passage, in so far that elsewhere faith is represented as the gift of God. 1 Cor. 1, 26-31. Eph. 1, 19. Col. 2, 12, et passim.

 

[drstevej]

Let's see...

Am I going with Hodge and Kuyper

or

JDS and Van ???