Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
You're being vague again, whole trying to sound profound apparently. It means nothing to say that Jesus is the truth unless one has some specifics about what that means, Who He is and what demands that places on us.
Are you saying Jesus tells us to do things that can't be done? Is it impossible to remain in Him? And for what reason would He use the term "if" unless it were also possible for us to fail to remain in Him?
You were not quoting Scripture. You said that if I didn't agree with your point of view it was because I have no ability to see the truth because I am lost.
Arminius was just a guy who realized that the will of man plays some role in his salvation, and continues to do so throughout his life, and that what man does in his life matters, as James, for one, affirms in chapter 2 of his letter. And that realization is nothing more or less what Christians have always known and believed before Arminius.
He's simply giving us criteria for gaining eternal life. And that's pretty hard to do if we're not forgiven, for one thing. If you want to understand what these things mean, it all boils down to the same thing: you must love-the greatest commandments are still the rule, IOW.
So, do you realize that you just proved my point? Precisely that believing in Jesus is the work of God. And giving us ears to hear (and eyes to see) is one of the ways that happens.
That's a circular argument. But it breaks down at one point in the circle. He wouldn't call on us to believe if it was something He granted to some and witheld from others. It is cynical to think that He calls on people everywhere to repent/believe/turn from sin to God if He had already prevented some large portion of the human population from doing so. And it contradicts solid Scriptual evidence that He wants everyone to be saved. So, no, I did not prove your point by saying that He tells us we need to believe.
I’m sorry, where do you get the idea that He wouldn’t call on us to believe if it was given to some to hear and withheld from others. JESUS said that very thing when He started teaching in parables.
Once a person is saved, he can see and hear the deep things of God. This is because of God taking up residence in a persons heart and revealing those things He knows about Himself to us. These spiritual things are foolishness to the lost and they cannot know them. Therefore, these are not statements regarding who can believe and be saved. They are statements about who can know and understand the things of God and who cannot.
So, your understanding is that God prevents some people from seeing and hearing the mysteries of His kingdom because He knows that if He allowed them to see those things, they would all of a sudden understand and repent and He would be forced to forgive them? But He doesn't want to forgive them, so He keeps them from being able to hear or see? That is a terrible thing to ascribe to God.
Yes. Jesus said it. He is God. I will disbelieve you rather than disbelieve what God has clearly said. I mean, what does “wide is the path that leads to destruction but narrow is the path that leads to life” if it is not a statement that everyone will not hear the truth and respond? From the very beginning of the Bible, God has had a promised people. It didn’t change in the NT except that instead of external works and laws, the new covenant is written on our heart. John 6 outlines the process of salvation for those God chooses to save, and Jesus will not save anyone except for those whom the Father has given Him.
Jesus' words are often taken to mean something other than what He meant.
It is good to listen to God rather than men.
It has nothing to do with hearing and believing. It has to do with people choosing to enter through the narrow gate instead of following the masses to destruction.
No, it was always through trusting that God would forgive our sins by way of Christ (Ga 3:17-18). And it is true that we who have believed in Christ have the Holy Spirit in our hearts, leading, guiding, directicting, correcting, and comforting us. But this does not speak to how we got here, but to our current condition.
The process is that 1) God communicates to everyone that they are sinners in need of a Savior, 2) some people learn from God and take heed of what they hear, 3) God sends these people to Jesus, and 4) Jesus saves everyone who comes to Him.
This is a non sequitur. Expectations are not at issue here. What we believe about God is at issue here. And we have put our finger on one disagreement on what each of us believes about God. In my opinion, since this is at the heart of Reformed theology, and since it is its achilles heal, there is no reason to discuss any other of its doctrines.
It's God's word, not mine that gives balance to the matter, leaving no doubt that a person can walk away from their faith, from their first love, from God. And yes, I've been given witness by the Spirit that I'm His.
Expectations are clearly at issue here. You said “That is a terrible thing to ascribe to God” because it doesn’t meet your expectations of the person and nature of God.
There is no "imbalance" to be "balanced" in the word of God correctly understood.
That's all your opinion. Balancing comes as Scripture sheds light on other Scripture. Such as here.
"If they have escaped the corruption of the world by knowing our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ and are again entangled in it and are overcome, they are worse off at the end than they were at the beginning. It would have been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than to have known it and then to turn their backs on the sacred command that was passed on to them. Of them the proverbs are true: “A dog returns to its vomit,”and, “A sow that is washed returns to her wallowing in the mud.” 2 Pet 2:20-22
No, I don't think grace has any achilles heals. I think Calvinism has an achilles heal. And it has to do with the "T" in "TULIP" (i.e., the idea that man is prevented by nature from understanding that God offers salvation through the sacrifice of Christ and that their nature deprives them of any ability to go to Him that they may receive forgiveness of their sins).
No, that's not how any of this works. God reveals deep things about Himself to us by His Spirit (1 Cor 2:10), we receive His tesimony directly into our hearts where He lives (1 Cor 2:12), and our knowledge of the things of God increases (1 Cor 2:12). When we (His children) are in error on our doctrines, our loving Heavenly Father corrects us. Some people are more stubborn than others. But God does not give up until His correction is successful. These things are from Hebrews 12. So, if a Christian believes false doctrine, it is not because he wants his false doctrine to be true, it is because he is resisting the correction of the Holy Spirit to suppress the truth.
There are many verses that speak of God calling on people to repent, to turn to Christ, and be saved. Let's take the following passage...
There are no Bible verses that say "our will is a slave of sin". All the verses that speak of us being slaves of sin are peaking of us, not of our wills. Besides that, your point that your will is not a slave of sin right now after having been saved does not hold water either because it is obvious that saved people continue to sin after salvation and can't stop sinning. Maybe you're just saying that we are liberated from our depravity just long enough to believe in Jesus and be saved and the rest comes later?
It is obviously written to those who are judgemental towards the lost and their rejection of God...
Romans 6:20 (NASB95) For when you were slaves of sin, you were free in regard to righteousness.
But what's different after salvation? Why do we still sin? Per Romans 6, you are making the case that those who were slaves of sin could not choose righteousness. But you are not making the case that after having been made slaves of righteousness they cannot choose to sin. Why does the term "slave" need to have a new meaning? Furthermore, why does committing sin now, after salvation, not make us a slave of sin again? I do have the answer to these questions, but I want to hear your answer first.
Thanks for the information. I never heard the term "Doctrines of Grace" (though when I read it in your post I thought the term grace was mis-applied), and I never really thought there was a meaningful difference between Reformed theology and Calvinism.
One either believes Jesus or one doesn't.
Paul disagrees with you in Ro 8:16:
We sin because the earth is still fallen and we are still surrounded by sin. Justification only addresses the penalty of sin. Sanctification addresses the power of sin. That is what the Holy Spirit helps us with. Sanctification is when we become conformed to the image of Christ. It is a never-ending process because until we are no longer in the presence of sin, it still has power over us, but we are not slaves to it.
