Poll on OSAS

[StanJ]

Stan,

Your attempt to pigeon hole me is rather futile as I do not come from some organizational indoctrination. At best you could say I am conservative evangelical. Yet even here I have differing views concerning the Eucharist than most of my ilk. I like to say I am a disciple of the Lord Jesus Christ, a follower of the Way. Most people I know call me a Christian.

I believe in the perspicuity of Scripture. I exegete the texts understanding to the best of my ability and knowledge the historical and cultural background of the authors. I comprehend textual criticism from lower criticism. I believe in the inspiration and inerrancy of Scripture.

As pertaining to your beloved TULIP I have already told you the best I can claim is TUP. Even here I am not really steeped in Calvinistic theology so I don't really know if I exactly agree concerning these. My studies have not led me to learning any one system per se' rather they have directed me in the pursuit of exegesis for myself. I am currently studying intermediate Greek.

I have read some of the link you posted, yet it is not brief. What I have read so far is interesting. I will need time to fully read and comprehend it. With the holiday seasons I am rather busy right now so it may take some time before I generate a response.

Merry Christmas to YOU! God bless you.

In the love of Christ,
Justaname

I have no doubt you are a Christian, I just want to know where you stand in the grand scheme of Soteriology. Seems you don't want to clarify that or, it suits your purpose not to, so we are left to our own devices when it comes to figuring out what camp you belong to. It appears you belong to SE and OSAS, which makes you at least a 2 petal Calvinist. I suppose the T goes along with the U & P, but something for another thread so as not to take this one any further off topic than it has gone so far. So that would be a 3 petal adherent.

Well you may believe that, but you don't practice it, as IMO you eisegete your pre-existing views FROM scripture.

Better to be slow and methodical IMO, than skim over good exegesis.

Thanks and I pray you have a Spirit filled Christmas as well.

 

[justaname]

WW,

Just a quick response.

First you did not comment concerning how you believe some love darkness while others do not. Is your teaching that some are inherently good by nature?

From my reading of the Scripture concerning the judgement humanity loves darkness over the Light of the world. How is it you say "some"?

Then would we not say that some men (those that believe) are inherently better than others, thus by their righteousness they come to faith?

Second you seem to believe God is monergistic in saving infants and the mentally handicapped but not with others? Some are required to believe the gospel, while others are not?

You say we are held accountable based on our understanding...do you have Scripture to support this idea?

God does not delight in the destruction of the wicked, yet His divine justice must be served. In His mercy He chooses to save some.

Perhaps the biggest question I have is if God is not the cause for belief what causes some to believe where others do not?

 

[StanJ]

First you did not comment concerning how you believe some love darkness while others do not. Is your teaching that some are inherently good by nature?

From my reading of the Scripture concerning the judgement humanity loves darkness over the Light of the world. How is it you say "some"?

Then would we not say that some men (those that believe) are inherently better than others, thus by their righteousness they come to faith?

Second you seem to believe God is monergistic in saving infants and the mentally handicapped but not with others? Some are required to believe the gospel, while others are not?

You say we are held accountable based on our understanding...do you have Scripture to support this idea?

God does not delight in the destruction of the wicked, yet His divine justice must be served. In His mercy He chooses to save some.

Perhaps the biggest question I have is if God is not the cause for belief what causes some to believe where others do not?

It's called our HUMAN nature. Not much different than some that love flying and some that don't.

John 1:9-11 explains that and as you read further, so does 12-13.

Better is a relevant term, and from God's perspective, NO MAN IS GOOD. The Bible also teaches that Jesus is our righteousness, which is one of the big reasons that many Jews didn't accept Jesus as they though THEY themselves were righteous under the Mosaic Law, when in fact they were not.

Anyone who does not know the difference between right and wrong cannot be judged. It's pretty simple.

Rom 1:18-20

2 Peter 3:9, which I'm sure has been given you hundreds of times in this regard.

Rom 10:8-11 is very clear, we HAVE the truth in our hearts and MUST accept confess it to BE saved. It's totally a matter of an individuals will to accept or reject the truth....ALWAYS.

 

[justaname]

It's called our HUMAN nature. Not much different than some that love flying and some that don't.

John 1:9-11 explains that and as you read further, so does 12-13.

Better is a relevant term, and from God's perspective, NO MAN IS GOOD. The Bible also teaches that Jesus is our righteousness, which is one of the big reasons that many Jews didn't accept Jesus as they though THEY themselves were righteous under the Mosaic Law, when in fact they were not.

Anyone who does not know the difference between right and wrong cannot be judged. It's pretty simple.

Rom 1:18-20

2 Peter 3:9, which I'm sure has been given you hundreds of times in this regard.

Rom 10:8-11 is very clear, we HAVE the truth in our hearts and MUST accept confess it to BE saved. It's totally a matter of an individuals will to accept or reject the truth....ALWAYS.

The human nature answer is rather vague. You would be better to say I don't know why some choose God and others don't.

Some love flying because God designed them that way, to love flying.

Yet some love God because they came to that all on their own, not because God designed them that way... :wacko:

My point with the mentally handicapped and infants is to show how you are being inconsistent with your view on soteriology. In these you say it is by God's mercy and grace. Yet with others it is up to them to come to God on their own. Here God is not being impartial, or to say it in the positive God is being partial, and the requirement for salvation changes.

Myself I can say God gives faith on behalf of all who believe and are saved. It is by a working of the Holy Spirit that the deed of coming to God is wrought. I assure you had it not been of God, I would not have come to faith. Yes I credit God for this miracle, not my decision making.


I was actually referring to John 3:18-21.

18 “He who believes in Him is not judged; he who does not believe has been judged already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
19 “This is the judgment, that the Light has come into the world, and men loved the darkness rather than the Light, for their deeds were evil.
20 “For everyone who does evil hates the Light, and does not come to the Light for fear that his deeds will be exposed.
21 “But he who practices the truth comes to the Light, so that his deeds may be manifested as having been wrought in God.”

In this we understand men in verse 19 can also be translated humanity or people. I do not see "some" in there. We see here in verse 21 the one who comes to the Light practices the truth and John is clear to specify that the deeds were wrought in God.

 

[StanJ]

The human nature answer is rather vague. You would be better to say I don't know why some choose God and others don't.

Some love flying because God designed them that way, to love flying.

Yet some love God because they came to that all on their own, not because God designed them that way... :wacko:

My point with the mentally handicapped and infants is to show how you are being inconsistent with your view on soteriology. In these you say it is by God's mercy and grace. Yet with others it is up to them to come to God on their own. Here God is not being impartial, or to say it in the positive God is being partial, and the requirement for salvation changes.

Myself I can say God gives faith on behalf of all who believe and are saved. It is by a working of the Holy Spirit that the deed of coming to God is wrought. I assure you had it not been of God, I would not have come to faith. Yes I credit God for this miracle, not my decision making.


I was actually referring to John 3:18-21.

18 “He who believes in Him is not judged; he who does not believe has been judged already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
19 “This is the judgment, that the Light has come into the world, and men loved the darkness rather than the Light, for their deeds were evil.
20 “For everyone who does evil hates the Light, and does not come to the Light for fear that his deeds will be exposed.
21 “But he who practices the truth comes to the Light, so that his deeds may be manifested as having been wrought in God.”

In this we understand men in verse 19 can also be translated humanity or people. I do not see "some" in there. We see here in verse 21 the one who comes to the Light practices the truth and John is clear to specify that the deeds were wrought in God.

Just like I don't know why some love flying or hate flying. ONLY God knows, but that knowledge does not negate that ALL have the chance to be saved.

God doesn't design anyone. After Adam and Eve, ALL mankind was procreated, and subject to the consequences of original sin.

Paul taught how people are judged, and if you understand that teaching along with what Jesus said about children, you will know there is NO culpability when one is NOT culpable. Only God KNOWS for sure, but we can make educated guesses.

Paul clearly taught that God does work IN people of faith, but WE are to work OUT our salvation. This is not the same as confessing Jesus as savior, which is only up to us to do.

It would really help if you were a LOT more specific when quoting scripture. You always seem to switch back and forth between translations that use the words you like? Mostly KJV or NKJV. How about drilling down to the real words and those that are properly translated? In any event these verses in John 3 clearly show the responsibility of believing is ON the person. God does NOT make them believe, and as such, cannot "elect" them as you like to say, to salvation.

 

[justaname]

Just like I don't know why some love flying or hate flying. ONLY God knows, but that knowledge does not negate that ALL have the chance to be saved.

God doesn't design anyone. After Adam and Eve, ALL mankind was procreated, and subject to the consequences of original sin.

Paul taught how people are judged, and if you understand that teaching along with what Jesus said about children, you will know there is NO culpability when one is NOT culpable. Only God KNOWS for sure, but we can make educated guesses.

Paul clearly taught that God does work IN people of faith, but WE are to work OUT our salvation. This is not the same as confessing Jesus as savior, which is only up to us to do.

It would really help if you were a LOT more specific when quoting scripture. You always seem to switch back and forth between translations that use the words you like? Mostly KJV or NKJV. How about drilling down to the real words and those that are properly translated? In any event these verses in John 3 clearly show the responsibility of believing is ON the person. God does NOT make them believe, and as such, cannot "elect" them as you like to say, to salvation.

Teaching by Stan: God only designed Adam and Eve.

Scripture: From the ESV

13 For you formed my inward parts; you knitted me together in my mother's womb.
14 I praise you, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made. Wonderful are your works; my soul knows it very well. - Psalm 139:13-14

Here is the NET

Certainly you made my mind and heart; you wove me together in my mother's womb.

Here is the NIV:

For you created my inmost being; you knit me together in my mother's womb.

I rarely post from the KJV. Mostly when I use my phone it is the ESV...because that is the version I can easily copy/paste from. From the laptop I prefer the NASB. Sometimes I use bible-hub online and copy/paste from there. No conspiring about the versions, only ease of use.

With the culpability issue what about those that never hear the gospel then? Would you say they are not accountable?

Now back to the John passage. Verse 19 teaches humanity rejected the Light. Jesus explains why: because their works were evil.

Here we know everyone is guilty of sin or does evil works. Everyone is guilty else they would not need a Savior. There is One who is without sin (unless you believe Mary was sinless). Jesus furthers His dialogue:

For everyone who does wicked things hates the light and does not come to the light, lest his works should be exposed. - John 3:20

We can easily conclude everyone sins and has done wicked things. This would mean no one seeks after God or comes to the Light. Paul and the Psalmist agrees...

10 as it is written: "None is righteous, no, not one;
11 no one understands; no one seeks for God.
12 All have turned aside; together they have become worthless; no one does good, not even one." - Romans 3:10-12

Yet you say some do choose God out of their own free will...baffeling.

Now to further the Scripture we need look to John's epistle.

5 This is the message we have heard from him and proclaim to you, that God is light, and in him is no darkness at all.
6 If we say we have fellowship with him while we walk in darkness, we lie and do not practice the truth.
7 But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus his Son cleanses us from all sin. - 1 John 1:5-7

Let me proclaim to you...all who are not in Christ are in the darkness. This is the thrust of John's epistle. Jesus teaches all who practice wickedness (sin) hates the Light and does not come to it.

Practicing the truth is believing Jesus is the Christ. It is not until you believe can you come out of darkness and practice the truth. You can not believe the truth until you come out of the darkness, yet those in the darkness hate the Light and will not come to it. They are blinded by Satan.

None can come to the Son unless it is granted by the Father. (cf John 6)

We have some of the most simple and clear verses in Scripture concerning election and the depravity of humanity. What I see is people rejecting plain Scripture to suit their own idea of how they feel salvation should be wrought, by placing salvation in the hands of men as opposed to the hands of God. Just as in Barrds case where she decides to reject the idea God is omniscient because it conflicts with what she feels God should be like.

God has given His special revelation concerning Himself. We need not read our ideas about how God should be into it.

If we remember the main argument WW had was God is culpable for not saving everyone or to explain it differently God predestined many to eternal suffering. Taking it back to the garden levels that argument moot. The point being is WW didn't agree with God having mercy on only some. By placing salvation in the hands of individuals it can be said well it is their own fault they didn't believe. This way we can feel God is being fair.

God is not fair for if He were we would all suffer eternal damnation. That is fair because the penalty for sin is death. As I have continually said God in His mercy has chosen to save some.

Not by man's will, but by God's mercy. Do you not know that it is because of God's kindness that we repent?

If though this post you can not see how the Scriptures are twisted to support a view, then you most likely will never see because you do not want to.

 

[StanJ]

Teaching by Stan: God only designed Adam and Eve.

Scripture: From the ESV

13 For you formed my inward parts; you knitted me together in my mother's womb.
14 I praise you, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made. Wonderful are your works; my soul knows it very well. - Psalm 139:13-14

Here is the NET

Certainly you made my mind and heart; you wove me together in my mother's womb.

Here is the NIV:

For you created my inmost being; you knit me together in my mother's womb.

I rarely post from the KJV. Mostly when I use my phone it is the ESV...because that is the version I can easily copy/paste from. From the laptop I prefer the NASB. Sometimes I use bible-hub online and copy/paste from there. No conspiring about the versions, only ease of use.

With the culpability issue what about those that never hear the gospel then? Would you say they are not accountable?

Now back to the John passage. Verse 19 teaches humanity rejected the Light. Jesus explains why: because their works were evil.

Here we know everyone is guilty of sin or does evil works. Everyone is guilty else they would not need a Savior. There is One who is without sin (unless you believe Mary was sinless). Jesus furthers His dialogue:

For everyone who does wicked things hates the light and does not come to the light, lest his works should be exposed. - John 3:20

We can easily conclude everyone sins and has done wicked things. This would mean no one seeks after God or comes to the Light. Paul and the Psalmist agrees...

10 as it is written: "None is righteous, no, not one;
11 no one understands; no one seeks for God.
12 All have turned aside; together they have become worthless; no one does good, not even one." - Romans 3:10-12

Yet you say some do choose God out of their own free will...baffeling.

Now to further the Scripture we need look to John's epistle.

5 This is the message we have heard from him and proclaim to you, that God is light, and in him is no darkness at all.
6 If we say we have fellowship with him while we walk in darkness, we lie and do not practice the truth.
7 But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus his Son cleanses us from all sin. - 1 John 1:5-7

Let me proclaim to you...all who are not in Christ are in the darkness. This is the thrust of John's epistle. Jesus teaches all who practice wickedness (sin) hates the Light and does not come to it.

Practicing the truth is believing Jesus is the Christ. It is not until you believe can you come out of darkness and practice the truth. You can not believe the truth until you come out of the darkness, yet those in the darkness hate the Light and will not come to it. They are blinded by Satan.

None can come to the Son unless it is granted by the Father. (cf John 6)

We have some of the most simple and clear verses in Scripture concerning election and the depravity of humanity. What I see is people rejecting plain Scripture to suit their own idea of how they feel salvation should be wrought, by placing salvation in the hands of men as opposed to the hands of God. Just as in Barrds case where she decides to reject the idea God is omniscient because it conflicts with what she feels God should be like.

God has given His special revelation concerning Himself. We need not read our ideas about how God should be into it.

If we remember the main argument WW had was God is culpable for not saving everyone or to explain it differently God predestined many to eternal suffering. Taking it back to the garden levels that argument moot. The point being is WW didn't agree with God having mercy on only some. By placing salvation in the hands of individuals it can be said well it is their own fault they didn't believe. This way we can feel God is being fair.

God is not fair for if He were we would all suffer eternal damnation. That is fair because the penalty for sin is death. As I have continually said God in His mercy has chosen to save some.

Not by man's will, but by God's mercy. Do you not know that it is because of God's kindness that we repent?

If though this post you can not see how the Scriptures are twisted to support a view, then you most likely will never see because you do not want to.

No, this teaching is directly from the Bible. Guess you never read Gen 1:28?

Who is speaking in Psalm 139, and is he writing literally or figuratively? Seems you can't tell?

The LAST Revelation from Jesus is what John recorded on Patmos, so what special revelation are YOU referring to?

Continually repeating your dogma doesn't make it any closer to being right.

 

[Born_Again]

Without quoting every ounce of the replies, I will say Justaname is on it!! Bless you, brother!

 

[StanJ]

Without quoting every ounce of the replies, I will say Justaname is on it!! Bless you, brother!

Really???

 

[KingJ]

Now back to the John passage. Verse 19 teaches humanity rejected the Light. Jesus explains why: because their works were evil.

Here we know everyone is guilty of sin or does evil works. Everyone is guilty else they would not need a Savior. There is One who is without sin (unless you believe Mary was sinless). Jesus furthers His dialogue:

For everyone who does wicked things hates the light and does not come to the light, lest his works should be exposed. - John 3:20

We can easily conclude everyone sins and has done wicked things. This would mean no one seeks after God or comes to the Light. Paul and the Psalmist agrees...

10 as it is written: "None is righteous, no, not one;
11 no one understands; no one seeks for God.
12 All have turned aside; together they have become worthless; no one does good, not even one." - Romans 3:10-12

I believe you are making two errors here.

1. You are not reading / grasping John 3:19,20 properly.
2. You cannot fuse Rom 3:10 with the above as you are.

1. John 3:19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.

John is making a prophecy of the Christian age. It is that the verdict will be that those who reject Jesus, do so because they do not hate what is evil. They love it. Major emphasis on ''love'' it. As Paul explains he hates sin in Rom 7:15.

Having sin disqaulifies all from God's presence. Loving sin qualifies us for hell. Hating sin leads to repentance / accepting the light. All humanity has hence not rejected the light as you said. Having sin is not rejecting Jesus.

2. The point here by Paul and David is on par with the point Jesus made in Matt 5:28. It is simply that all mankind has fallen from grace / has sin and that it is impossible for us to to do anything to be reconciled with God. All our good deeds are filthy rags to God. Those that hate what is evil have to wait / hope for Jesus. This however is not saying God completely ignores the heart behind the deeds or the level of evil in the deeds. We cannot read and teach Matt 5:28 without Matt 5:32.

Abel and Cain both in death because they had sin. Cain was excommunicated because he murdered. Only excommunicated when he actually murdered. Not when he thought of murder. Not when he did other sins. It is because the act of murder showed God that Cain was closer to loving what is evil, full measure.

 

[KingJ]

WW,

Just a quick response.

1. First you did not comment concerning how you believe some love darkness while others do not. Is your teaching that some are inherently good by nature?

From my reading of the Scripture concerning the judgement humanity loves darkness over the Light of the world. How is it you say "some"?

Then would we not say that some men (those that believe) are inherently better than others, thus by their righteousness they come to faith?

2. Second you seem to believe God is monergistic in saving infants and the mentally handicapped but not with others? Some are required to believe the gospel, while others are not?

You say we are held accountable based on our understanding...do you have Scripture to support this idea?

3. God does not delight in the destruction of the wicked, yet His divine justice must be served. In His mercy He chooses to save some.

4. Perhaps the biggest question I have is if God is not the cause for belief what causes some to believe where others do not?

1. Many were in Abraham's Bosom OT. They got themselves into AB over Hades. The gospel to mankind from day 1 has always been to repent. Repenting has always required hating what is evil. Albeit we still do it.

Psalm 51:17 was given to the Jews and all others OT. That Jew that was stoned to death just may have still repented.

2. The scripture is ''Jesus died for mankind''. Mankind is created just beneath the angels. Ie mankind is accountable for their evil because they have a working brain that is able to discern the difference between good and evil. We are able to excuse ourselves from judgment 1 Cor 11:31 For if we would judge ourselves, we should not be judged.

3. We need to understand that ''salvation'' is taking us from separation to His presence. Jesus / God saves absolutely nobody from hell. We are saved from separation. Hell / lake of fire is a home for those that hate Him. If Jesus never died, many would still be in AB and many in Hades. Nero and you / Cain and Abel / Hitler and Mother Theresa would never be in the same home.

4. Nobody can believe Jesus is Lord unless the Holy Spirit reveals this to us 1 Cor 12:3, Matt 16:16-17. The Holy Spirit only does this after examining our heart and mind Jer 17:10. After we draw close to Him James 4:8 and the verdict is not John 3:19.

1 Cor 12:3 Therefore I want you to know that no one who is speaking by the Spirit of God says, "Jesus be cursed," and no one can say, "Jesus is Lord," except by the Holy Spirit.

 

[KingJ]

Firstly the idea we are discussing is omniscience not omnipotence. Then your comment is way off base about the Trinity...if Jesus has not all the attributes of God then He is not God, but something lesser. Yet the Orthodox view of Christology is Jesus is fully God and fully human. This means Jesus is all knowing/all powerful/ever present...

I agree that Jesus is 100% God. Just some thoughts on His omiscience that have helped me. We cannot profess to grasp God just because we can grasp the idea of omniscience.

God is omnipotent but He clearly limited that on the cross. To uphold who He is, Good! We give thanks because God is good Psalm 136:1.

God is as good as He is omniscient. This is hard to grasp. Kind of on par with grasping how He came into existance. But I believe we assume that omniscience = evil. When we do not grasp that God is incapable of evil. There is no darkness in Him at all 1 John 1:5. Paritality is evil. Fore-knolwdege / creating one from a lump of clay unto dishonor and another unto honour, is possible as He is God, but it is evil. God is not evil.

 

[Wormwood]

justaname,

Sorry for the slow reply. It has been a busy Christmas season . Here are my thoughts about your questions....

First you did not comment concerning how you believe some love darkness while others do not. Is your teaching that some are inherently good by nature?

I agree that humanity is depraved. All sin and all are in need of a Savior. I just reject the notion that humanity is "totally depraved" to the point that a person cannot even recognize good and evil or accept the light when it is presented to them. Again, I think Romans 7 spells this out very clearly. Paul recognizes what is good and he loves the goodness of God. However, he cannot follow what he knows to be right because sin dwelling in his body. The law he loves only condemns him because his flesh is wicked. So we see that Paul, 1) can recognize what is good and can appreciate it, and 2) cannot live out perfect righteousness because of his depraved flesh. Humanity is depraved and has a bent toward seflishness and evil. No one can save themselves or live righteously according to the law (I am not a Pelagian). However, humans can recognize what is good and accept grace. In fact, God expects us to do this and he condemns those who do not believe. This is why Jesus says those who reject him are condemned already. It is not because they cannot accept him, but because they can recognize light from darkness and choose darkness. This is a choice and they are condemned because they make a wicked choice, not because they can do nothing else.

From my reading of the Scripture concerning the judgement humanity loves darkness over the Light of the world. How is it you say "some"?

Humans dwell in darkness. The whole world is steeped in sin and under the control of the wicked one. Our natural tendency is to do what is contrary to the desires of God. However, in the midst of this, people can recognize goodness. In fact, Paul makes it clear in Romans 2 that even the pagan who do not have the law have a conscience that shows the basics of the law stamped on their hearts. This is why they are subject to condemnation. They have no excuse. They cannot say, "We didnt have the law, so how can we be convicted of sin?" Paul says that God has given them a conscience and a knowledge of what is good so they are still under sin will be judged accordingly. Moreover, in John 1 and 3, we see that men love darkness. However, it is also clear that not all do. There are those who believe. Again, there is no indication in these verses that people do evil because they have no other choice. Jesus gives them a clear choice to come into the light, or continue to love darkness. Most choose darkness, but some accept the light and believe.

“But whoever does what is true comes to the light, so that it may be clearly seen that his works have been carried out in God.”” (John 3:21, ESV)


Then would we not say that some men (those that believe) are inherently better than others, thus by their righteousness they come to faith?

I think this question is wrongly worded. Someone having an inner character that allows them to humble themselves and seek grace is not the same thing as possessing righteousness. This is something I have been trying to explain to you over the past few posts. Abraham was not righteous because he believed God. He was credited righteousness because he believed. In other words, Abraham was not right with God, but by faith, God imputed righteousness to him because God gives grace to those who trust him. I think you have a very non-Jewish definition of righteousness here. For the Jew, righteousness was about keeping the law, the ceremonies and walking uprightly. Righteousness was something someone "did" not an inner quality. A person was made righteous by their works (circumcision, Sabbath observances, good deeds, alms giving, keeping feasts, keeping the commandments, etc.) Christianity turned this notion of righteousness on its head by saying that no one could be made righteous by keeping the law. One's good works were not sufficient to satisfy a holy God because all sin. Thus, true righteousness could only come with it being imputed by faith in Jesus Christ. So, someone doesnt come to faith because they are righteous, they have faith because they are not righteous. They trust in the righteousness of Christ and God grants them righteousness by that faith.

So, to answer the first part of your question, yes, our inner character makes a difference. Yet that is shaped by our choices, and is not something predetermined. This is why John the Baptist came and called people to "repent" and make "straight the way of the Lord." People were called to change their hearts and humble themselves for the coming King. People like the Pharisees were too proud to humble themselves and this inner pride and selfishness prevented them from knowing the grace of Christ. This is why we call people to humble themselves and repent. God opposes the proud but gives grace to the humble. If a person wants grace, they must humble their hearts. It is a choice and God allows us to make it.
To answer the second part of your question, no, coming to faith is not righteousness. Recognizing I am a sinner who is condemned before a holy God and I cannot save myself is not personal righteousness. Rather, it is merely an admission that I am not righteous. If I had personal righteousness, then I wouldnt need faith because I could trust in my own goodness rather than needing to put my hope and trust in Christ. Does that make sense?


Second you seem to believe God is monergistic in saving infants and the mentally handicapped but not with others? Some are required to believe the gospel, while others are not?

No, I believe we do not share in Adam's guilt. A newborn baby has never sinned, and therefore has no need of being saved from their sins. Depravity and guilt from conscious sin are two very different things. I can have a bent toward sinful behavior, but if I am a baby and never have an opportunity to act on that depraved nature, then I am not guilty of sin. God only judges us according to our acts, not according to the acts of our parents or Adam.

““Yet you say, ‘Why should not the son suffer for the iniquity of the father?’ When the son has done what is just and right, and has been careful to observe all my statutes, he shall surely live. The soul who sins shall die. The son shall not suffer for the iniquity of the father, nor the father suffer for the iniquity of the son. The righteousness of the righteous shall be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon himself.” (Ezekiel 18:19–20, ESV)

If a person does not know better or never made a conscious, willful sin, then they are not guilty of doing such. As for the mentally handicapped, I think the same applies. They are judged according to what they understand. I think Romans 5 makes it clear though that Christ's work that we live under original grace, not original sin. I'll just leave it at that for now, but there is much that could be said in this area if you want to explore it deeper.

You say we are held accountable based on our understanding...do you have Scripture to support this idea?

Yes, there are a few. First, I would say that the Ezekiel passage above shows that infants are not judged by their parent's sin. Second, Jesus tells us that “Everyone to whom much was given, of him much will be required, and from him to whom they entrusted much, they will demand the more.” (Luke 12:48, ESV) Also, Romans 7:9 makes it clear that it is our knowledge of what is good and doing the opposite that brings us condemnation. Also, Romans 5:12-19 tells us that Christ's cross undid Adam's curse so that we have original grace rather than original sin.

Im out of time....ill try to share my thoughts on the other questions later today.

 

[Barrd]

justaname,

Sorry for the slow reply. It has been a busy Christmas season . Here are my thoughts about your questions....

First you did not comment concerning how you believe some love darkness while others do not. Is your teaching that some are inherently good by nature?

I agree that humanity is depraved. All sin and all are in need of a Savior. I just reject the notion that humanity is "totally depraved" to the point that a person cannot even recognize good and evil or accept the light when it is presented to them. Again, I think Romans 7 spells this out very clearly. Paul recognizes what is good and he loves the goodness of God. However, he cannot follow what he knows to be right because sin dwelling in his body. The law he loves only condemns him because his flesh is wicked. So we see that Paul, 1) can recognize what is good and can appreciate it, and 2) cannot live out perfect righteousness because of his depraved flesh. Humanity is depraved and has a bent toward seflishness and evil. No one can save themselves or live righteously according to the law (I am not a Pelagian). However, humans can recognize what is good and accept grace. In fact, God expects us to do this and he condemns those who do not believe. This is why Jesus says those who reject him are condemned already. It is not because they cannot accept him, but because they can recognize light from darkness and choose darkness. This is a choice and they are condemned because they make a wicked choice, not because they can do nothing else.

Humans dwell in darkness. The whole world is steeped in sin and under the control of the wicked one. Our natural tendency is to do what is contrary to the desires of God. However, in the midst of this, people can recognize goodness. In fact, Paul makes it clear in Romans 2 that even the pagan who do not have the law have a conscience that shows the basics of the law stamped on their hearts. This is why they are subject to condemnation. They have no excuse. They cannot say, "We didnt have the law, so how can we be convicted of sin?" Paul says that God has given them a conscience and a knowledge of what is good so they are still under sin will be judged accordingly. Moreover, in John 1 and 3, we see that men love darkness. However, it is also clear that not all do. There are those who believe. Again, there is no indication in these verses that people do evil because they have no other choice. Jesus gives them a clear choice to come into the light, or continue to love darkness. Most choose darkness, but some accept the light and believe.

“But whoever does what is true comes to the light, so that it may be clearly seen that his works have been carried out in God.”” (John 3:21, ESV)


Then would we not say that some men (those that believe) are inherently better than others, thus by their righteousness they come to faith?

I think this question is wrongly worded. Someone having an inner character that allows them to humble themselves and seek grace is not the same thing as possessing righteousness. This is something I have been trying to explain to you over the past few posts. Abraham was not righteous because he believed God. He was credited righteousness because he believed. In other words, Abraham was not right with God, but by faith, God imputed righteousness to him because God gives grace to those who trust him. I think you have a very non-Jewish definition of righteousness here. For the Jew, righteousness was about keeping the law, the ceremonies and walking uprightly. Righteousness was something someone "did" not an inner quality. A person was made righteous by their works (circumcision, Sabbath observances, good deeds, alms giving, keeping feasts, keeping the commandments, etc.) Christianity turned this notion of righteousness on its head by saying that no one could be made righteous by keeping the law. One's good works were not sufficient to satisfy a holy God because all sin. Thus, true righteousness could only come with it being imputed by faith in Jesus Christ. So, someone doesnt come to faith because they are righteous, they have faith because they are not righteous. The trust in the righteousness of Christ and God grants them righteousness by that faith.

So, to answer the first part of your question, yes, our inner character makes a difference. Yet that is shaped by our choices, and is not something predetermined. This is why John the Baptist came and called people to "repent" and make "straight the way of the Lord." People were called to change their hearts and humble themselves for the coming King. People like the Pharisees were too proud to humble themselves and this inner pride and selfishness prevented them from knowing the grace of Christ. This is why we call people to humble themselves and repent. God opposes the proud but gives grace to the humble. If a person wants grace, they must humble their hearts. It is a choice and God allows us to make it.
To answer the second part of your question, no, coming to faith is not righteousness. Recognizing I am a sinner who is condemned before a holy God and I cannot save myself is not personal righteousness. Rather, it is merely an admission that I am not righteous. If I had personal righteousness, then I wouldnt need faith because I could trust in my own goodness rather than needing to put my hope and trust in Christ. Does that make sense?


Second you seem to believe God is monergistic in saving infants and the mentally handicapped but not with others? Some are required to believe the gospel, while others are not?

No, I believe we do not share in Adam's guilt. A newborn baby has never sinned, and therefore has no need of being saved from their sins. Depravity and guilt from conscious sin are two very different things. I can have a bent toward sinful behavior, but if I am a baby and never have an opportunity to act on that depraved nature, then I am not guilty of sin. God only judges us according to our acts, not according to the acts of our parents or Adam.

““Yet you say, ‘Why should not the son suffer for the iniquity of the father?’ When the son has done what is just and right, and has been careful to observe all my statutes, he shall surely live. The soul who sins shall die. The son shall not suffer for the iniquity of the father, nor the father suffer for the iniquity of the son. The righteousness of the righteous shall be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon himself.” (Ezekiel 18:19–20, ESV)

If a person does not know better or never made a conscious, willful sin, then they are not guilty of doing such. As for the mentally handicapped, I think the same applies. They are judged according to what they understand. I think Romans 5 makes it clear though that Christ's work that we live under original grace, not original sin. I'll just leave it at that for now, but there is much that could be said in this area if you want to explore it deeper.

You say we are held accountable based on our understanding...do you have Scripture to support this idea?

Yes, there are a few. First, I would say that the Ezekiel passage above shows that infants are not judged by their parent's sin. Second, Jesus tells us that “Everyone to whom much was given, of him much will be required, and from him to whom they entrusted much, they will demand the more.” (Luke 12:48, ESV) Also, Romans 7:9 makes it clear that it is our knowledge of what is good and doing the opposite that brings us condemnation. Also, Romans 5:12-19 tells us that Christ's cross undid Adam's curse so that we have original grace rather than original sin.

Im out of time....ill try to share my thoughts on the other questions later today.
God does not delight in the destruction of the wicked, yet His divine justice must be served. In His mercy He chooses to save some.

Perhaps the biggest question I have is if God is not the cause for belief what causes some to believe where others do not?

You are asking for an analysis of the human mind...
What causes some to write beautiful music, while others have no music in them at all?
What causes some to create amazing works of art, while others struggle to draw a stick figure?
What causes some to be poets, or singers, or whatever, while others have no creativity in them at all?

I might agree with you that the ultimate cause, if I had not heard music that glorifies evil, if I had not seen art that features pornography, if I had not read dirty limericks, etc....

Yes, God creates us with whatever talents or abilities we have...including the ability to believe...but it is up to us how we use that talent or that ability...or not use it at all.

 

[StanJ]

Yes, God creates us with whatever talents or abilities we have...including the ability to believe...but it is up to us how we use that talent or that ability...or not use it at all.

We may be blessed with certain talents, but they are NOT created in us, nor are we created with them.
The parable of the 10 virgins in Matthew 25 shows pretty succinctly that people with different talents exist, God doesn't make them so.
Thanking God for our Blessings is of course our duty, but saying God makes some to be great and some to be psychopaths is the same as agreeing with Sovereign Election.

 

[Wormwood]

justaname,

Here are my thoughts on your final two inquiries of me...

3. God does not delight in the destruction of the wicked, yet His divine justice must be served. In His mercy He chooses to save some.

Hmmmm, could you rephrase this? I dont see what you are asking. I think the notion that "He chooses to save some" is in direct conflict with the Scriptural teaching that God desires all to be saved (if the idea that "chooses" means a monergistic, predetermined choice to save some and not others). I would word it like this: "God does not delight in the destruction of the wicked, yet his divine justice must be served. In mercy, he offers salvation to all. Some choose to accept his offer of salvation."
4. Perhaps the biggest question I have is if God is not the cause for belief what causes some to believe where others do not?

Let me answer this by first asking you a question. If a person becomes a believer because God created the "goodness" in them to cause them to want to believe, does that mean that God created the unbeliever in such a way as to ensure they would not believe? Thus, is God the author of that person's evil?

I reject the idea that these responses are pre-programmed by the Creator. I believe we are created with genuine free will and we are each responsible for our own decision-making. Of course, we are all influenced by culture, parents, opportunities, social status, etc. However, none of these factors determine our decisions. Some grow up in poverty with horrible parents and become passionate, loving, Christ-followers. Some grow up in wealth with great parents and education and become abusive, perverted and filled with all kids of evil. Who we become is our responsibility. We get to choose. I believe that is a big part of the image of God we bear. We are not robots and we are not computers who have been preprogrammed to function a particular way (if anything, this sounds like Darwinian evolution that says we are all just a combination of various chemical reactions and so "free-will" is nothing but an illusion. They would say we are nothing more than chemical machines and so our acts are more reactions to environments based on chemicals in our brains than any controllable "will.") However, I believe that God made humans with the freedom to choose. Because we are fallen people in a fallen world, we require grace. On our own, we are doomed. We cannot meet the standard of a holy God. So, "free-will" is not really definable any more than a "soul" is something that can be quantified. I dont know why one of my kids will obey me and lovingly help out around the house while the other one is strong-willed, selfish and chooses to make a fuss about the exact same chore. I just dont think God put it in one of the kids to obey and the other to quarrel. (BTW, I have pretty sweet kids..lol). I just think they battle the same thing we do. Each day we choose....pick up the cross...or live for myself. It's our choice and it is why God holds us responsible (just as I hold my kids, not God, responsible for their obedience or disobedience).

 

[StanJ]

However, I believe that God made humans with the freedom to choose. Because we are fallen people in a fallen world, we require grace. On our own, we are doomed. We cannot meet the standard of a holy God. So, "free-will" is not really definable any more than a "soul" is something that can be quantified. I dont know why one of my kids will obey me and lovingly help out around the house while the other one is strong-willed, selfish and chooses to make a fuss about the exact same chore. I just dont think God put it in one of the kids to obey and the other to quarrel. (BTW, I have pretty sweet kids..lol). I just think they battle the same thing we do. Each day we choose....pick up the cross...or live for myself. It's our choice and it is why God holds us responsible (just as I hold my kids, not God, responsible for their obedience or disobedience).

Amen, and Amen!!!

 

[justaname]

Wormwood,

Blessings in Christ; may our God continue to grow and strengthen you in the love and knowledge of Him in this new year!

I am opting against quoting fully your two responses. Through this post though I hope to give more light in accordance with what I interpret the scriptures to present. I do see this side topic as being attached to the doctrine of the perseverance of the saints, so I am yet to think we need to start our own thread. I appreciate your position and have had time to contemplate prayerfully over what was presented. I have also read over some of Oz's post in the thread "Grace" knowing of the doctrines being supported there and fully appreciating them also. I must reiterate that I am unstudied in one school or system of doctrine, so as I encounter new insight into the text I am completely open to allowing that insight to form my opinion. Thus as stated I have held to some points of Calvinism and to others of Arminianism. As I read into the fathers of these seemingly opposing views I am finding they were much closer in their interpretations than their proponents present. This perhaps is why it may seem I am using a specific jargon when in truth I am simply attempting to convey what I interpret without all the theological baggage attached. So please if I use a term that you perceive may have a specific meaning, understand I may not mean what you interpret me presenting. I apologize in advance for any confusion as this is not my intent.

Concerning election and the depraved state of humanity we have differing views which is evident. I am convinced thus far God is completely sovereign in His election of individuals for salvation. From what I currently understand you are convinced God is sovereign in the election of the plan of salvation, yet individuals are sovereign in their choice of believing the gospel, thus those who opt against the gospel have no excuse. If I have presented your view falsely please correct me, yet please be succinct in your idea of election concerning individuals. The driving force behind my advancing idea of sovereign election is the depraved state of humanity. I see the scriptures present the idea that man chooses darkness over the light out of shame and personal wicked desire.

John Piper speaks well here...
When we speak of man's depravity we mean man's natural condition apart from any grace exerted by God to restrain or transform man.
There is no doubt that man could perform more evil acts toward his fellow man than he does. But if he is restrained from performing more evil acts by motives that are not owing to his glad submission to God, then even his "virtue" is evil in the sight of God.
Romans 14:23 says, "Whatever does not proceed from faith is sin." This is a radical indictment of all natural "virtue" that does not flow from a heart humbly relying on God's grace.
The terrible condition of man's heart will never be recognized by people who assess it only in relation to other men. Romans 14:23 makes plain that depravity is our condition in relation to God primarily, and only secondarily in relation to man. Unless we start here we will never grasp the totality of our natural depravity.
https://www.monergism.com/thethreshold/articles/piper/depravity.html

I think we both agree man's heart is desperately wicked, yet I affirm as do the Scriptures that man does not seek God (Romans 3:9-10,18). Here somehow we disagree.

Referring back to John 3:20-21 I affirm some do come to the light yet it is clear those whose works are the deeds of God come to the light. "his deeds have been wrought in God." Apart from God's work men hate the light and will not come to it lest their deeds be exposed. Looking back to the garden Adam and Eve hid themselves from the Lord. It was by God drawing them out that they came to Him. So it is for all the progeny of Adam; it is by a work of God that humans come into the Light.

I like this quote also by Piper...
In Romans 7:18 Paul says, "I know that no good dwells in me, that is, in my flesh." This is a radical confession of the truth that in our rebellion nothing we think or feel is good. It is all part of our rebellion. The fact that Paul qualifies his depravity with the words, "that is, in my flesh," shows that he is willing to affirm the good of anything that the Spirit of God produces in him (Romans 15:18). "Flesh" refers to man in his natural state apart from the work of God's Spirit. So what Paul is saying in Romans 7:18 is that apart from the work of God's Spirit all we think and feel and do is not good. Picking up on the term "flesh" above (man apart from the grace of God) we find Paul declaring it to be totally enslaved to rebellion. Romans 8:7-8 says, "For the mind that is set on the flesh is hostile to God; it does not submit to God's law, indeed it cannot; and those who are in the flesh cannot please God."

The "mind of the flesh" is the mind of man apart from the indwelling Spirit of God ("You are not in the flesh, you are in the Spirit, if the Spirit of God really dwells in you," Romans 8:9). So natural man has a mindset that does not and cannot submit to God. Man cannot reform himself. Ephesians 2:1 says that we Christians were all once "dead in trespasses and sins." The point of deadness is that we were incapable of any life with God. Our hearts were like a stone toward God (Ephesians 4:18; Ezekiel 36:26). Our hearts were blind and incapable of seeing the glory of God in Christ (2 Corinthians 4:4-6). We were totally unable to reform ourselves.

This is the natural state of all of humanity until God supersedes with the truth of His gospel modifying the condition of the heart of the individual.
For God, who said, "Light shall shine out of darkness," is the One who has shone in our hearts to give the Light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Christ. (2 Corinthians 4:6)
This action by God is ultimately prepared in the mind of God before the foundations of the world, yet is realized by the individual at the moment of belief. Although it is the act of God that initiates and activates belief the individual freely chooses positively in the belief. Thus I would say God is first cause in belief as He is planner, initiate, and positive force bringing the individual to belief by previously preparing the individual's heart before birth. All of this is to the praise of His glory for His namesake in accordance with His will and good pleasure.

To support this idea of God preparing hearts I use this scripture:
From the ESV: For you formed my inward parts; you knitted me together in my mother's womb.
I praise you, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made. Wonderful are your works; my soul knows it very well. - Psalm 139:13-14

Here is the NET: Certainly you made my mind and heart; you wove me together in my mother's womb.

Here is the NIV: For you created my inmost being; you knit me together in my mother's womb.


This is your quote:
I think Romans 5 makes it clear though that Christ's work that we live under original grace, not original sin. I'll just leave it at that for now, but there is much that could be said in this area if you want to explore it deeper.

I say lets explore deeper. Let me state I see the context of Romans 5 through verse 5:1. Thereby when Paul speaks of justification, reconciliation, and righteousness he is speaking of those who are of the faith. Perhaps you see something different. I am eager to see.

This chapter 5 of Romans is the bearer of condemnation for infants and mentally handicapped, which is why they need God's mercy. In truth death is still in effect for infants, mentally handicapped, and even the unborn. Thus literal and spiritual death are still in the world which are the effect of one transgression. This is the point of Romans 5:14 and it holds true for all unbelievers. Ezekiel 18:19-20 does not contradict this.

Another quote:
3. God does not delight in the destruction of the wicked, yet His divine justice must be served. In His mercy He chooses to save some.

Hmmmm, could you rephrase this? I dont see what you are asking. I think the notion that "He chooses to save some" is in direct conflict with the Scriptural teaching that God desires all to be saved (if the idea that "chooses" means a monergistic, predetermined choice to save some and not others). I would word it like this: "God does not delight in the destruction of the wicked, yet his divine justice must be served. In mercy, he offers salvation to all. Some choose to accept his offer of salvation."

Your quote of #3 was actually my response to your question. There is no conflict between saving some and desiring all to be saved. Man is in rebellion to God, and God is just. In His mercy he offers His salvation to all, yet all reject God. None seek Him for they are hostile towards Him, in rebellion. In His grace and mercy He saves some from even themselves. These are chosen out of His will for His purpose.

18 So then He has mercy on whom He desires, and He hardens whom He desires.
19 You will say to me then, “Why does He still find fault? For who resists His will?”
20 On the contrary, who are you, O man, who answers back to God? The thing molded will not say to the molder, “Why did you make me like this,” will it?
21 Or does not the potter have a right over the clay, to make from the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for common use?
22 What if God, although willing to demonstrate His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction?
23 And He did so to make known the riches of His glory upon vessels of mercy, which He prepared beforehand for glory,
24 even us, whom He also called, not from among Jews only, but also from among Gentiles.


Verse 24 is bolded for emphasis to show context...Paul is stating "even us" individual believers whom He also called. This calling is an effectual calling as you can seen in Romans 8:28-33. In Romans 9 Paul is speaking of sovereign election of nations and individuals evidenced in the initial context of the Jews, switching to the twins both as nations and individuals, then to Pharaoh as an individual, and finally to individual believers from among the Jews and Gentiles.

 

[Wormwood]

justaname,

Blessings brother. Thank you for your response. I pray also that God blesses your year as well. I appreciate your eagerness to explore this and be open to other ideas. I also are more than willing to be shaped in my understanding on this issue. I probably do not sound as flexible, but that is simply because I have looked into the issue for many years...but I also try to keep an open mind and heart on any debatable issue in Scripture.

From what I currently understand you are convinced God is sovereign in the election of the plan of salvation, yet individuals are sovereign in their choice of believing the gospel, thus those who opt against the gospel have no excuse.

Not exactly. I would not say the individual is "sovereign" in their choice. I certainly think that not only are people shaped by a host of factors beyond their control, but also that every individual requires grace to come to faith. You are right, no one seeks God. However, God does seek us and gives us grace so that we have the capacity to respond to his voice. I would not disagree with this particular quote from Piper except for the final part where he links this need for faith with "total" depravity (which, for him, means a person cannot even exercise faith on his/her without God's irresistable grace). So, here is where I think the differences for where I would stand and what someone like Piper would affirm:

Both of us believe man is depraved and does not seek God. Both believe God seeks us and we are reliant upon His grace for salvation as well as to do that which is truly pleasing in His sight. The difference is that Piper would say that man is "totally depraved" such that an individual cannot even accept the Gospel unless they are specifically "chosen" and given the capacity to do so through His irresistable grace. This is where I would disagree. God gives us grace so that we can accept the Gospel, but that grace is not irresistable. God gives us "ears to hear" and "eyes to see" and yet some still harden their hearts, close their eyes and plug their ears. This is their choice. Of course, they would not even have this choice if it were not for God's grace at work.

I think we both agree man's heart is desperately wicked, yet I affirm as do the Scriptures that man does not seek God (Romans 3:9-10,18). Here somehow we disagree.

No, I also affirm that man does not seek God. Jesus came to us. God's grace in Christ came to us. The Gospel comes to us and that message is powerful (Romans 1:16-17; 10:17; Heb. 4:12.) and can break through the barrier of the sinners heart to convict them of sin, righteousness and judgment (John 16:8-15). I just reject the idea that our depravity is "total" such that the grace that is found in the cross of Christ (Rom. 5:17) and the power of the Spirit through the preached Gospel is insufficient to allow a person the capacity to respond to it. God does not have to restore us via irressistable grace and determine our salvation before we can respond to the Gospel. God's grace in the cross and through the preached Word is sufficient to give a sinner the capacity to see its goodness and accept or reject it. They cannot make that choice apart from preventing grace (grace that precedes salvation), but this does not mean that grace makes the choice for them (irresistable grace). I hope that makes better sense.

This is the natural state of all of humanity until God supersedes with the truth of His gospel modifying the condition of the heart of the individual.

I agree with this. The question is "How does the Gospel modify the condition of the heart of the individual?" That is where the disagreement comes into play for the Arminian and the Calvinist. Both agree that man is depraved. But is man so depraved that not even the Word of God and the cross of Christ is sufficient to break through to them? Does God have to unilaterially save them and make them part of the "chosen" by an act of monergism, or does God's grace call for cooperation/synergism? I believe the latter. God's grace modifies the heart such that a person has the capacity to respond and and gives them freedom to accept his gift...his grace does not mandate anything. It provides choice when there was none. It does not move a person from not being able to choose anything but evil to not being able to choose anything but the good of the Gospel.

This chapter 5 of Romans is the bearer of condemnation for infants and mentally handicapped, which is why they need God's mercy. In truth death is still in effect for infants, mentally handicapped, and even the unborn. Thus literal and spiritual death are still in the world which are the effect of one transgression. This is the point of Romans 5:14 and it holds true for all unbelievers. Ezekiel 18:19-20 does not contradict this.

I dont have a lot of time, but let me try to explain a little more of my understanding on Romans 5 so you know where I am coming from. The point of Romans 5 is that the power of what the second Adam (Jesus) did is greater than the act of the first. The first Adam sinned and we all feel the effects of that. Yes, children die even when they havent transgressed a law (this does not mean they are guilty, it just means they are the offspring of the first Adam). Just like a child who is born blind doesnt mean they were born that way because they sinned or their parents sinned in such a way as to warrant this kind of handicap. Rather, the handicap is the result of a world that has been deeply marred by the sin of Adam (which also gives us a depraved nature by which we are all certain to sin and incur guilt as well, given the opportunity and mental capacity).

Yet, Paul tells us that what Christ did was even more powerful that what the first Adam did. Adam unleashed depravity, sin and death on the world through his one act. But Jesus unleashed grace and favor from God through his act of dying for us. Look at this verse:

“But the free gift is not like the trespass. For if many died through one man’s trespass, much more have the grace of God and the free gift by the grace of that one man Jesus Christ abounded for many. And the free gift is not like the result of that one man’s sin. For the judgment following one trespass brought condemnation, but the free gift following many trespasses brought justification. For if, because of one man’s trespass, death reigned through that one man, much more will those who receive the abundance of grace and the free gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man Jesus Christ. Therefore, as one trespass led to condemnation for all men, so one act of righteousness leads to justification and life for all men. For as by the one man’s disobedience the many were made sinners, so by the one man’s obedience the many will be made righteous. Now the law came in to increase the trespass, but where sin increased, grace abounded all the more, so that, as sin reigned in death, grace also might reign through righteousness leading to eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.” (Romans 5:15–21, ESV)

So, I see these very challenging verses telling us a couple things about the power of the cross: First, Christ's act of righteousness is more powerful than Adam's sin because Adam's one sin led the entire world into sin and death, but Christ's one act of righteousness has to power to forgive and clean up all of the mess that has transpired from that one act of Adam until now (contra limited atonement). Second, Adam's one sin brought condemnation and judgment upon the entire world, yet Christ's one act of righteousness has brought grace to the entire world.

It seems very clear to me that God's grace in Christ stretches to the same scope of Adam's sin. God's grace is not limited. It doesnt only apply to the chosen. The cross has the power to forgive ALL who believe. If not, how could we say that Christ's act is more powerful than Adam's? This means that through the cross, grace is poured out on the world so that all are given the capacity to choose and are given the means to accept life. Adam brought man into depravity such that they could not escape, did not seek God and condemned the world to darkness and death. The cross of Christ has overcome that darkness and now grace reigns which is able to lead people to eternal life in Jesus Christ. So, these verses show the power of Christ's cross to overcome the effects of Adam's sin on a universal scale. These verses do not teach original sin, but original grace. Dont confuse this with "universalism." I dont think Paul is teaching here that all will be saved, as clearly that is not his intention as seen in the context of Romans. However, he is teaching that God's grace reigns currently and all have the capacity to find eternal life through the grace poured out at the cross. Again, if the world is truly "totally depraved" such that infants carry Adam's guilt and are destined for hell and sinners cannot even see and respond to the Gospel, then certainly Adam's sin would have to be considered as more powerful than the work of the cross. Otherwise, an additional work of "enlightenment" or "quickening" by God for them to embrace the Gospel would not be needed.

I hope this makes sense...im writing in a rush with no real time to check for coherency. Lol. I'll try to respond more later. Have a blessed day. Also, feel free to start another thread on a more specific topic if you want and just provide the link and I will join it.

 

[justaname]

Wormwood,

Respectfully the majority of your post is speaking against limited atonement. Now I myself was never arguing that position. I do believe Piper holds to that doctrine, yet I do not see that doctrine forming his argument. The most convincing portion of his argument is the intrepretation of Romans 8:7-9
For the mind that is set on the flesh is hostile to God, for it does not submit to God's law; indeed, it cannot.
8 Those who are in the flesh cannot please God.
9 You, however, are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if in fact the Spirit of God dwells in you. Anyone who does not have the Spirit of Christ does not belong to him.

The indwelling of the Holy Spirit enables us to move from the mind set on the flesh to being in the Spirit. Otherwise we are hostile to God without the Spirit.

Another portion you did not respond to was where I made the argument that God designs the most inward parts of a person, which I interpret to mean the mind, heart, and soul of a man.

You see I do agree with God's grace being extended to all. God does nothing to hold men back from believing in the atonement of Jesus Christ and the gospel of grace. It is the pride of man and their hostility towards God that holds them back. If left to our own, all would do that. If a heart is a stone to God, who but God Himself can turn stone to flesh?

In the love of Christ,
Justaname