Posted on 01/21/2005 6:34:28 AM PST by P-Marlowe
Yes, you did write it poorly as it was addressed to only me. The way I read the following comment was:
"If you [Harley] come to the above conclusion [saved by grace], then you're [Harley are] not "rightly dividing the Word of Truth" are you [Harley]?"
I should have read the "you" in the more generic sense but since it was only address to me I took it more personally. It's good to have the clarification.
Fortunately I did not rent my shirt. :O)
And as you told us yesterday with more forthrightness than your arminian compadres, you are smarter than the average bear, and thus you believe and have faith in Jesus Christ.
The Reformed disagree with this completely and profoundly as it is 180 degrees from Scripture, and leads one straight back to Rome (synergism over monergism.) But at least you are honest enough to say it out loud.
I'm coming home, I've done my time....
The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom
So, when you obey God, is it because you are 'smarter' then a Christian that doesn't?
So, why do some Christians choose to grow and others do not?
Why are you a Calvinist and others not?
Must be something in you that led you to believe certain things which others have rejected.
I know,you do not want to think of those things-they just happen!
It's the Holy Ghost causing me (and you) to "think of those things."
I know you don't want to hear that, but it's true.
By the grace of God.
Christ's sacrifice is complete. No sacraments, water baptisms, confessions, tithing, secret handshakes, absolutions or acceptance cards necessary to finish the completed atonement. It is finished. The elect, ordained by God from before the foundation of the world from all nations and races and ages, have been saved. He is gathering them up and He will not lose any whom the Father has given Him.
Thank you, God, for this unmerited, unearned and most merciful gift of grace through the death and resurrection of your Son.
Now, who is kidding whom?
You have to yield to the Holy Spirit or resist Him.
So why do you yield sometimes and sometimes not?
I know you do not want to admit that you have choices to make.
Or, God is responsible for your sins (since He is willing them)
Or, you don't sin.
Which is it?
Don't you think God knows when you will yield to Him and when you won't? Do you think that your choices surprise, startle, or disappoint God? How much do you think God knows about you and how you will respond to circumstances around you?
You will ALWAYS yeild to God. Jonah found that out. Ahab found it out. Pharaoh found it out.
There seems to be a "limiting" factor that God is only some kind of "still small voice" that tells us what we should do but we have a right to tell that voice to be quiet. A rather anemic view of God IMHO and not at all the Biblical version of God.
The Jews did not yield (Acts7)
You and I do not yield when we sin or does God really want us to sin?
There seems to be a "limiting" factor that God is only some kind of "still small voice" that tells us what we should do but we have a right to tell that voice to be quiet. A rather anemic view of God IMHO and not at all the Biblical version of God.
No, God indwells us and there is a battle over our will (Rom.7)
Hence the commands not to grieve or quench the Holy Spirit.
But ofcourse if man is just going along for the ride, God is also doing the sinning, willing it to be so.
And you guys say you do not think God is the author of sin.
You make God responsible for your daily sins!
You may THINK you don’t yield but this is not what scripture tells us. Jonah ran away from what God told him to do but God brought him right back. You may sin (and not yielding to God is sin) but He will bring you back to do His will.
"For those whom the Lord loves He disciplines, and He scourges every son whom He receives.” It is for discipline that you endure; God deals with you as with sons; for what son is there whom his father does not discipline?” Heb 12:6-7
"No, God indwells us and there is a battle over our will (Rom.7)”
The historical view of Romans 7 was never this Joseph Arminius’ interpretation. The historical (and proper) view of Romans 7 is talking about the old nature before we come to know Christ. God does not battle Satan. Satan has to ask His permission (see Job). What makes you think He battles with our “will”? You give us far too much credit. When we accept Christ we are indwelled with the Holy Spirit and become new creatures.
"Therefore if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creature; the old things passed away; behold, new things have come.” 2 Cor 5:17
That doesn’t mean we won’t sin. It only means that God will correct us and bring us back on course to do His purpose.
" My belief is that you're saved the moment God wishes to give you a new heart."
That may be your belief, but it is not what the Bible clearly states. Yes, the blood of Christ removes sins, but the key is this: At what point do we come in contact with the Blood?
According to the Word of God, baptism is for the remission of sins (Acts 2:38) and washes away sins (Acts 22:16). In Matthew 26:28, Christ uses the exact same language that is used in Acts 2:38 to say that He shed His blood for the remission of sins. There is an obvious connection here. By submitting ourselves to His will and being baptized, the precious blood of Christ is applied.
I believe the hardest part for you in regards to baptism is that you think it negates God's grace somehow to believe that baptism is necessary to accept God's gift of salvation. Nothing could be farther from the truth.
God was under no obligation to offer us a way to be saved, but He has done so because of His unconditional love for us. That is what makes the gift free. We did not warrant the gift, but it was given anyway. The fact that we must obey Him to accept this wonderful gift in no way changes that.
God has always commanded obedience from His followers, including the Nation of Israel under the Mosaic Law. Please consider the following verses:
Hebrews 5:8-9 -
8 though He was a Son, [yet] He learned obedience by the things which He suffered.
9 And having been perfected, He became the author of eternal salvation to all who obey Him
As you can see, Christ is the author of our salvation, but only to those who obey Him. The only way to obey Him is to keep his commandments (Luke 6:46).
God bless.
That is a hilarous oxymoron but it is doubly sad considering the extent of the warmed over slop that is taught in the baptistic arminian culture. The sad fact is that these arminians are enslaved in enlightment philosophy and most don't even realize the catagory they are bound in. Saying that the Word of God is only the words written in the Bible is an example of how the arminian is utterly bound by analytic philosophy dismissing any general revelation and contextual historical revelations, as if God Himself is limited by language. Blasphmemy! That is why their little dispensational god is so mutable. Everytime one of his syllogisms falls apart he needs to reconstruct a new one.
I've become convinced that the only way to reach our enslaved brothers and sisters is by employing the same methodology as God Himself condescended to teach His people, that is through stories. The veracity of stories is arrived at differently than enlightment analytic philosophy. In the Arminian Cartesian model it is about "I" using my senses to arrive at the truth. As we know this is antithethical to the story/narrative of the Bible. Perhaps we have too have been enslaved to a degree and need to repent and help our brothers and sisters out of their enslavement.
bump for my files
This is actually where we disagree. If we have to do something to accept "the gift" it's earned. We did something (obey, be baptized) for "the gift". It ceases to be a gift.
The verses you cited can be easily explain that baptism is one step in the regeneration process. Hence the writers were only discussing just step "X" of the regeneration process. We obey our Lord Jesus in baptism because He has changed us to want to do so. And, yes, this is what the Bible clearly states as I pointed out with the case of Cornelius which you have not yet explain. While its important to review the doctrinal text, God also gives us Biblical examples to ensure our accurate interpretation. Most people fail to examine these stories closely and match them to other text to understand the workings of God.
I don't wish to sound mean spirited; I'm really a swell guy. But given my past experiences with people who hold this view, I doubt if we're going to change each other's minds on this.
LOL. No matter how many times I've discuss Biblical examples (Jonah, Ester, Cornelius, etc.) they seem to be ignored.
I've always had trouble reconciling the Arminian "God of love" with one who would command the slaughter of civilizations. I understand it from a Calvinist "God is sovereign" perspective. Until people can grasp the sovereignty part these examples will only remain "stories".
I have given an explanation to the case of Cornelius, you have just yet to comment on my explanation. I have shown, in the Bible, that baptism is for the remission of sins. Until you can prove to me that we are saved before our sins are remitted, then you can't prove that salvation happens before baptism. Period.
Yea, I know.
The inferences derived from these stories are clear, yet...
As the Isrealites proved, just being part of a covenant community doesn't ensure repentance.
We need to pray for an outpouring of the Holy Spirit to clear fogged minds.
"Cornelius received the Holy Spirit as a sign to the Jewish Christians that Gentiles could be saved as well. There are only two instances where the Holy Spirit manifests itself as it did with Cornelius, the other being when the apostles spoke at Pentecost."
You might include John the Baptist and Jeremiah to this list but, of course, they were under the "old covenant".
This is a typical Arminian construct. God works differently in the life of one but He doesn't work that way for the rest of us. I'm sorry but I reject this type of argument. People use it in all sorts of different ways just to "prove" their case. There's always an exception and that exception list grows awfully long and varies depending on who you talk to.
God works exactly the same way in everyone's life. God show no partiality. Period.
***The money isn't in your account, it is a account that you have been given access to, but you have to claim it.***
This is not what you said. You are talking out of both sides of your mouth. Here is EXACTLY what you said when you FIRST gave your analogy: "I put a million dollars in your bank account."
I think you need to go back and figure out what kind of analogy you want to present before you talk yourself into a corner and need to start contradicting yourself in order to try and make your analogy make sense.
I'm just going on EXACTLY what you told me in the beginning. You told me that the million dollars was in MY bank account. Now, you tell me that the million isn't in my account.
When you figure out exactly what it is that YOU believe, you be sure and get back to me. Ok!
***Now, that is quite amazing. You know its there-how?***
Well, I think that is self evidently obvious. You know that your debt has been paid because you don't get sent to debtors prison. This analogy isn't hard, ftd.
***You have to believe to get saved, believe in the Person and Work of the saviour.***
This is exactly the backward way that Arminians read such passages as John 10:26. In point of fact, people don't believe BECAUSE they are not sheep, exactly and explicitly as such passages as John 10:26 say.
Let's look at the modified analogy again:
"Let us say that you owe a million dollars and that if you don't pay, you will be cast into debtors prison until the full debt is paid. Some man comes along and pays your debt. There is not any requirement for you to accept this gift; it was legally applied to your account for your benefit. All you must do is enjoy the gift. Now, that makes more sense than this bank job weirdness."
First off, I'll point out that in your silly analogy you did EXACTLY say that "I put a million dollars in your bank account." I correctly pointed out that if the million is in MY account, then there is nothing I need do further. Of course, realizing that you had talked yourself into a corner, you've tried to change your analogy. Well, I've modified it for you to make it Biblical so there is no need now for you to contradict yourself. Simply admit that you had it all wrong and embrace something better. Just look....
Luke 7:41 "There was a certain creditor who had two debtors. One owed five hundred denarii, and the other fifty. And when they had nothing with which to repay, he freely forgave them both. Tell Me, therefore, which of them will love him more?"
Now, the Lord Jesus used this analogy of a freely forgiven debt more than once. And, not once in any of the times did the Lord use the analogy was there an element of the debtor having to accept the gift of the payment in order for it to actually apply to him. It is just not to be found. IOW, you are just making up stuff which has no Biblical relevance. To be honest, it is in effect adding an unBiblical requirement to the gospel.
Now, I'm sure you will note if you check The Parable of the Unforgiving Servant in Matthew that the wicked servant actually begged his master to forgive him. Before you wrongfully think that this somehow helps you out, let me point out something for you.
Boldly walking up to your Master and simply informing him that you freely accept his gift of forgiving your debt is tantamount to a blasphemy against the person of the Son. It is highly irreverent. The wicked servant actually got this part right: he BEGGED his master to forgive him. You see, first of all, our Master is under no obligation to forgive. To say that he is under obligation is to flat out declare that he actually owed something to man. And that is just plain blasphemy. Secondly, there is a big difference between begging for forgiveness and informing your master that you presumptuously accept his forgiveness. On both points, your Arminianism falls woefully short.
This isn't hard, ftd.
In the service of the Lord,
Christian.
Strangely enough, I think I'm more Calvinist in this area than you.
First, if you truly believe that, you cannot be a Calvinist, since Calvinism vehemously defends God's right to show all the partiality that He wants, even in the matter of choosing whether to allow us to love Him or not.
Secondly, I do believe that the gifts of the Spirit are still operative today. Nevertheless, 1 Cor. 12-14 is clear that God does not give all believers all the same gifts. Ergo, there's a measure of "partiality" involved there--that is, He equips us for the unique ministries He has in mind for each of us, but not everyone ministers in the same way. How many people go around parting the seas, for example?
The only Spiritual gift that God promises to give abundantly to anyone who asks is wisdom, per James 1:5. Now, I do believe that if you are fruitful with your given gifts, you will be given more (and more responsibilities to go with them), but when and how much is strictly up to God.
That being said, jkl1122 is incorrect on how many were immersed (baptized) in the Holy Spirit in Acts. There are other instances where the Holy Spirit fell upon people with power when the Apostles laid their hands on them. The Apostles came to Philip's evangelistic meetings expressly to give the Spirit's full immersion to those who had been saved, for example (remember how Simon the Sorceror wanted to buy that power), and the fact that the Gentiles were exhibiting the Spritual gifts was a major part of Paul and Barnabbas' case in Acts 15. Besides, 1 Cor. 12-14 makes no sense except in the context of continuing miracles by the Holy Spirit in the Church, including the gift of tongues.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.