The Current War against Iran and Support for Israel is based on Catholic Counter Reformation Theology.

[dad]

<smile> Even though until they are born again of the Spirit they are dead ~ dead ~ in their sin... "in which they (we) once walked, following the course of this world, following the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that is now at work in the sons of disobedience... children of wrath like the rest of mankind..." (Ephesians 2:1-3)... Yeah, no.

Yes until we are born of the spirit, we are dead. ..and..?

And we believe and come to him because we are born again of the Spirit. Yet again:

No. IF we come to Him THEN we are born again.

"Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God... That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. Do not marvel that I said to you, ‘You must be born again.’ The wind blows where it wishes, and you hear its sound, but you do not know where it comes from or where it goes. So it is with everyone who is born of the Spirit." (John 3:3-8)

That which is born of the spirit is that person that comes to Jesus. Not some pre born special few. Otherwise he died for nothing

Our belief, dad, is an exertion. Nothing, even our belief, merits salvation.

But He gives it anyhow! That is the nice thing about mercy and a gift

Else, as Paul says, you make grace out to be something other than grace... unmerited favor.

Where exactly is the verse you allude to?

"...we know that for those who love God all things work together for good, for those who are called according to His purpose. For those whom He foreknew He also predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son, in order that He might be the firstborn among many brothers. And those whom he predestined he also called, and those whom he called he also justified, and those whom he justified he also glorified" (Romans 8:28-30).

The saved (who chose Jesus) are called to His purpose. And that group of sheep that do get saved, were part of a predestined plan of salvation. It was all arranged to be possible for us beforehand. And this people (saved) God knows will choose Him. When we do choose Him we then start to be conformed to be like Him. We answer the call! Then, because of Christ we are justified. And of course we also will have eternal life. (glorified)

"Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us in Christ with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places, even as He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before Him.

We, the ones who choose Jesus, are saved because He chose to make a way for us before the foundation of the world (pre determined way so that there could be an 'us) and this means we will be holy and blameless before God. We are a work in progress.

In love He predestined us for adoption to himself as sons through Jesus Christ,

Yes it was predestined that we could be adopted. (Through Jesus)

I mean, if you can offer any kind of alternative explanation of those verses, then give it a try. <smile> I'm warning you, though, I've asked many a person for that, and all I have ever gotten is... crickets. <smile>

The trick is to remember the rest of the bible. How Jesus died for us so that we could be saved if we believe.

At any rate, God made us all, dad. Can He not do what he wants to do with any one of us? Does He not have a right over all His creation to do what He wants with it? These are the exact questions ~ rhetorical in nature ~ that Paul asks in Romans 9:19-24. Who are you, O man, to answer back to God? <shrug>

Not sure what you are trying to say there. Hopefully you are not suggesting that if He 'wants' He can just toss whoever into hell fire, and assure that they never got that 'call' you allude to?

And on top of that, dad, we are all by nature children of wrath, dead in our sin. He would be perfectly just not to have mercy or compassion on anybody. But then there is grace. "But God, being rich in mercy, because of the great love with which he loved us, even when we were dead in our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ⁠ ~ by grace you have been saved⁠..."

Yes, accepting His sacrifice is what saves us. Washed in His blood. ALL that come to Him He will in no possible way cast off.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Agreed. He calls all, in that all are called to repentance..

I agree, but doesn't that imply that all are capable of repenting of their sins? I believe so. But, you don't believe that, right? Why would all be called to repentance if some have no ability to repent?

. the general call of the Gospel goes out to all. But still... God has mercy on whom He has mercy, compassion on whom He has compassion. The inward call of God is issued only to God's elect... by His Spirit, and they are born again. Each at his appointed time. And then... he believes.

Explain why God would make "the general call of the Gospel" to all if not all are capable of answering the call by believing the gospel? Is He just playing games and teasing some people by pretending as if He is offering them a chance at salvation only to pull away the football at the last second like Lucy does to Charlie Brown (hopefully, you know this reference) to reveal that they never actually had a chance to be saved?

I would love for you to explain the purpose of the supposed "general call of the gospel" that "goes out to all".

 

[PinSeeker]

1 John 2:19 refers to people who were never saved as leaving John's circle of believers.

Yes, and any circle of believers, then and today and at all times between. Wow.

It is not a verse addressing believers and warning them about being deceived and turning away from God...

Right, but it is about the reason why those who were at one time with us are no longer with us. Because they were never of us, us who are of God.

so it has a different context than Hebrews 3:12.

What John says about their not having been of us is absolutely analogous to having an unbelieving heart, which is why they don't remain with us and why they fall away. You're just... avoiding, I guess.

You apparently think that Hebrews 3:12 is a warning that is not given to believers, but instead unbelievers.

No, that's not what I think, SI. <sigh>

You are obviously not reading John 17:12 carefully at all.

Dude. Get off this Judas thing. In the end, we agree about him. My goodness. Talk about obsessions...

<chuckles> How would you know if I know what he taught or not? You don't. But, I do. And he did not teach what I believe in relation to salvation, that's for sure.

Okay, well prove it. All you've done is say stuff. Maybe you'll convince me. <chuckles> Good luck...

I'm not surprised that your answer did not really answer the question.

I did. And it's not the first time...

Continued...

 

[PinSeeker]

2 of 3...

Your answer doesn't address how it came to be that they became children of the devil.

We've talked about that. SI, like it or not, at any one time, we are all ~ all ~ children of the devil. If you could bring yourself to actually digest what Paul says in Ephesians 2:1-3, you would not continue ~ over and over again ~ asking me to address that. By nature, we are all children of wrath, and, as Jesus says in John 8, not believing because we are children of the devil. And, our will, even before it is outwardly made manifest, even to ourselves, is to do his will. It applies to every single one of us... unless and until we are born again of the Spirit, in which case we then have this new spirit, even the Holy Spirit, and our will is then to do our Father's ~ God's ~ will.

You think they were just born that way...

Well, the Bible says it ~ David even says it of himself, in Psalm 51:5... "Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, and in sin did my mother conceive me" ~ so yes, I do think that... know it, actually. Sure.

and were destined to be children of the devil...

Well, we all are, although I wouldn't say "destined," we just are... But, still, some of us ~ you and me and dad are three ~ are predestined to be... yet again... chosen by God in Him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before Him... in God's love predestined for adoption to Himself as sons through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of His will... We have obtained an inheritance, having been predestined according to the purpose of Him Who works all things according to the counsel of His will, so that we who were the first to hope in Christ might be to the praise of His glory. And, in Him we also, when we heard the word of truth, the gospel of our salvation, and believed in him, were sealed with the promised Holy Spirit. Now, this very last part... we do have a part in this sealing, and it is very, very important; it is completed when we believe, but we do not seal ourselves.

Continued...

 

[PinSeeker]

<sigh> Still falling on concrete ears... <smile>... 3 of 3:

Couldn't help it? How do you come to that conclusion?

You, said that, SI. You said it. And my full quote, in response to your saying they "couldn't help it," was:

"So, "couldn't help it..." I mean, in a certain sense I guess you might say that. Again, your focus is on the will instead of what drives the will, the heart... what kind of spirit that person has. That really shouldn't be so hard to understand. But, denial is a thing, certainly...

Interesting. But not surprising. <smile> It's a microcosm of this whole "conversation," and many of the previous ones we've had.

You are completely ignoring my arguments and not addressing them.

No, I'm redirecting them to what they should be. Turning them on themselves, really.

Are you afraid to actually address them?

No. <smile> See above.

Paul clearly indicated that some who heard did not accept what they heard. This is undeniable.

Right, and I acknowledged that.

But, here you are acting as if hearing automatically results in faith.

But I explicitly said in my last post that was not and is not the case.

How do you, as a Calvinist, explain people hearing the gospel but not obeying and accepting it?

God has mercy on whom He has mercy, compassion on whom He has compassion. And drawing on Paul's words in Ephesians 2 about those of us who are born again of the Spirit, some hear, and are not born again of the Spirit, remaining what they always were by nature, children of wrath.

You don't even know what Calvinists typically believe.

I refute what you think Calvinists "typically believe." It takes... very little effort... <smile> ...but that's what I do. <smile> But hey, like I said, instead of just saying it, prove it. Give me a quote or two from John Calvin... or any one of any of the more contemporary folks, male or female, who believe as he did.

Most Calvinists would say that the hearing of the word automatically results in faith...

No, they wouldn't. SI. They wouldn't. Now, if they actually are members of God's elect, and they are appointed to eternal life ~ again, in the sense of those who heard Paul in Acts 13:48 ~ "And when the Gentiles heard this, they began rejoicing and glorifying the word of the Lord, and as many as were appointed to eternal life believed" ~ then, okay, although still, "automatically" is a wrongly used word, there, but it is their inevitable ~ but not "automatic" ~ response. They then believe, and freely so.

Ah, yes. Acts 13:48. One of many verses that Calvinists take out of context. It does not say those Gentiles were appointed to believe unto eternal life, as Calvinists imagine, it just says they were appointed to eternal life and points out that they believed.

Uh... that's kind of... discombobulated (which speaks volumes)... <chuckles> It just is what it is... <smile>

And eternal life obviously is only for those who believe (John 3:16).

Sure, but not primarily, not firstly, because they believe.

If you read a couple verses earlier it talks about the unbelieving Jews judging themselves unworthy of eternal life. What do Calvinists do with that verse?

We are all unworthy of eternal life, SI. We are all unworthy of God's grace. Every single one of us. As Paul says, "sin came into the world through one man... (Adam, of course) "...and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because..." (not when, SI, but because) "... all sinned⁠..." (Romans 5:12).

It was not dependent on God's choice of whether they were worthy of eternal life or not...

Of course not. And that's not "God's choice," but God's judgment, according to His justice. What Paul says in Romans 3 (quoting from Psalm 14) ~ just after speaking of unbelievers (mainly in Romans 1) and believers (in Romans 2) ~ is clear:

• "'None is righteous, no, not one; no one seeks for God. All have turned aside; together they have become worthless; no one does good, not even one'... all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and are justified by His grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, Whom God put forward as a propitiation by His blood, to be received by faith..."

And then in Romans 6:

• "...having been set free from sin, have become slaves of righteousness. I am speaking in human terms, because of your natural limitations. For just as you once presented your members as slaves to impurity and to lawlessness leading to more lawlessness, so now present your members as slaves to righteousness leading to sanctification. For when you were slaves of sin, you were free in regard to righteousness. But what fruit were you getting at that time from the things of which you are now ashamed? For the end of those things is death. But now that you have been set free from sin and have become slaves of God, the fruit you get leads to sanctification and its end, eternal life. For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord."

So, like Abraham, "we have been justified by faith..." ~ which is God's "...assurance of things hoped for, the conviction..." by the Holy Spirit, Who convicts "...of things not seen" (Hebrews 11:1) ~ "we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ" (Romans 5:1).

it was dependent on their choice that God requires all people to make.

No, it was made completely and outwardly manifest in us when we made the choice.

You did not. At all. Not even close.

Not to your satisfaction. Understood.

Do you really think that everyone is genuinely capable of either accepting or rejecting the gospel?

Have answered that in the affirmative many times... Yes...

• "All the ends of the earth have seen the salvation of our God" (Psalm 98:3).
• "For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made" (Romans 1:19-20).

And you know how Romans 1:20 ends... "So they are without excuse."

Why do you continue saying things that contradict what you believe? ... Why would you pretend to agree with me about something that you clearly do not agree with me about? Can you just be honest in this discussion? Is that too much to ask?

<eye roll>

Grace and peace to you, SI.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

What John says about their not having been of us is absolutely analogous to having an unbelieving heart, which is why they don't remain with us and why they fall away. You're just... avoiding, I guess.

You are avoiding the fact that Hebrews 3:12 is addressed only to believers, which means it is a warning for believers to not develop an unbelieving heart in departing from God. You continue to fail to address the actual arguments that I make. Hebrews 3:12 is not a warning for those who were never of us (believers) to be careful not to depart from God. They are already apart from God. You are completely failing to see what Hebrews 3:12-14 is about because of your doctrinal bias.

No, that's not what I think, SI. <sigh>


Dude. Get off this Judas thing. In the end, we agree about him. My goodness. Talk about obsessions...

Dude, make at least some effort to try to understand the points I'm making. It's valid to use Judas to support the point that not all who were given to Jesus by the Father are saved. Judas is one that was given to Jesus by the Father, but was lost.

Okay, well prove it. All you've done is say stuff. Maybe you'll convince me. <chuckles> Good luck...

I already have. You are just closed minded about this. If only you were open minded about this like you were about whether or not Judas was saved....

I did.

You did not. Your responses do not adequately address my arguments at all. Not even close. But, naturally, you can't understand that because you have your Calvinist blinders on.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

We've talked about that. SI, like it or not, at any one time, we are all ~ all ~ children of the devil. If you could bring yourself to actually digest what Paul says in Ephesians 2:1-3, you would not continue ~ over and over again ~ asking me to address that. By nature, we are all children of wrath, and, as Jesus says in John 8, not believing because we are children of the devil. And, our will, even before it is outwardly made manifest, even to ourselves, is to do his will. It applies to every single one of us... unless and until we are born again of the Spirit, in which case we then have this new spirit, even the Holy Spirit, and our will is then to do our Father's ~ God's ~ will.

When will you ever actually address my arguments instead of trying to get around them? Yes, we naturally sin and that makes us children of wrath (before we become saved, of course), but that is not the end of the story. Despite being children of wrath, all people are expected by God to not suppress the truth in unrighteousness and to not fail to glorify Him as God and to be thankful to Him (Romans 1:18-21). No one has any excuse for suppressing the truth in unrighteousness and not glorifying God and being thankful to Him. So, what do you suppose is the reason that some suppress the truth in unrighteousness and don't glorify God and aren't thankful to Him, despite having no excuse for that? It should be clear what the reason is. It's because we have free will and some choose not to do what they are fully capable of doing (accepting the truth and glorifying God and being thankful to Him). That is the reason that people reject the gospel. It's not because they can't accept it due to not being born of the Spirit, as you imagine. People who have not been born again of the Spirit have no excuse for suppressing the truth. But, your doctrine gives them an excuse.

Well, the Bible says it ~ David even says it of himself, in Psalm 51:5... "Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, and in sin did my mother conceive me" ~ so yes, I do think that... know it, actually. Sure.

You can't know something to be true that is false. Why are you willing to interpret that verse in a way that contradicts many other verses? Your cherry picking method of interpreting scripture is a bad approach. We are not born dead in sin as you imagine. That is not what that verse is saying. If that was the case then all babies and toddlers who die would go to hell. Paul taught that we don't become dead in sin until we understand what sin is, as he indicated here:

Romans 7:9 Once I was alive apart from the law; but when the commandment came, sin sprang to life and I died. 10 I found that the very commandment that was intended to bring life actually brought death. 11 For sin, seizing the opportunity afforded by the commandment, deceived me, and through the commandment put me to death.

I guarantee that Paul did not interpret Psalm 51:5 the way you do because he did not teach that people are born dead in their sins. What sins has a newborn committed? None. So, to think that people are born dead in their sins is complete nonsense. A person can't be held responsible for sinning if they don't even know what sin is. Think, man!

What Psalm 51:5 means is the same as what other scripture indicates is that we have a natural tendency to sin. Some translations call that "the flesh" and some call it the "sinful nature". But, that "sinful nature" does not manifest itself immediately from birth. Hello? Babies can't sin. Toddlers might disobey their parents, but they don't really know what they're doing. Eventually, all people will sin but they don't sin right from birth. As Paul taught, someone does not become dead in their sins until they understand what sin is.

 

[PinSeeker]

No. Never. Being a son of Abraham by faith has nothing to do with pedigree

It does... if, dad, if, you mean 'pedigree' not in the sense of ethnicity, but rather through the promise, through the child of the promise, Isaac.

What was the verse that said Israel is everyone? I must have missed that.

Well yeah, me too. Israel is not everyone... and not even all those who are ethnically Jewish. Is this not what I have said? It is...

The promised land is still what it was.

No, the lesser pointed to... foreshadowed... the greater. In the same sense as all the elements of the law, like concerning murder and adultery, are really far greater than just the lesser thing, which is what Jesus said in all his "but I tell you" statements in the Sermon on the Mount.

When Jesus talks to us He makes it clear it is a city He prepared in heaven, not the promised land on earth. For the remnant He also made it clear it will be the promised land on earth

Right, we are that city, the City of God, and we will inhabit the whole earth, which will be without sin... completely made new by God.

Everything about salvation depends on God, and not what we do. Salvation that only comes after we decide to come to Him.

This is, dad, an absolute contradiction. Yes, everything about salvation depends on God, and not what we do, just as you said. But in the second sentence, you totally refute what you literally just said., which is really that salvation depends solely on our decision, that God gives us salvation based solely on our decision, which is a work, to come to him.

Some of the promises are for saved Israel in the end.

All of God's promises have their 'yes' and 'amen' in Christ. And... we are all in Christ, one in Christ Jesus.

He that works in us makes us new. We do not make ourselves new first.

Uh, right; I agree... <smile> But you and SI are both in effect saying that we decide to be made new, and that God's decision to make us new is based on our decision, which is a work... which is putting the cart before the horse.

Nor do we get born again before we are born again.

LOL! I agree! LOL! But, nor do we make a decision to be born again before we are born again. <smile> Dead is dead, dad. By nature, we are dead in our sin.

Ask a specific question...

I did. <smile> I asked you to back up what you said (if you can) with Scripture. This speaks volumes...

Name me one nation or race or group or whatever that you claim is not able to be saved?

Well, if you mean individuals in those nations or people groups, there is not one not able to be saved. With God all things are possible...

Who is not 'appointed' for possible salvation?

Uhhhh... <chuckles> ...those not appointed for salvation. By saying "those appointed for salvation" in Acts 13:48, dad, as Luke does, is to say implicitly, there were those there who were not appointed for salvation. But we cannot know who is and is not appointed; God is the Appointer... <smile>

You seem to be peddling the idea that His selective respecter of persons love is only for some privileged minority, unlike the majority of mankind?

Hmmm... the words that you use here are troubling, like, "respecter of persons" (all of God's creation was originally, before the Fall of Adam and Eve, "very good") and "privileged minority"... God chose those of all His creation for His own glory. Everything He does is for His own glory.

No idea what you are trying to say.

<chuckles>

Apparently it might be that you think that if God allows choice, then He is small?

No... <chuckles>

Accepting a free gift from Him does not make us 'more powerful than God'

I agree; that's not what I have said. Read what I said again, dad, and don't turn it into something I didn't say. <smile>

You seem to have no real argument or case.

<chuckles> It's not really me making it...

You inserted that bit. The call of God is out there, but we have to hear it/accept it. It is some presto chango sneaky magic call that only some select few get...

There is a general call of the Gospel, general in the sense that it goes out to all, and there is an inward call by the Spirit, which is not general, not given to all but only God's elect. And this is God's purpose of election, as Paul says of Jacob and Esau, using them as examples, "though they were not yet born and had done nothing either good or bad⁠ ~ in order that God’s purpose of election might continue, not because of works but because of Him Who calls..."

while the rest of mankind is doomed to hell

We are all naturally "doomed,"... "by nature children of wrath." Completely undeserving of God's grace. All of us. No exceptions.

And that 'whom' is precisely those that choose Him! THAT is whom He chooses to have mercy on!

"...it depends not on human will or exertion, but on God, who has mercy." (Romans 9:16)

He will have compassion on all that ask and receive. That is whom He has compassion on

"...it depends not on human will or exertion, but on God, who has mercy." (Romans 9:16)

Yes until we are born of the spirit, we are dead. ..and..?

<smile> Can you do anything, choose anything, believe in anything when you are dead, dad?

That which is born of the spirit is that person that comes to Jesus.

We come to Jesus because we are born of the Spirit. This does not mean that we don't ~ or can't, in the sense of inability ~ make our own decision to come to Jesus.

Not some pre born special few. Otherwise he died for nothing

"Pre-born"? Ugh. "Pre-chosen" and "pre-born" are not equivalent or synonymous terms, dad.

But He gives it anyhow! That is the nice thing about mercy and a gift

Where exactly is the verse you allude to?

The saved (who chose Jesus) are called to His purpose.

But not because they chose Jesus. What you're saying here, dad, is that God's call depends on our choosing ~ which is a work and directly opposes Paul's statement that (yet again) "...it depends not on human will or exertion, but on God, who has mercy." (Romans 9:16)

And that group of sheep that do get saved, were part of a predestined plan of salvation. It was all arranged to be possible for us beforehand. And this people (saved) God knows will choose Him. When we do choose Him we then start to be conformed to be like Him. We answer the call! Then, because of Christ we are justified. And of course we also will have eternal life. (glorified)

We, the ones who choose Jesus, are saved because He chose to make a way for us before the foundation of the world (pre determined way so that there could be an 'us) and this means we will be holy and blameless before God. We are a work in progress.

Yes it was predestined that we could be adopted. (Through Jesus)

That we would be. Paul, in Ephesians 1:4-5 (yet again): "He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before Him. In love He predestined us for adoption to himself as sons through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of His will..."

The trick is to remember the rest of the bible.

I agree... <smile>

How Jesus died for us so that we could be saved if we believe.

Well, and that we would be, made manifest in us when we believe.

Not sure what you are trying to say there.

Ohhhh, I think you are... <smile> But fair enough. <smile>

Hopefully you are not suggesting that if He 'wants' He can just toss whoever into hell fire, and assure that they never got that 'call' you allude to?

Well no, there's Scripture (Paul, in 1 Timothy 2:4) that does explicitly say that his desire is the opposite of what you say here, which you know, I'm sure... <smile> But... He calls who He calls, and this is His right, as He is the potter and we are the clay, all made out of the same lump... So, again, He has mercy and compassion on those whom He has mercy and compassion...

Yes, accepting His sacrifice is what saves us.

Works don't save, dad. You said it yourself. And I agree with that... <smile>

Washed in His blood.

Which is His doing.

ALL that come to Him He will in no possible way cast off.

Absolutely.

Grace and peace to you.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

<sigh> Still falling on concrete ears... <smile>... 3 of 3:

Look in the mirror. Your ears are completely plugged up when it comes to this topic.

You, said that, SI. You said it. And my full quote, in response to your saying they "couldn't help it," was:

"So, "couldn't help it..." I mean, in a certain sense I guess you might say that. Again, your focus is on the will instead of what drives the will, the heart... what kind of spirit that person has. That really shouldn't be so hard to understand. But, denial is a thing, certainly...

Like your denial that you give man an excuse for rejecting the gospel with your doctrine? Your doctrine says that those who reject the gospel can't help but reject the gospel because they can only accept it if God makes them born again of the Spirit. But, scripture says that NO ONE has any excuse for suppressing the truth. Which means EVERYONE is capable of accepting the truth without the need for being born again of the Spirit first. Talk about denial! You deny this truth.

Jesus called sinners to repentance. Tell me, did He make any exceptions? Not that I can see. So, that means he calls all sinners to repentance? Do you deny that?

Mark 2:16 And when the scribes [a]and Pharisees saw Him eating with the tax collectors and sinners, they said to His disciples, “How is it that He eats and drinks with tax collectors and sinners?” 17 When Jesus heard it, He said to them, “Those who are well have no need of a physician, but those who are sick. I did not come to call the righteous, but sinners, to repentance.”

Tell me what the reason is for people who Jesus fully expects and requires to repent to not do so? Because God didn't give them the ability to do so by making them born again of the Spirit? No. That would give them an excuse for not doing so. But, they have no excuse. Why can't you see that your doctrine gives people an excuse for not repenting and not believing the truth despite the fact that no one has an excuse for that?

God has mercy on whom He has mercy, compassion on whom He has compassion. And drawing on Paul's words in Ephesians 2 about those of us who are born again of the Spirit, some hear, and are not born again of the Spirit, remaining what they always were by nature, children of wrath.

How do you reconcile your understanding of God having mercy on whom He has mercy with God wanting to have mercy on all people (Romans 11:30-32)? That means God does not have mercy on people unconditionally or else He would have mercy on all people. His conditions for having mercy on people are that He requires them to choose to repent and put their faith in Jesus Christ as their personal Lord and Savior (Romans 10:9-12).

I refute what you think Calvinists "typically believe." It takes... very little effort... <smile> ...but that's what I do. <smile> But hey, like I said, instead of just saying it, prove it. Give me a quote or two from John Calvin... or any one of any of the more contemporary folks, male or female, who believe as he did.

You demand that I give a quote or two from John Calvin when you haven't even done so yourself. No, YOU prove that your belief lines up with Calvin's and what most Calvinists believe. I already know otherwise. If you want to deny that, so be it.

No, they wouldn't. SI. They wouldn't. Now, if they actually are members of God's elect, and they are appointed to eternal life ~ again, in the sense of those who heard Paul in Acts 13:48 ~ "And when the Gentiles heard this, they began rejoicing and glorifying the word of the Lord, and as many as were appointed to eternal life believed" ~ then, okay, although still, "automatically" is a wrongly used word, there, but it is their inevitable ~ but not "automatic" ~ response. They then believe, and freely so.

Come on, buddy. Why do you insist on being so dishonest in these discussions? You think I can't see through that? Tell me this. Do you think there was any chance that any of them could have chosen not to believe? You believe that they were appointed to believe rather than them freely choosing to believe (while they could have instead chosen not to believe), do you not? You believe that God chooses who will believe or not, right? So, your interpretation of Acts 13:48 is based on that belief. LOL at you saying their inevitable, but not automatic, response was to believe. What is the difference? You don't think they could have chosen not to believe, so saying that their response to believe was automatic is accurate from your doctrinal perspective. It's funny how Calvinists like you squirm when words like "automatic" and "forced" are used to describe your beliefs.

Uh... that's kind of... discombobulated (which speaks volumes)... <chuckles> It just is what it is... <smile>

It's not discombobulated at all if you didn't have your Calvinist blinders on. It's a FACT that it doesn't say in Acts 13:48 that they were appointed to believe.

We are all unworthy of eternal life, SI. We are all unworthy of God's grace. Every single one of us. As Paul says, "sin came into the world through one man... (Adam, of course) "...and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because..." (not when, SI, but because) "... all sinned⁠..." (Romans 5:12).

As is almost always the case, you're not seeing the point. Yes, we are all unworthy of eternal life, but that is not the context of Acts 13:46. In the sense that you're talking about, we don't judge ourselves unworthy of eternal life, God does because of the wages of sin, which is death (Romans 6:23). Acts 13:46 has a different context than that.

Acts 13:46 And Paul and Barnabas spoke out boldly, saying, “It was necessary that the word of God be spoken first to you. Since you thrust it aside and judge yourselves unworthy of eternal life, behold, we are turning to the Gentiles.

Frankly, it would have been wrong and stupid for Paul and Barnabas to tell those Jews that they judged themselves unworthy of eternal life if they were talking in the context that you are talking about because they would be contradicting the fact that God judges all people unworthy of eternal life in the sense that we are all sinners who fall short of His glory (Romans 3:23). But, because of His grace and because He is love, God offers all people salvation and eternal life, anyway (Titus 2:11).

So, what Paul and Barnabas were saying in Acts 13:46 is that eternal life was being offered to those Jews and they were given the opportunity to accept it, but since they rejected it they judged themselves unworthy of eternal life. God judged them worthy of eternal life, not because they deserved it, but because of His grace, but they judged themselves unworthy of it. The responsibility for not having eternal life lies completely on those unbelieving Jews rather than it being because God didn't predestine them to eternal life by His choice alone. They had the ability to accept God's offer of eternal life, but chose to reject it and that's why Paul and Barnabas said they judged themselves unworthy of eternal life.

Of course not. And that's not "God's choice," but God's judgment, according to His justice.

Did you forget what I was talking about, which was Acts 13:46? It says those Jewish unbelievers judged themselves unworthy of eternal life and doesn't say God judged them unworthy. What is your understanding of what sense they judged themselves unworthy of eternal life?

Have answered that in the affirmative many times... Yes...

• "All the ends of the earth have seen the salvation of our God" (Psalm 98:3).
• "For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made" (Romans 1:19-20).

And you know how Romans 1:20 ends... "So they are without excuse."

Just for reference, this was your response to my question "Do you really think that everyone is genuinely capable of either accepting or rejecting the gospel?".

Can you explain how your belief that people can only repent and believe if God gives them repentance and faith can be reconciled with your claim that that everyone is capable of either accepting or rejecting the gospel? How exactly are those who God did not choose to give repentance and faith to genuinely capable of accepting the gospel (accepting Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior)?

 

[PinSeeker]

You are avoiding the fact that Hebrews 3:12 is addressed only to believers...

No I'm not... I agree... <smile>

, which means it is a warning for believers to not develop an unbelieving heart...

Ah! There it is: "develop an unbelieving heart." That is NOT what the text says, SI, and you know it. Or, if you don't, wow. No, the unbelieving heart is not "developed," as if it were once believing and then at some point unbelieving. It is a warning, I agree... and an exhortation to continual self-reflection, really, to "Take care, brothers, lest there be in any of you an evil, unbelieving heart, leading you to fall away from the living God." That phrase, "lest there be" ~ BE ~ is very important, SI. Greatly important.

in departing from God. You continue to fail to address the actual arguments that I make.

In your opinion. Fair enough. I'm just not addressing them in the way you want me to. I can't help that; that's all you.

Hebrews 3:12 is not a warning for those who were never of us (believers) to be careful not to depart from God. They are already apart from God. You are completely failing to see what Hebrews 3:12-14 is about because of your doctrinal bias.


Dude, make at least some effort to try to understand the points I'm making.

Yeah, it takes very little effort. That's the problem. <smile> I would say the very same to you, SI.

It's valid to use Judas to support the point that not all who were given to Jesus by the Father are saved. Judas is one that was given to Jesus by the Father, but was lost.

Yet Jesus says, in John 10, "My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me. I give them eternal life, and they will never perish, and no one will snatch them out of My hand. My Father, Who has given them to Me, is greater than all, and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father’s hand. I and the Father are one." So, was Jesus lying? Or just deceived or wrong? Well, none of the above, of course. We have to conclude that Judas was never really given to Jesus by the Father... was never really one of His sheep.

I already have.

No, you have never offered anything in the way of a direct John Calvin quote or of anyone who understands things along the same lines as he. You never have. It has always been, every time, just a statement of yours. Every time. I mean, give it a try. I would say don't waste your time trying, because you will not find anything, but hey, knock yourself out. Give it a try. Good luck.

You are just closed minded about this.

And I say you are.

You did not.

I did.

Your responses do not adequately address my arguments at all. Not even close.

In... your... humble... <smile> ...opinion. Okay, fair enough. <smile>

But, naturally, you can't understand that because you have your Calvinist blinders on.

To make a statement like that, you have to know what Calvinism is... <chuckles>

When will you ever actually address my arguments instead of trying to get around them?

I have. Over and over again... and over and over and over... again.

Yes, we naturally sin and that makes us children of wrath (before we become saved, of course)...

And why do we naturally sin, SI? I mean, focus on the word 'naturally' there... <smile>

I guarantee that Paul did not interpret Psalm 51:5 the way you do because he did not teach that people are born dead in their sins.

Wow. I mean concerning Psalm 51:5, he obviously did, precisely because he said, of believing Christians, that before they were born again of the Spirit, they ~ we ~ were children of wrath, just as the rest of mankind is. There is no "before that." We were dead, and we have been made alive in Christ... which is exactly what Peter says in 1 Peter 1:3-5, that God "has caused us to be born again to a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, to an inheritance that is imperishable, undefiled, and unfading, kept in heaven for (us), who by God’s power are being guarded through faith for a salvation ready to be revealed in the last time."

There is nothing in either passage about us making a decision to follow God/Jesus before this happens. Nothing. And precisely the opposite; it is all the doing of God, according to His will.

What sins has a newborn committed? None.

Right; doesn't matter whether we have sinned or not, but that we have it in our hearts, that our hearts ~ yes, from birth, even from conception, as David says ~ are sinful.

So, to think that people are born dead in their sins is complete nonsense.

I mean you can think what you want, certainly. But Scripture says otherwise. Over and over again.

A person can't be held responsible for sinning if they don't even know what sin is.

It's not about the actual sinning, but the natural propensity to do so, which, even from conception, makes it inevitable that they will.

Think, man!

Right back atcha.

What Psalm 51:5 means is the same as what other scripture indicates is that we have a natural tendency to sin.

Yes, and there is nothing else, initially. Again, why do we have this... using your own words, here... "natural tendency to sin"...?

Some translations call that "the flesh" and some call it the "sinful nature"

Right; same thing.

But, that "sinful nature" does not manifest itself immediately from birth.

A person's nature is what it is, even from birth. I agree that it does not manifest itself outwardly for... maybe a minute or two... <smile> ...or maybe even a year or two. <smile> But it will, without fail. Yeah, I remember my kids' "terrible twos." <smile> But yeah, it will, without fail... which is no laughing matter.

Eventually, all people will sin...

There you go.

As Paul taught, someone does not become dead in their sins until they understand what sin is.

He did not teach this. The sinful heart is the issue.

Grace and peace.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

LOL! I agree! LOL! But, nor do we make a decision to be born again before we are born again. <smile> Dead is dead, dad. By nature, we are dead in our sin.

Please tell me exactly what you think it means to be dead in our sin. And please tell me what you think the difference is between being dead in our sin and being spiritually sick, as Jesus described the condition of sinners.

Mark 2:16 And when the scribes and Pharisees saw Him eating with the tax collectors and sinners, they said to His disciples, “How is it that He eats and drinks with tax collectors and sinners?” 17 When Jesus heard it, He said to them, “Those who are well have no need of a physician, but those who are sick. I did not come to call the righteous, but sinners, to repentance.”

 

[PinSeeker]

Look in the mirror. Your ears are completely plugged up when it comes to this topic.


Like your denial that you give man an excuse for rejecting the gospel with your doctrine? Your doctrine says that those who reject the gospel can't help but reject the gospel because they can only accept it if God makes them born again of the Spirit. But, scripture says that NO ONE has any excuse for suppressing the truth. Which means EVERYONE is capable of accepting the truth without the need for being born again of the Spirit first. Talk about denial! You deny this truth.

Jesus called sinners to repentance. Tell me, did He make any exceptions? Not that I can see. So, that means he calls all sinners to repentance? Do you deny that?

Mark 2:16 And when the scribes [a]and Pharisees saw Him eating with the tax collectors and sinners, they said to His disciples, “How is it that He eats and drinks with tax collectors and sinners?” 17 When Jesus heard it, He said to them, “Those who are well have no need of a physician, but those who are sick. I did not come to call the righteous, but sinners, to repentance.”

Tell me what the reason is for people who Jesus fully expects and requires to repent to not do so? Because God didn't give them the ability to do so by making them born again of the Spirit? No. That would give them an excuse for not doing so. But, they have no excuse. Why can't you see that your doctrine gives people an excuse for not repenting and not believing the truth despite the fact that no one has an excuse for that?


How do you reconcile your understanding of God having mercy on whom He has mercy with God wanting to have mercy on all people (Romans 11:30-32)? That means God does not have mercy on people unconditionally or else He would have mercy on all people. His conditions for having mercy on people are that He requires them to choose to repent and put their faith in Jesus Christ as their personal Lord and Savior (Romans 10:9-12).


You demand that I give a quote or two from John Calvin when you haven't even done so yourself. No, YOU prove that your belief lines up with Calvin's and what most Calvinists believe. I already know otherwise. If you want to deny that, so be it.


Come on, buddy. Why do you insist on being so dishonest in these discussions? You think I can't see through that? Tell me this. Do you think there was any chance that any of them could have chosen not to believe? You believe that they were appointed to believe rather than them freely choosing to believe (while they could have instead chosen not to believe), do you not? You believe that God chooses who will believe or not, right? So, your interpretation of Acts 13:48 is based on that belief. LOL at you saying their inevitable, but not automatic, response was to believe. What is the difference? You don't think they could have chosen not to believe, so saying that their response to believe was automatic is accurate from your doctrinal perspective. It's funny how Calvinists like you squirm when words like "automatic" and "forced" are used to describe your beliefs.


It's not discombobulated at all if you didn't have your Calvinist blinders on. It's a FACT that it doesn't say in Acts 13:48 that they were appointed to believe.


As is almost always the case, you're not seeing the point. Yes, we are all unworthy of eternal life, but that is not the context of Acts 13:46. In the sense that you're talking about, we don't judge ourselves unworthy of eternal life, God does because of the wages of sin, which is death (Romans 6:23). Acts 13:46 has a different context than that.

Acts 13:46 And Paul and Barnabas spoke out boldly, saying, “It was necessary that the word of God be spoken first to you. Since you thrust it aside and judge yourselves unworthy of eternal life, behold, we are turning to the Gentiles.

Frankly, it would have been wrong and stupid for Paul and Barnabas to tell those Jews that they judged themselves unworthy of eternal life if they were talking in the context that you are talking about because they would be contradicting the fact that God judges all people unworthy of eternal life in the sense that we are all sinners who fall short of His glory (Romans 3:23). But, because of His grace and because He is love, God offers all people salvation and eternal life, anyway (Titus 2:11).

So, what Paul and Barnabas were saying in Acts 13:46 is that eternal life was being offered to those Jews and they were given the opportunity to accept it, but since they rejected it they judged themselves unworthy of eternal life. God judged them worthy of eternal life, not because they deserved it, but because of His grace, but they judged themselves unworthy of it. The responsibility for not having eternal life lies completely on those unbelieving Jews rather than it being because God didn't predestine them to eternal life by His choice alone. They had the ability to accept God's offer of eternal life, but chose to reject it and that's why Paul and Barnabas said they judged themselves unworthy of eternal life.


Did you forget what I was talking about, which was Acts 13:46? It says those Jewish unbelievers judged themselves unworthy of eternal life and doesn't say God judged them unworthy. What is your understanding of what sense they judged themselves unworthy of eternal life?


Just for reference, this was your response to my question "Do you really think that everyone is genuinely capable of either accepting or rejecting the gospel?".

Can you explain how your belief that people can only repent and believe if God gives them repentance and faith can be reconciled with your claim that that everyone is capable of either accepting or rejecting the gospel? How exactly are those who God did not choose to give repentance and faith to genuinely capable of accepting the gospel (accepting Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior)?

Out of all this, I'm going to pull out one little thing... for two reasons: 1) because so much of what you ask, say, assert, whatever... I've directly addressed over and over again, and 2) because it's a microcosm of this whole discussion:

You demand that I give a quote or two from John Calvin when you haven't even done so yourself. No, YOU prove that your belief lines up with Calvin's and what most Calvinists believe. I already know otherwise. If you want to deny that, so be it.

I didn't demand anything; far be it from me to do that. But it's you that keeps saying, in this thread and others, that Calvin said this and that, and Calvinists believe this and that. So... I've refuted those things many times, and yes, I could give you quotes stating otherwise; I have Calvin's Institutes right here with me within reaching distance. But since you say those things, I think it incumbent upon you to give some kind of evidence, rather than just, you know, saying stuff, making assertions and accusations. If you don't want to, then, okay, fair enough. But like I said, trying to turn it around on me speaks volumes.

Grace and peace to you, SI.

 

[PinSeeker]

Please tell me exactly what you think it means to be dead in our sin.

You know, I'm not being coy (though you will almost surely think or say I am), but dead is dead. <smile> There is no ambiguity.

And please tell me what you think the difference is between being dead in our sin and being spiritually sick, as Jesus described the condition of sinners.

None. The latter, in need of a physician (the Physician, in this case), certainly, without which he or she cannot be made well. But I'm glad you say "condition of sinners," here; because of this condition of sinners ~ and thus desiring to do the will of the devil ~ he or she will not call on that Physician. He or she could, but will not. And will not even know he or she is sick, will think of himself or herself not in need of any physician because, like Paul says to the Corinthians, he or she thinks the Gospel to be foolishness.

Grace and peace to you.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

No I'm not... I agree... <smile>

Okay, so you agree that Hebrews 3:12 is only addressed to believers.

Hebrews 3:12 Beware, brethren, lest there be in any of you an evil heart of unbelief in departing from the living God;

If this is only addressed to believers, as you agree is the case, then that means this is a warning to saved believers to beware and examine themselves and check their hearts and to be careful not to depart from the living God. How else can this be understood with the understanding that this is addressed only to believers?

Ah! There it is: "develop an unbelieving heart." That is NOT what the text says, SI, and you know it.

It's what the text means. What else can it mean when, as you agreed, it is addressed to believers?

Or, if you don't, wow.

Wow yourself, buddy. I don't these kinds of condescending responses from someone who is as blind about this topic as you are. Spare me.

No, the unbelieving heart is not "developed," as if it were once believing and then at some point unbelieving.

Hello? Did you not agree that Hebrews 3:12 is addressed to believers? How else can a believer have a heart of unbelief unless they stopped believing? Goodness sakes...

It is a warning, I agree... and an exhortation to continual self-reflection, really, to "Take care, brothers, lest there be in any of you an evil, unbelieving heart, leading you to fall away from the living God." That phrase, "lest there be" ~ BE ~ is very important, SI. Greatly important.

Say what now? Don't speak in code. What are you talking about here? Do you see it as a genuine warning to believers or not?

In your opinion. Fair enough. I'm just not addressing them in the way you want me to. I can't help that; that's all you.

No, you could do a much better job of addressing them and that's all you. Unless I'm overestimating your capabilities, which, I guess, is possible.

Yeah, it takes very little effort. That's the problem. <smile> I would say the very same to you, SI.

But, I can say it legitimately and you can't. But, while you have your Calvinist blinders on you can't understand that.

Yet Jesus says, in John 10, "My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me. I give them eternal life, and they will never perish, and no one will snatch them out of My hand. My Father, Who has given them to Me, is greater than all, and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father’s hand. I and the Father are one." So, was Jesus lying? Or just deceived or wrong? Well, none of the above, of course. We have to conclude that Judas was never really given to Jesus by the Father... was never really one of His sheep.

Your doctrinal bias clouds your understanding of so much scripture. It's sad to witness. You fail to ever take man's responsibility into account. Yes, it's true that no one can just snatch anyone who is given to Jesus out of the Father's hand. But, because you don't really believe in free will (even though you claim that you do - lol), you don't understand that someone can choose to no longer want to follow Jesus and depart from Him. The warning in Hebrews 3:12 is not just an empty threat given to believers. It's a sincere warning that we all have to take seriously and do whatever we can to help prevent it from happening.

If someone decides to no longer follow Jesus and leaves Him, does that mean someone snatched that person out of the Father's hand? No. They willingly left rather than being snatched away. You're always only looking at part of the story instead of the whole story and that's why you don't understand the truth as it relates to this topic and you remain duped by Calvinism.

No, you have never offered anything in the way of a direct John Calvin quote or of anyone who understands things along the same lines as he. You never have. It has always been, every time, just a statement of yours. Every time. I mean, give it a try. I would say don't waste your time trying, because you will not find anything, but hey, knock yourself out. Give it a try. Good luck.

And where are your John Calvin quotes? It appears that neither of us wants to bother taking the time quoting him. So...whatever.

To make a statement like that, you have to know what Calvinism is... <chuckles>

Thankfully, I do. Despite being one yourself, you don't even fully know what it is.

I have. Over and over again... and over and over and over... again.

You have not. You often ignore my arguments. Such as what I said about Romans 7:9-11. No response from you about that at all. You just instead repeat your same old spiel and still try to claim that people are dead in sin from birth despite Paul saying that he became dead in sin only once he understood what sin is.

And why do we naturally sin, SI? I mean, focus on the word 'naturally' there... <smile>

Because we have a natural tendency to sin. Hello? I already said that. But, we don't actually sin right from birth. So, we are not born dead in sin. As Paul said, we become dead in sins when we come to understand what sin is. How can someone be dead in sins before even knowing what sin is? That makes no sense whatsoever. The wages of sin is death which refers to eternal death that Paul contrasted with the gift of God, which is eternal life (Romans 6:23) . Do you think the wages of sin being death (eternal death - the second death) applies to babies and toddlers and anyone who doesn't understand what sin is?

Wow.

Wow yourself. You only say this because you have failed to make the effort to really think about all these things in depth. You just go by what you've been taught in Calvinism and you've never thought about these things objectively. So, you say "wow" any time someone says something that doesn't follow what you've been taught.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

I mean concerning Psalm 51:5, he obviously did, precisely because he said, of believing Christians, that before they were born again of the Spirit, they ~ we ~ were children of wrath, just as the rest of mankind is. There is no "before that." We were dead, and we have been made alive in Christ... which is exactly what Peter says in 1 Peter 1:3-5, that God "has caused us to be born again to a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, to an inheritance that is imperishable, undefiled, and unfading, kept in heaven for (us), who by God’s power are being guarded through faith for a salvation ready to be revealed in the last time."

There is nothing in either passage about us making a decision to follow God/Jesus before this happens. Nothing. And precisely the opposite; it is all the doing of God, according to His will.

You bring up Psalm 51:5 and proceed to not even address what it actually says. Where did Paul or Peter indicate anywhere that people are born dead in sin? Nowhere. Paul taught otherwise in Romans 7:9-11 where he said that he became dead in sin after learning about what sin is by way of the law. When the Spirit makes us born again, that, of course, is the Spirit's doing, but nowhere does it say that the Spirit just does that randomly rather than in response to someone doing what God requires of everyone, which is to repent and believe.

John 1:12 indicates that someone becomes a child of God after believing. It should be obvious that no one is born of God until they become a child of God. Therefore, becoming a born again child of God comes after faith.

Right; doesn't matter whether we have sinned or not, but that we have it in our hearts, that our hearts ~ yes, from birth, even from conception, as David says ~ are sinful.

Doesn't matter whether we have sinned or not? Will you please get serious? How do you expect me to take this nonsense seriously? I can't. If what you were saying was true, which, thank God, it is not, then babies, toddlers and anyone who is not capable of sinning would all end up in the lake of fire because the wages of sin is eternal death (the second death).

Do all people eventually sin if they live long enough to do so? Yes (Romans 3:23). But, are people sinful and dead in sins from birth? Absolutely not! You can't say that someone is sinful who doesn't even know what sin is! You are not even thinking here at all. You are so blinded by Calvinism that you have thrown logic completely out the window here.

If even small children are considered to be sinful and dead in their sins, explain why Jesus said this...

Matthew 19:13 Then children were brought to him that he might lay his hands on them and pray. The disciples rebuked the people, 14 but Jesus said, “Let the little children come to me and do not hinder them, for to such belongs the kingdom of heaven.” 15 And he laid his hands on them and went away.

What do you think Jesus was saying here? Something like this? "Let the little sinful, spiritually dead rebels come to me because to such belongs the kingdom of heaven"? Of course not. Little children don't have a full understanding of sin and its consequences. Generally, they are innocent and have yet to have sinful desires manifested in them. Jesus wants people to be humble like little children generally are because that is the type of people who belong in the kingdom of God/heaven.

I mean you can think what you want, certainly. But Scripture says otherwise. Over and over again.

No, scripture NEVER says that people are born dead in their sins. How interesting that you haven't bothered to address what I showed you from Romans 7:9-11. Are you waiting until you find a way around it to address it?

Romans 7:9 I was once alive apart from the law, but when the commandment came, sin came alive and I died. 10 The very commandment that promised life proved to be death to me. 11 For sin, seizing an opportunity through the commandment, deceived me and through it killed me.

In what sense do you think Paul was saying he was "once alive apart from the law"? In what sense do you think Paul "died" when "the commandment came and sin came alive"? In what sense did sin, through the commandment, deceive and kill Paul?

It's not about the actual sinning, but the natural propensity to do so, which, even from conception, makes it inevitable that they will.

Yes, of course. That's what I've been saying. But, don't you believe that people are born dead in their sins? If so, how can that be the case before they actually sin?

Yes, and there is nothing else, initially. Again, why do we have this... using your own words, here... "natural tendency to sin"...?

Because that was passed down from Adam. We all inherit that.

Romans 6:12 Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned— 13 for sin indeed was in the world before the law was given, but sin is not counted where there is no law.

A person's nature is what it is, even from birth. I agree that it does not manifest itself outwardly for... maybe a minute or two... <smile> ...or maybe even a year or two. <smile> But it will, without fail. Yeah, I remember my kids' "terrible twos." <smile> But yeah, it will, without fail... which is no laughing matter.

So, do you think that when your kids were two years old that they knew exactly what they were doing and understood the consequences and if they had died when they were two they would eventually have to stand before the judgment seat of Christ to explain themselves and give an account of what they had done?

He did not teach this. The sinful heart is the issue.

Are you just not willing to address the scriptures which say otherwise? See Romans 7:9-11 above. Paul said he was alive without the law, but the commandments of the law made him aware of sin and that killed him (made him dead in his sins). So, yes, he did teach this. But, you are not willing to take ALL of scripture into account when it comes to this topic and would prefer to cherry pick whatever scriptures you think you can manipulate to fit your doctrine while ignoring the rest.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

You know, I'm not being coy (though you will almost surely think or say I am), but dead is dead. <smile> There is no ambiguity.

Why are you not willing to dig deeper when it comes to this topic? Afraid of what you might discover? This response is extremely weak. Dead is dead is a non-answer. When it comes to physical death, that results in separation of the body from the soul and spirit. When it comes to the second death, that results in eternal separation from God (2 Thess 1:9). So, when you say "dead is dead" does that mean you understand that death is related to separation rather than to what someone is capable of doing? I can only guess as to what that means to you because you are just being vague for no reason.

What does being dead in sins mean to you exactly? You should be able to answer this simple question.

None. The latter, in need of a physician (the Physician, in this case), certainly, without which he or she cannot be made well.

So, you say there is no difference between dead in sins and being spiritually sick, which is correct. Great job! Well done. I have no prizes for you, sadly. Yes, of course, one cannot be made will without the physician. But, are sick people capable of acknowledging that they are sick and need the physician to heal them? Yes, they are. Since Jesus was saying that sinners are sick and that He calls them to repentance that means sinners are all capable of acknowledging their sins and calling on the Great Physician, Jesus, to heal them spiritually.

But I'm glad you say "condition of sinners," here; because of this condition of sinners ~ and thus desiring to do the will of the devil ~ he or she will not call on that Physician.

Say what? Faith comes by hearing and hearing by the word of God (Romans 10:17). Once people hear the truth then they can realize that there's something better than what the devil offers them. How can you say that people will not call on the physician once they hear about what the physician can do for them? Scripture never teaches that. Jesus called sinners to repentance. He did not say some sinners. He calls all sinners to repentance becaues all sinners are capable of repenting. Just because someone is currently a child of the devil doesn't mean they are incapable of deciding they want to be a child of God instead.

These same sinners who you say won't call on that Physician have no excuse for suppressing the truth in unrighteousness, so what exuse would they have for not calling on the Physician for healing? None. But, your doctrine gives them an excuse by saying that they are not able to call on the Physician. Jesus clearly knew otherwise because He calls those people to repentance while fully expecting them to answer His call with repentance.

He or she could, but will not. And will not even know he or she is sick, will think of himself or herself not in need of any physician because, like Paul says to the Corinthians, he or she thinks the Gospel to be foolishness.

People choose to consider the gospel to be foolishness. It does not mean they could not have instead responded favorably to the gospel. Scripture never teaches that. Going back to Acts 13:46 again, people judge themselves unworthy of eternal life by rejecting God's offer of salvation and eternal life through the gospel of Christ. If people had no choice in the matter it couldn't be said that they judge themselves unworthy.

 

[PinSeeker]

Hebrews 3:12... is a warning to saved believers to beware and examine themselves and check their hearts and to be careful not to depart from the living God.

I'd call it an admonition, but yeah, I'll accept 'warning,' if meant along the same lines. I'll just say this, SI, that even a preacher, in preaching in a Christian church, so presumably to believers, knows that there are people in the congregation... even though we may not be able to tell who they are... who do not believe from the heart... even though they may think they do... that just may at some point lead them to fall away from the living God, just as the writer of Hebrews says there.

Say what now? Don't speak in code. What are you talking about here? Do you see it as a genuine warning to believers or not?

No code; yes; I'm trying to get you to think for yourself, SI. And in saying that, I mean nothing untoward as it concerns you or anyone else.

No, you could do a much better job of addressing them and that's all you. Unless I'm overestimating your capabilities, which, I guess, is possible.\

You can keep turning it back on me as many times as you like; I don't care. But, like I said, doing so, especially repeatedly, speaks volumes.

Your doctrinal bias clouds your understanding of so much scripture.

And again, I say exactly the same right back to you..

You fail to ever take man's responsibility into account.

No, I just don't misplace it, as you ~ and all Arminians ~ do. You know, one thing that is not easy ~ kind of like trying to really undersand the triune-ness of God ~ is to understand how God works in us... what that really means... and how God's will in our will, um, mesh together. That's at least partly the problem. How do we really understand the Psalmist when He says, "Delight yourself in the Lord, and He will direct your steps"...? Maybe that's what we should really talk about, not really Psalm 37:4 in particular, but in that verse, what all does it mean to "delight oneself in the Lord," and that God "directs the steps" of those who truly do this?

You bring up Psalm 51:5 and proceed to not even address what it actually says.

It says what it says. David says what he says. And, you understand what I say David is saying there... It really is in no uncertain terms. I mean it really seems to me that no "explanation" is necessary. Again, not being coy... It is what it is. He was sinful even from conception; that's what He says.

Where did Paul or Peter indicate anywhere that people are born dead in sin?

They express no other condition aside from either being dead in their sin or being made alive in Christ. And the sequence is crytal clear... for those of us who have been made alive in Christ, we were previously dead in our sin... like the rest of mankind is. So, first, A, then B... and for the rest of mankind, only A. There is no condition ~ expressed or implied ~ previous to that.

Paul taught otherwise in Romans 7:9-11 where he said that he became dead in sin after learning about what sin is by way of the law.

No, that he became aware of his sinfulness. And this is what the law does for us even after we become Christians, born again of the Spirit ~ it acts as a mirror, informing us more and more of our inherent sinfulness and our great need of Jesus... and pushes us to Him.

When the Spirit makes us born again, that, of course, is the Spirit's doing, but nowhere does it say that the Spirit just does that randomly...

Right... According to the Father's will... And the Spirit, Who is one with the Father and the Son. So, as He wills, which may seem random to us, which is exactly what Jesus is telling Nicodemus in John 3.

rather than in response to someone doing what God requires of everyone, which is to repent and believe.

See, there it is. Jesus clearly says, "The wind blows where it wishes, and you hear its sound, but you do not know where it comes from or where it goes. So it is with everyone who is born of the Spirit." His work is in response to nothing aside from God's will. Which, yeah, may seem random to us, but it's not... <smile>

John 1:12 indicates that someone becomes a child of God after believing.

It does not; we disagree on this. That's so interesting, because the very next verse (13, which is the latter part of the very same sentence) is "who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God."

It should be obvious that no one is born of God until they become a child of God.

You know, I don't know if you have children, but is one's son or daughter his or her child before he or she exists? No...<chuckles>

Therefore, becoming a born again child of God comes after faith.

Fair enough, but no. And now we're back, yet again, to the chicken or the egg... Through faith, SI, which, yet again, is God's "assurance of things hoped for, the conviction..." (by the Holy Spirit, Who convicts) "...of things unseen" (Hebrews 11:1).

Doesn't matter whether we have sinned or not?

In the sense that we are in this condition of sinfulness, that we are sinful, no. Woodenly speaking... <chuckles> ...yes, it matters. You know as well as I do that to God, all things are present, even future things. Ergo... sin.

...babies, toddlers and anyone who is not capable of sinning...

But they are. You know... I mean, you won't like this... <smile> ... but babies are born crying. It's what they do. Immediately, when they exit the mother's womb. Why? <smile> I mean, crying is not the sin, but why do they cry?

What do you think Jesus was saying here?

That we are all... eligible. <smile> We are all equally undeserving, regardless of age, but equally... um... eligible.

...scripture NEVER says that people are born dead in their sins.

David does. Irrefutably.

How interesting that you haven't bothered to address what I showed you from Romans 7:9-11.

See above. I did before, in another thread, as I recall. But here... now I have. Again. See above.

...don't you believe that people are born dead in their sins? If so, how can that be the case before they actually sin?

The sin, or a sin, is not the deciding factor, SI. It is his or her... our, as we are all in the same boat, naturally speaking. sinfulness ~ evil, unbelieving heart, even in the same sense as Hebrews 3:12 ~ that is the issue. And we have this from conception. It is the condition we are all in, from conception, as a result of Adam's and Eve's fall in Genesis 3.

So, do you think that when your kids were two years old that they knew exactly what they were doing and understood the consequences and if they had died when they were two they would eventually have to stand before the judgment seat of Christ to explain themselves and give an account of what they had done?

No, but it is what it is.

Are you just not willing to address the scriptures which say otherwise?

There are none.

Continued...

 

[PinSeeker]

<SIGH>

See Romans 7:9-11 above.

Right. See above. <smile>

Why are you not willing to dig deeper when it comes to this topic? Afraid of what you might discover? This response is extremely weak.

That's exactly what I say to you, SI. Although I don't mean it in the mean-spiritedness you do.

Dead is dead is a non-answer.

Oh, my.

When it comes to physical death...

We're not talking about physical death; at least not me. There are a lot of dead people walking around and with us right now, spiritually speaking.

...the second death...

Bouncin' around everywhere... <chuckles>

What does being dead in sins mean to you exactly? You should be able to answer this simple question.

I mean I could say a lot more, but will repeat what I've said before, very simply, to your simple question: It means not being able to bring oneself ~ even though he or she is capable of it, woodenly speaking; he or she has willingly exchanged the truth for a lie, as Paul says in Romans 1 ~ and for that reason not able to bring oneself to repentance and belief. And summed up by Jesus in His very simple statement to Nicodemus, that "unless one is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God... unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God."

...sinners are all capable of acknowledging their sins and calling on the Great Physician, Jesus, to heal them spiritually.

Sure. But if they are dead in their sin, they will not. Yes, they could. Yes, they are capable. But they will not. They have (willingly) exchanged the truth for a lie.

Once people hear the truth then they can realize that there's something better than what the devil offers them.

Sure. But they may still ~ continue to ~ regard it as foolishness.

How can you say that people will not call on the physician once they hear about what the physician can do for them?

Are you now suggesting that when they hear they can do no other than to... uh, call on the physician? Hey, James tells us not to be hearers only but doers of the Word. Why would he say this, I wonder? <smile>

People choose to consider the gospel to be foolishness.

They do. And we all would, if not for this new heart, this new spirit that we've been given. <smile> But for the grace of God, there go I...

Okay, that's enough. <chuckles>

Grace and peace.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

I'd call it an admonition, but yeah, I'll accept 'warning,'

LOL. An admonition is a warning, so I would hope that you would accept "warning".

if meant along the same lines.

What does that mean?

I'll just say this, SI, that even a preacher, in preaching in a Christian church, so presumably to believers, knows that there are people in the congregation... even though we may not be able to tell who they are... who do not believe from the heart... even though they may think they do... that just may at some point lead them to fall away from the living God, just as the writer of Hebrews says there.

You are just so incredibly dishonest with scripture sometimes. It's truly sad to witness. The author of Hebrews, who I strongly believe is Paul, was ONLY addressing true believers in Hebrews 3:12-14. Not those who only thought they believed. He addressed them as "brothers in sisters" (or "brethren" or "brothers"). He would not call anyone but true believers "brothers and sisters". They are the same ones he addressed a little earlier in Hebrews 3:1 as "holy brothers and sisters, who share in the heavenly calling" and who acknowledge Jesus "as our apostle and high priest.".

Hebrews 3:1 Therefore, holy brothers and sisters, who share in the heavenly calling, fix your thoughts on Jesus, whom we acknowledge as our apostle and high priest.

This is not the way that anyone who just thinks they believe, but does not truly believe would be addressed. Paul was intending in Hebrews 3:12-14 to warn true believers about turning away from the living God and about being hardened by sin's deceitfulness.

It's ludicrous to think that Paul was intending to warn people who only thought they believed about turning away from the living God. They would have already been away from the living God, so how could they turn away from Him? No, Paul was clearly warning true believers about being deceived and turning away from God. Only doctrinal bias can prevent someone (like you) from seeing this. Jesus also warned true believers about being careful not to be deceived, so why would you think that could not be the case in Hebrews 3:12-14 as well?

Here is Jesus speaking to His disciples, who clearly were true believers:

Matthew 24:4 Jesus answered: “Watch out that no one deceives you. 5 For many will come in my name, claiming, ‘I am the Messiah,’ and will deceive many.

If a true believer can't be deceived and can't turn away from God then why would Jesus tell true believers to "watch out that no one deceives you"?

No code; yes; I'm trying to get you to think for yourself, SI.

LOL! I don't need your help to do that. You are the one who does not think for yourself. That is very clear. You have been duped by Calvinist teaching and you have bought it hook, line and sinker.

And in saying that, I mean nothing untoward as it concerns you or anyone else.

Sure. LOL.

You can keep turning it back on me as many times as you like; I don't care. But, like I said, doing so, especially repeatedly, speaks volumes.

You saying what you said in the first place speaks volumes. And you say things like that repeatedly. But, you can do no wrong, of course.

No, I just don't misplace it, as you ~ and all Arminians ~ do. You know, one thing that is not easy ~ kind of like trying to really undersand the triune-ness of God ~ is to understand how God works in us... what that really means... and how God's will in our will, um, mesh together. That's at least partly the problem. How do we really understand the Psalmist when He says, "Delight yourself in the Lord, and He will direct your steps"...? Maybe that's what we should really talk about, not really Psalm 37:4 in particular, but in that verse, what all does it mean to "delight oneself in the Lord," and that God "directs the steps" of those who truly do this?

No matter what you decide that it means to "delight yourself in the Lord", it's clearly something that we are responsible to do and He doesn't just direct our steps unless we do that. It's similar to Romans 8:28. I've heard people quote only part of that verse and they'll say that God works for the good while forgetting the part about Him working for the good of those who love Him. He doesn't work for the good of those who don't love Him. We're responsible to love Him and love can't be forced. It has to come from a willing decision to submit to God with a willingness to serve and obey Him.

It says what it says. David says what he says. And, you understand what I say David is saying there... It really is in no uncertain terms. I mean it really seems to me that no "explanation" is necessary. Again, not being coy... It is what it is. He was sinful even from conception; that's what He says.

For Pete's sake, man. This is how pre-tribs argue. They always say something means what it says, as if no spiritual discernment is required. Do you really want to interpret scripture like them? Yeah, David said what he said, but we disagree on what it means. Hello? I don't buy this type of ridiculous argument that "it says what it says". Yeah, it says what it says, but do you know what it means? Clearly not.

They express no other condition aside from either being dead in their sin or being made alive in Christ. And the sequence is crytal clear... for those of us who have been made alive in Christ, we were previously dead in our sin... like the rest of mankind is. So, first, A, then B... and for the rest of mankind, only A. There is no condition ~ expressed or implied ~ previous to that.

In other words, neither Peter nor Paul ever said that people are born dead in their sins. Paul said something quite different from that, in fact. He said he didn't become dead in his sins until he came to understand what sin is, as he indicated in Romans 7:9-11.

No, that he became aware of his sinfulness. And this is what the law does for us even after we become Christians, born again of the Spirit ~ it acts as a mirror, informing us more and more of our inherent sinfulness and our great need of Jesus... and pushes us to Him.

Are you just not willing to be honest in this discussion? That is how you are coming across. Why will you not deal honestly with what Paul actually said in Romans 7:9-11?

Romans 7:9 I was once alive apart from the law, but when the commandment came, sin came alive and I died. 10 The very commandment that promised life proved to be death to me. 11 For sin, seizing an opportunity through the commandment, deceived me and through it killed me.

Please answer these questions. What do you think Paul meant when he said "I was once alive apart from the law, but when the commandment came, sin came alive and I died? In what way do you think he was alive apart from the law and in what way do you think he died "when the commandment came" and "sin came alive"? What do you think Paul meant when he said the "sin, seizing an opportunity through the commandment, deceived me and through it killed me."? How can you think he had already been dead in sins before that when he indicated that sin is what killed him (in a spiritual sense, of course)?

Right... According to the Father's will... And the Spirit, Who is one with the Father and the Son. So, as He wills, which may seem random to us, which is exactly what Jesus is telling Nicodemus in John 3.

Why could it seem random to us? It doesn't seem random to me at all. Scripture is clear that those who repent and put their faith in Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior are the ones who become born again children of God. No randomness there at all.

See, there it is. Jesus clearly says, "The wind blows where it wishes, and you hear its sound, but you do not know where it comes from or where it goes. So it is with everyone who is born of the Spirit." His work is in response to nothing aside from God's will. Which, yeah, may seem random to us, but it's not... <smile>

Why do you so often just make assumptions about what is said in scripture without really carefully thinking about what it's actually saying? All that is saying is that we can't see the Holy Spirit working. Jesus said the wind blows where it wishes, so that means by comparing that to what the Holy Spirit does means that the Holy Spirit dwells in those who He wishes to dwell in. Well, it so happens that the ones He dwells in are those who repent and put their faith in Jesus Christ as their personal Lord and Savior.

Read Acts 10:42-47. Peter was preaching the gospel to Gentiles and they believed what he preached and they then received the Holy Spirit. No randomness there. They couldn't see the Holy Spirit coming to dwell in them. They couldn't see where He came from or where He was going. But, that doesn't mean He just goes where He goes for no discernible reason. He goes to dwell in those who respond to the gospel with repentance and faith.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

It does not; we disagree on this. That's so interesting, because the very next verse (13, which is the latter part of the very same sentence) is "who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God."

How do you interpret John 1:12?

John 1:12 But to all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God, 13 who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God.

What comes first in verse 12 here? People receiving (accepting) Christ and believing in His name. That is followed by becoming children of God as a result of believing in Christ. So, how can you deny that faith comes first before becoming a child of God? It clearly does.

As for verse 13, you are just making assumptions about what it is saying without even thinking about it. You always just scratch the surface of scripture without digging deeper to see what it is actually saying. Your interpretation of that verse blatantly contradicts what is indicated in verse 12. I'm not willing to make scripture contradict itself the way you do.

What verse 13 means is simply that the act of being born of the Spirit is something that the Holy Spirit does. Not man. Man can't just decide to be born of the Spirit at will. We're not born of man or the will of man, we're born of God. In no way, shape or form does that mean our will plays no part in being born of God. That is only your assumption based on a very shallow look at the verse. The previous verse very clearly says that we must believe in Christ in order to have the right to become children of God. Becoming a child of God and being born of God are the same thing. Do you deny this? If not, then verse 12 should make it clear that we become born again children of God after first putting our faith in Christ. The actual act of regeneration is something the Holy Spirit does, not man, but we are responsible to do what God requires in order to become born again children of God. That is taught repeatedly in scripture.

You know, I don't know if you have children, but is one's son or daughter his or her child before he or she exists? No...<chuckles>

What was the reason for this ridiculous question? You obviously must not have seen my point. My point is that if you agree that becoming a child of God and being born of God are the same thing, then you should see from John 1:12 that faith comes first before becoming a born again child of God.

Fair enough, but no. And now we're back, yet again, to the chicken or the egg... Through faith, SI, which, yet again, is God's "assurance of things hoped for, the conviction..." (by the Holy Spirit, Who convicts) "...of things unseen" (Hebrews 11:1).

Yeah, you have no understanding of what faith is. I know. We don't need to go over that again.

But they are. You know... I mean, you won't like this... <smile> ... but babies are born crying. It's what they do. Immediately, when they exit the mother's womb. Why? <smile> I mean, crying is not the sin, but why do they cry?

LOL. I can't even believe you are for real sometimes. This is one of those times. You can't be serious here. I know you are, but I will still assume that somehow you're not. Babies don't sin. Period. Facts. Moving on...

That we are all... eligible. <smile> We are all equally undeserving, regardless of age, but equally... um... eligible.

Who are "we"? All people? Eligible for what? Being in the kingdom of God/heaven? I agree. So, if that's what you're saying (who knows?) then why would you believe that the choice of whether someone is in the kingdom of God or not is ultimately entirely up to God alone?

David does. Irrefutably.

LOL! You apparently don't know what "irrefutably means" because I've already refuted that. You respond with nothing but an extremely weak response to what Paul indicated in Romans 7:9-11 which is that he became dead in sin when he becamse aware of what sin was by way of the law.

The sin, or a sin, is not the deciding factor, SI. It is his or her... our, as we are all in the same boat, naturally speaking. sinfulness ~ evil, unbelieving heart, even in the same sense as Hebrews 3:12 ~ that is the issue. And we have this from conception. It is the condition we are all in, from conception, as a result of Adam's and Eve's fall in Genesis 3.

This is ridiculous. Babies and little children are not dead in their sins. A more ludicrous idea has never been conceived. If that was the case then Jesus surely would not have said that the kingdom of God/heaven was made up of those who are like little children. But, He did. You continue to not carefully think about these things. Why is that? Because you just believe what you want to believe. That is very clear to me.

No, but it is what it is.

What is the deal with these types of vague responses from you? What do you mean "it is what it is"? I asked you if your two year old child had died if they would have to stand before Christ to give an account of what they had done and you correctly answered "No", but what do you mean "it is what it is"? Why not actually address the argument I was making. You were saying their sinful nature manifested itself when they were two years old. You believe they were dead in sins. According to Paul in Ephesians 2:1-3, those who are dead in sins are children of wrath. So, do you think God's wrath was on your two year old when he was misbehaving? If so, why would you deny that he would have to give an account of his actions before Christ? Why not just acknowledge that little children are not dead in sins since being dead in sins means that God's wrath is on you and you will be held accountable to God and punished by God if you do not repent and believe?