“I don’t care about the Arminian view and how they’d read it, or the Papist view, or the Mormon view of these verses. I just want a plain reading of the text.”
So do I. But when one talks about 2-3 verses, then one’s overall understanding of scripture gets involved. In your case, you bring a Calvinist view to those verses, and read predestination into verses that make no mention of it.
“What we are debating, however, is the cause of belief. Please re-read my previous post and properly respond to me.”
We are debating if God gives life to men he preselected with no regard to faith, and after saving them gives them faith, or if faith is a condition God imposes on ALL. WHOSOEVER supports MY view, but makes a mess of yours.
Also, I loath your snarky replies. Either learn to reply like a polite person, or we are finished. Your failure to understand is not moral superiority on your point. I have explained my reasons, and given links that go into much greater depth. In return, you offer attitude but no discussion.
“Me: Neither does it say anywhere in John 6 that those are people who won God’s Life Lottery,
You: Ignoring your mockery, you know as well as I do that it most certainly does, and I have repeatedly asked you to address my points.”
Asserting you are right is not reason. It is vain boasting. Nothing in John 6 says those given to Christ are from a list of elect that God drew up with no reference to their believing, since he would give them faith after giving them life. The point of Calvin is that our response in faith to God does not come from us, but is given to us by God because he already chose to save us. But that is not found anywhere in scripture, and certainly not in John 6. Instead, John wrote:
“For this is the will of my Father, that everyone who looks on the Son and believes in him should have eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.”
Everyone who looks and believes. Calvin inserts God’s “secret will”: that only those on God’s List of Names will be allowed to look and believe. It turns God into a liar, who would lose in court if anyone took him up on his contract offer.
We KNOW who will be given to Jesus: “everyone who looks on the Son and believes in him”.
“You stated earlier that my view is not in these verses, but then you confess my view is in these verses”
Again, no. What I said is that the verses can be treated either way, by themselves. But in context, with the 500 verses about faith and believinn found in the NT alone, then there IS only one consistent way to treat them. In deed, if one reads ALL the verses in John 6 instead of cherry picking, the same conclusion is reached - UNLESS you resort to Calvin’s “hidden will of God” - the will he supposedly has, but doesn’t mention in scripture.
“This doesn’t actually respond to the text, again, regarding the God who “works all things according to the counsel of His will.”
Actually, it does. If the sovereign will of God is to give us choice, then who are you to deny Him? Who is Calvin to order God to not do what God has said He will do? If God decides to do Plan A, who are you or Calvin to say, “No God, you must do it my way!”?
It is bewildering that people want to limit God to deciding I will sin on a given day at a given hour. The Calvinist who told me God made me sin was at least consistent with his view of God, if not with the Bible.
As far back as Genesis 4 we read, “The Lord said to Cain, “Why are you angry, and why has your face fallen? 7 If you do well, will you not be accepted? And if you do not do well, sin is crouching at the door. Its desire is for you, but you must rule over it.”
God knew what Cain would do, but He did not need to compel him to do so. When I was stationed in the Philippines, I always knew the outcome of the Super Bowl before we could watch it on TV. When watching it, I knew what would happen, but I did not force it to happen that way. God knows what we will do. When He chooses, He intervenes and makes us do something. But when He chooses, He allows us to make meaningful choices. Thus He commands us to “Repent and believe”, and He knows if we will, but He does not force us to do either - because it is His sovereign will to allow us to do so.
Not at all, and I can't help but to notice that you consistently refuse to defend any of your assertions. If we understand "whosoever" as declaring universal ability, we contradict the verses in John which declare this ability to be limited to those whom God gives it to, and whom Paul later writes cannot confess Christ "but by the Holy Ghost." Therefore, if you want to bring the "whole of scripture" into things, you are forced to limit "whosoever" to only those whom the Holy Spirit, at some point in time, is working His influence on. You cannot, however, argue for free-will or universal ability.
The promise of Christ is not a vain one, but a true one, and those who refuse Christ have only themselves to blame. Hence why the Apostle describes the Gospel as "the savour of death unto death; and to the other the savour of life unto life" (2 Co 2:16).
This line of argument you offer is only a red herring. It does not remove the problem at hand: the origin of faith.
I have explained my reasons, and given links that go into much greater depth.
If you have any that go into any kind of depth at all on any of my objections, I would be pleased to see them. But, I do not click on links because I consider it intellectual and spiritual laziness, as I said, so you must provide the passage in question and swear that you will defend them when I tear them to pieces.
Again, no.
At this point you're literally just repeating what you wrote in the last post, and doing it even as you describe "assertions" as "vain boasting." I think you are too blinded to seriously engage me, and that is why I swore my oath: never to be taken on a ride by the red herrings of sophists. I shall be bold, bloody and resolute, demanding accountability from my opponents. You taught me that. Twas not any of the Papists.
Who is Calvin to order God to not do what God has said He will do? If God decides to do Plan A, who are you or Calvin to say, “No God, you must do it my way!”?
But this is the position of the Arminians, who consistently accuse Calvin, Luther, the reformers, Augustine, and on and on, of teaching an "unfair" Gospel that teaches that God "does what He pleases in heaven and in Earth." Not one of our party has ever uttered the phrase "God must save us in a way that is fair!" This is the war cry of the Arminians, and, before them, the Papists. The Arminians are those who plead on the "willing," the Papists on the "running," but we say that God saves by His mercy only. This is where we stand today. Soli Deo gloria!
Rom 9:16 So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy.
God knew what Cain would do, but He did not need to compel him to do so.
That is most certainly true, and at no time is anyone compelled. But God would not have allowed him to sin, had it not been his will, and whoever says that God cannot change the will of a man to that which is good at any time denies His omnipotence; and God would not have allowed his sin to succeed in the murder of Abel, if this was not in His will. The idea that God was powerless to save Abel, or foresaw it and refused to do anything about it, or that anything occurs against God's will, is certainly a terrifying proposition, as we lose our assurance in God's power to protect us and to guide us in our lives, and we can no longer hope that "all things work unto good for them who love God, who are the called according to His purpose" (Rom 8).
The scripture stands secure, and we rest easy, knowing that His providential control over the world is exactly what the scripture says it is: Absolute, over all matters of life and death.