<lsenders@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:0A9E3038-5ED3-2CB9-CD02-31C5A50BE5BC@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On Mar 20, 7:44am, "gary" <biblic...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> <lsend...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>>
>> > 6:44 "No one can come to Me, unless the Father who sent Me draws
>> > him...
>>
>> g: I agree that this verse teaches that first one must be drawn by God
> to
>> Christ. Of course God draws all to Christ. John 12:32 And I, if I be li
> fted
>> up from the earth, will draw all men unto me.
>>
> Eph 1 teaches that salvation is exclussively a work of the Trinity.
> The
> elect were chosen in eternity past. It is brought to pass by both the
> Redeemer and the Inspirer. No where in 1:3-14 do we read anything
> even remotely requiring "belief".
NO, you have to be able to read, so that lets you out.
v. 13: "having believed, you were sealed "
Loren, I can't communicate with you since you don't seem to be able to
read.
Your version of "faith" is very
> similar to the RC version
My understanding of faith is far removed from the Roman Catholic view.
And of course your view as well.
Faith in a proposition is being convinced of the truth of the proposition.
Saving faith is being convinced of the truth of ANY proposition of God
which
promises Eternal Life.
You should know that the soteriology of Reformed Theology and Calvinism
comes from Augustine, who is the reputed father of Roman Catholicism.
The religion which has departed from its roots is Reformed Theology and
Calvinism. This departure began almost immediately with Beza, with a
change
in what faith is and what saving faith is.
The religion which teaches an "infused" righteousness is Reformed
Theology.
You teach that God regenerates a man unconsciously, without his will,
really
against his will, making him willing. This necessarily results in works
and
perseverance to the end of life in faithfulness. Which is infused
righteousness.
Luther kept a little closer to Roman Catholicism in that he kept infant
baptismal regeneration. Calvin was a little further removed, but not by
much.
> where grace is first infused but then it is
> up to the individual to "work out your own salvation." (As
> misappropria-
> tion of the contextual meaning)
But of course, I teach the very opposite. I teach that a man is saved
without doing any works at all after regeneration, or before or during.
> You make God subserviant to
> man. If man believes, then God has to respond.
He didn't HAVE to. He chose to. Actually, He responded in eternity past.
> If man does not
> believe
Then he is condemned already.
> then God again has His hands tied in the matter and He
> must then damn him.
As the Lord Jesus Christ said, the one who does not believe is condemned
already. BECAUSE he has NOT BELIEVED on the Son of God.
> Though there is a distinction of degree, to
> be sure, your is still a salvation by works.
Actually the one preaching a salvation by "infused righteousness" and
works
is you and Reformed Theology and Calvinism.
This is obvious. You teach that God regenerates a man by grace. This grace
is "infused" in the man against his will, since the infusion, the
regeneration, changes his will. He then becomes a willing obedient child
of
God. And the necessary result of such grace is good works, and
perseverance
in faith till death. This is a salvation of works. It matters not a whit
that you think that it is God working in you. No works, no continuance in
faith, no salvation! Works salvation, no other way to put it.
On the other hand, I teach that when a person believes the true gospel
(even
for an instant), he is saved eternally, even though he may never do a good
work ever and not even continue to believe.
I'll leave it to the readers to decide who is teaching a salvation of
works!
> It is surely not by
> grace
> and as Paul concludes at the end of his salvific apologetic - "it is
> ALL from Him, through Him and to Him."
With a result of good works and faithfulness. No good works, no
faithfulnesss, till death, no salvation.
The difference between you and Romanism is that they teach the man was
saved
but became lost, whereas you teach that the man was never saved.
>
>> g: This is not the verse which clearly teaches the only logical order I
>> am
>> interested in:
>>
> This verse denies your thesis.
You are a reprobate. You cut the verses which prove your theology false,
and
make false statements.
> It speaks of causality and it speaks
> of incapacity. The causality is God's alone because "no man can"
> because of his incapacity to do so. I guess I have to quote the
> entire
> passage...
>
> Rom. 3:9 What then? Are we better than they? Not at all; for we have
> already charged that both Jews and Greeks are ALL under sin;
> Rom. 3:10 as it is written, " There is NONE righteous, not even one;
> Rom. 3:11 There is NONE who understands, There is NONE who seeks for
> God;
>
> i.e. There is NONE who are inclined to God; have a disposition to
> please God apart from their own selfish end.
So you are not inclined to God, right? There is no exception here!
You just make up things, thinking that people are stupid and will believe
you.
We won't. Who said, "Are we better than they?" Paul the Apostle, a
regenerate man.
He says WE, including himself! He is no better than the unbelieving
gentiles.
Why do you change the verses to suit your taste. They are universal, and
include you.
God takes the initiative. We love Him because He first loved us.
We found Him because He searched for us. Romans 10:20 But Isaiah is very
bold and says: "I was found by those who did not seek Me; I was made
manifest to those who did not ask for Me."
The saved did not seek God, God sought out us. It is He who is to be given
ALL the praise for convincing ME (and every other saved person) of the
truth
of the Gospel. He hasn't yet convinced you, but is it not too late. What
is
so very funny, in a way, is that all of you guys who teach TULIP, none of
you believe the truth. I used to believe TULIP, but I was saved before
being
duped by Calvinism.
> Rom. 3:12 ALL have turned aside, together they have become useless;
> There is NONE who does good, There is NOT EVEN ONE. "
This includes everyone, including every regenerate person. Only one does
Good, and that is God.
> Rom. 3:13 " Their throat is an open grave, With their tongues they
> keep deceiving," " The poison of asps is under their lips";
You preach, man! Just apply it to yourself, and you may begin the road to
recovery.
> This last addition as to the poison of asps is particularly damaging
> to your refusal to accept the biblical doctrine of total depravity.
> Tell
> me this, when little tiny baby asps are born, how potent is their
> poison?
> Do they even have poison? To save you from taking the time to
> research this, Yes, they most certainly do. It is anywhere from 8-12
> times more potent than an adult asp. They are born poisonous just
> as we are born sinners.
SO WHAT????
Just because you are a sinner, and You are! That doesn't mean that you are
forced to commit every sin there is.
>> g: The logical order of faith/receiving Christ and becoming a child of
>> God
>> (regeneration) is what is at issue here.
>>
>> g: This logical order is clearly enunciated in the following verse:
>>
>> John 1:12 "But as many as RECEIVED HIM, to them gave He power TO BECOME
> THE
>> SONS OF GOD, even to them that believe on his name:"
>>
> 46rom the human perspective, I certainly do and have granted.
WHAT UTTER NONSENSE! God clearly tells you that you have believed a LIE,
and
you start "46rom the human perspective, I certainly …."
You are hopeless now. Perhaps in the future you will be more honest.
> But the
> biblical doctrine
Nonsense! God does not contradict Himself. The passage, John 1:12 cannot
be
controverted.
That your long involved false deductions lead you to REJECT John 1:12
SHOULD
really BOTHER you!
All of Calvinism false doctrines are based upon false presuppositions, and
false logic. (really no logic at all).
When a simple clear truth contradicts the very core of your theology, YOU
SHOULD start to re-examine your false theology.
> as taught by Paul above and in Eph 2,
But Paul never taught Calvinism and Reformed Theology.
by Christ in
> Jn 6:44
Nor did Christ! Far from it! He denounces your doctrine of demons at every
turn. Contrary to your false understanding of John 6:44 it teaches the
very
opposite of what you teach!
44 "No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I
will raise him up at the last day. 45 "It is written in the prophets,
‘And
they shall ALL be taught by God.’ Therefore everyone who has heard and
learned from the Father comes to Me.
v 44. NO one CAN come UNLESS - UNLESS HE is DRAWN.
This verse does not teach that those drawn necessarily come!
In v45 He explains the matter of the drawing:
ALL ARE TAUGHT! But not all "hear and learn."
Those who "hear and learn" COME to Christ.
You've been taught and believe a pack of lies.
> and the verses already quoted in chapter 3, man has no
> capacity within himself to see (idew) let alone believe and repent.
No verse teaches this. Further, John 1:12 denies it.
> Yes I know you have poo pooed the stated Greek definition of idein in
> the TDNT. Perhaps if you actually read some Greek expositions, you
> would not be so hasty.
I have a Greek exposition for You to read, ok?
http://www.chafer.edu/journal/back_issues/Vol%209-1%20ar3.pdf
Read it and weap.
> We lose so much of the original intent of the
> NT authors by not having a 1st understanding of the Greek.
A MAJOR problem is that SOME of the so-called articles in TDNT (I have it
in
print) are biased, and some are downright false. The Calvinistic and
Reformed Theology mutilation of "foreknow" in Romans 8:29 and
"foreknowledge" in I Peter 1:2 are stupendous!
> However,
> if you will not accept Jn 3:3,
I accept John 3:3 and every other verse in the Bible! You don't!
Try reading the Gospel of John! The entire book denies all of Calvinism.
Christ, in explaining the new birth to Nicodemus, used the parallel of the
s**** bitten Israelites look up to the brazen s**** on the pole held up by
Moses. But since this exposition by none other than the Lord Jesus Christ
Himself contradicts your entire theology, you refuse to believe HIM who is
perfect, and rather accept the false theology of a murderers. His
exegesis
is perfect. Yours is absolutely false.
> then the illustration given by Christ
> in v 8 will grant you insight.
Yet another passage you don't understand! You refuse the simple straight
forward passages which contradict your theology (John 1:12 and John
1:14,15.) ONE passage which contradicts it is quite sufficient, and I have
hundreds.
> The wind in its incomprehensibility
> and uncontrollability is the use by Christ to described the
> regenerating work of the Spirit.
IT IS NOT! You have not evidently even READ the verse in question!
the rest I clipped.
Gary
((( s.r.c.b-s is a moderated group. All posts are approved by a
moderator. )))
((( Read http://srcbs.org
for details about this group BEFORE you post.
)))
|
