Weep Over Jerusalem?

[cygnusx1]

I think I agree with everything you said. The only difference is, I'm willing to say that when the will is taken captive by sin, the person sins willingly. You've been arguing this whole time that Christians don't sin willingly.

That's right , taken captive is the opposite of willingness .

I understand your view but I don't see Paul using that argument , I think Romans 7 would have omitted a few verses if your view were right , just try using the exact same words Paul used in your own experience , I don't think you can.

I think Paul is saying that he doesn't will to sin , he even says the will to do what is right is thwarted (at times) , what is it that dictates his actions ? His willingness ? Then he should be above sinning.

I think this interesting conversation came up as a result of a well used Reformed phrase , but , we are to test all things , even Reformed ideas and phrases .

Also it's about time we saw some discussion on soteriology concerning sanctification , 9 years I think I have been here and this is a first , usually it's 5 points or anti predestination , we all need a broader scope of understanding .

Just see if you can use the exact words of Paul about your experience , I don't think you will be able given what you have repeatedly said ........

Concerning David yes I think he was regenerate , read some of his words about Gods Law and his sin seems even more inexplicable , I see it more like a massive fall and being taken captive by Satan , he certainly added sis to sin to sin , a downward spiral and in my opinion he was out of control and needed outside intervention.


Thanks for your time Griff

 

[Hammster]

So, if hell was originally created for the devil, did God originally create it for man?

Just a note: it's comments like these that cause Calvinists to wonder if those who make them might be Open Theists.

 

[guuila]

So, if hell was originally created for the devil, did God originally create it for man?

Yes.

Why do you not know? Doesn't the Bible tell us who will not enter the kingdom? Do you think those who will not enter the kingdom, will enter hell? And, don't Jesus and Paul tell us who will not inherit nor enter the kingdom?

I know in a general sense the reprobate will be the ones in hell who persist in unbelief. The elect, aka, believers, will be in heaven. If you're asking me specifically who those people are, I don't know and never claimed to.

Will the people of whom Paul is speaking in Galatians 6:8 enter the kingdom or hell?

Yes.

Since much of this discussion is about the regenerate living in the flesh, do you think they somehow get a pass when sowing to the flesh?

I think Christians can be carnal without losing their salvation, yes. If a person is in Christ no charge can be brought against them.

And what do you make of John's statement in 1 John 2:16?

For all that is in the world—the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life—is not of the Father but is of the world.

I agree with it.

Do you think the regenerate who live in the lust of the flesh, are of the Father?

The regenerate can be carnal while still being in Christ, just like the Corinthians were.

Again, I ask, do the regenerate get a pass if they live in the lust of the flesh?

If a person lives a lifestyle that is absolutely carnal with no good works, no sign of repentance and faith, etc. that person has no reason to believe he or she is regenerate.

Why do you think the Bible, over and over, tells us to remove sin from our heart, cast away our transgressions, flee fornication, abstain from fleshly lusts, and lay aside the old man? I'll give you a hint - the answer lies in Galatians 5:19-21 and 6:8 (quoted above)

Because God wants us to live holy lives.

 

[Arcoe]

Just a note: it's comments like these that cause Calvinists to wonder if those who make them might be Open Theists.

You can stop wondering, this judgement is left for the Lord, and not man.

 

[Hammster]

You can stop wondering, this judgement is left for the Lord, and not man.

So you don't even know if your an open theist? That might explain some things.

 

[Arcoe]

Just a note: it's comments like these that cause Calvinists to wonder if those who make them might be Open Theists.

Griff answered; why don't you? He said God did originally create hell for man, but he won't find that in the Bible anywhere.

What do you say? Can you support his claim by providing passages from the Bible, or you just gonna sit there and wonder?

 

[Arcoe]

So you don't even know if your an open theist? That might explain some things.

And if you put this tag on me, why should I be worried? Anything else you want to call me?

As I said earlier, personal attacks are next.

 

[guuila]

That's right , taken captive is the opposite of willingness .

I understand your view but I don't see Paul using that argument , I think Romans 7 would have omitted a few verses if your view were right , just try using the exact same words Paul used in your own experience , I don't think you can.

I think Paul is saying that he doesn't will to sin , he even says the will to do what is right is thwarted (at times) , what is it that dictates his actions ? His willingness ? Then he should be above sinning.

I think this interesting conversation came up as a result of a well used Reformed phrase , but , we are to test all things , even Reformed ideas and phrases .

Also it's about time we saw some discussion on soteriology concerning sanctification , 9 years I think I have been here and this is a first , usually it's 5 points or anti predestination , we all need a broader scope of understanding .

Just see if you can use the exact words of Paul about your experience , I don't think you will be able given what you have repeatedly said ........

Concerning David yes I think he was regenerate , read some of his words about Gods Law and his sin seems even more inexplicable , I see it more like a massive fall and being taken captive by Satan , he certainly added sis to sin to sin , a downward spiral and in my opinion he was out of control and needed outside intervention.


Thanks for your time Griff

I think we're closer in our understanding than it seems. I agree that there is more involved than the will. That's not what I'm suggesting. I agree sin is deceitful and our flesh is a slave to it. All I'm saying is I don't believe a Christian never willfully sins. If someone can convince me David did all those things unwillingly, I'll change my position. I'm afraid there may be nuances here that are keeping us from understanding each other.

 

[cygnusx1]

The human will in flux :

Ron Moody-Reviewing the Situation - YouTube

 

[guuila]

Griff answered; why don't you? He said God did originally create hell for man, but he won't find that in the Bible anywhere.

Show us where it explicitly says he didn't.

 

[Hammster]

And if you put this tag on me, why should I be worried? Anything else you want to call me?

As I said earlier, personal attacks are next.

It wasn't a tag. It was an observation. We've noticed that synergists often make comments that make it seem like they don't believe God is omniscient. No need to get upset.

 

[cygnusx1]

Show us where it explicitly says he didn't.

He will not do that , such are the problems entailed in quoting cliches , as if a simple quotation of a text ends all that may be true of a subject .

Al Martin warned against this view in a message about definite atonement , it is a great listen online , I had forgotten how good a speaker Al was/is ?

I'll see if I can recall what phrases he used

 

[Hammster]

Griff answered; why don't you? He said God did originally create hell for man, but he won't find that in the Bible anywhere.

What do you say? Can you support his claim by providing passages from the Bible, or you just gonna sit there and wonder?

He didn't say He created it for man. Go back and reread your question and his response.

 

[Arcoe]

Yes.

Is this a personal belief, or can you provide passages from the Bible to support your answer?

I know in a general sense the reprobate will be the ones in hell who persist in unbelief. The elect, aka, believers, will be in heaven. If you're asking me specifically who those people are, I don't know and never claimed to.

I don't want any specific people, all I'm asking is if a person practices sin through lusts of the flesh, can we not know who they are by their actions?

Yes.

Yes wasn't an option. It was either the kingdom or hell.

I think Christians can be carnal without losing their salvation, yes. If a person is in Christ no charge can be brought against them.

How is a person in Christ if they live to the flesh? Romans 8:1 says,

There is therefore now no condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus, who do not walk according to the flesh, but according to the Spirit.

Paul says a person in Christ does NOT walk according to the flesh. How is it you say a person is in Christ if he walks according to the flesh? Again, is a regenerate person exempt from this?

I agree with it.

I'm glad you agree with John. So I ask, how is a regenerate person of the Father if he lives in the lust of his flesh?

The regenerate can be carnal while still being in Christ, just like the Corinthians were.

So you equate being carnal with living in the lust of the flesh. Were these Corinthian believers of the Father, or of the world, being carnal? Did these Corinthians believers inherit the kingdom being carnal?

If a person lives a lifestyle that is absolutely carnal with no good works, no sign of repentance and faith, etc. that person has no reason to believe he or she is regenerate.

But you just said the Corinthian believers, who must be regenerate, lived a lifestyle of carnality. Which is it? Were the Corinthian believers regenerated or not?

Because God wants us to live holy lives.

Thank you for an honest answer.

 

[Arcoe]

He didn't say He created it for man. Go back and reread your question and his response.

I guess you are still wondering about open theists. Here is my question -

So, if hell was originally created for the devil, did God originally create it for man?

His answer was 'yes'. I went back and gave you the question and his answer, now stop wondering and get your mind on what was said.

 

[cygnusx1]

He will not do that , such are the problems entailed in quoting cliches , as if a simple quotation of a text ends all that may be true of a subject .

Al Martin warned against this view in a message about definite atonement , it is a great listen online , I had forgotten how good a speaker Al was/is ?

I'll see if I can recall what phrases he used

Found it , Al Martin says "we are not to approach debate with an atomistic approach but a holistic approach instead " in his great recording , this has been the most helpful tool to my view of this place so far , it's here

 

[Hammster]

I guess you are still wondering about open theists. Here is my question -

So, if hell was originally created for the devil, did God originally create it for man?

His answer was 'yes'. I went back and gave you the question and his answer, now stop wondering and get your mind on what was said.

I wasn't wondering. I know what was said.

But my answer is also yes.

 

[Jack Terrence]

It's not as though Paul was ignorant.Really it should be translated as more of an inability to do this good he speaks of, not a lack of knowledge. The verse literally says that the willing is present but the doing of the good is not. Nothing about 'not knowing' something.

I have no beef with this. But why did Paul not have the ability? And in what way is the Christian's will free if he does not have the ability? Hammster said that Christians have free will. But I believe that it is all of grace from start to finish. Free will played no part at salvation. Neither does it play a part in sanctification because there is no such thing as free will at all.

What are you saying? That you want to do good and then your flesh takes over, holds a gun to your head as it were, and then forces you to do what you don't want to do?

My chief point is that I ALWAYS want to do good. Again I have to remind some here that I am disputing Hammster's theory that Paul did what he "ultimately wanted." How anyone can say that the child of God, when he sins, is doing what he ultimately wants? He is a child of God!

"I do the very thing I hate. Now if I do what I do NOT want, I agree with the law, that it is good." ESV

When the Christian sins he is doing the opposite of what he wants.

Are you telling me that if a person willfully sins they aren't regenerate?

Not quite. I believe that the Elect are regenerated at conception in their mother's womb. I define regeneration simply as the implanting of the GERM of spiritual life into the soul. The Elect sin willfully up until the time they are converted. This is why I said, "If you are a regenerated AND a converted man you always want to do good.

"For if we sin willfully after we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remains no more sacrifice for sin."

Christians indeed sin but they CANNOT sin willfully. They sin in weakness. This is why Christ is our High Priest. He ever lives to plead our weakness before God.

15 For we do not have a High Priest who cannot sympathize with our weaknesses, but was in all points tempted as we are, yet without sin. 16 Let us therefore come boldly to the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy and find grace to help in time of need.

 

[Arcoe]

It wasn't a tag. It was an observation. We've noticed that synergists often make comments that make it seem like they don't believe God is omniscient. No need to get upset.

What does creating hell for the devil have to do with omniscience? Perhaps you think if you 'bog down' this discussion, you will have proved something.

I've asked you, and you haven't answered yet. Did God originally create hell for mankind? If so, please provide passages to prove your belief.

If you can't provide Biblical support for your belief, then I will assume it is a belief of man from his natural state.

 

[Arcoe]

I wasn't wondering. I know what was said.

But my answer is also yes.

Thank you. Now do you have Biblical support for this, or is this a personal belief?