It is utter nonsense to claim that TULIP (with a P for Perseverance of the Saints) destroys assurance of salvation.Indeed. The TULIP doctrine kills, steals and destroys ones faith and assurance of their salvation.
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
It is utter nonsense to claim that TULIP (with a P for Perseverance of the Saints) destroys assurance of salvation.Indeed. The TULIP doctrine kills, steals and destroys ones faith and assurance of their salvation.
I was thinking of this part . . .Except I never claimed that men have no free will, so it is actually an irrelevant point.
Try reading the first few posts and see what I actually did write.
Try responding to the serious posts directed to you rather than the humor directed to another.atpollard: "What a coincidence! I have a full copy of MY Gospel and all of my Letters to the Church available online, too. Is that enough to prove that I am the Apostle John? :)"
Hardly, because you are apparently ignorant of the scholarly consensus that the Apostle John is not the author of the Gospel and epistles that bear "John's" name. Read almost any modern academic commentary on John to understand why.
atpollard: "Care to discuss the P, S and V texts that were assembled to form Genesis?"
No, because you haven't even identified the established sources correctly! Try JEDP.
atpollard: "Poor me, just having to trust God with no theology degree."
That's fine, but don't be proud of your lack of biblical education or act like it doesn't matter. In a sense, the Bible cannot be translated because a one to one correspondence between modern English and the original Hebrew and Greek is often lacking and the original words often derive their meaning from the cultural "language games" that determine their ancient usage and meaning. So an in depth education in the cultural background and historical situation of biblical texts can be important to any adequate understanding. That's why seminaries are needed and why good academically respectable commentaries on specific Bible books can be important for good Bible teaching by the laity.
An example would be nice. Again, your word does not mean as much as THE Word. Please, if you are going to correct me, by all means go ahead. But just saying this proves nothing; especially when your answer is 1 sentence long and includes 0 Scripture.
What a coincidence! I have a full copy of MY Gospel and all of my Letters to the Church available online, too. Is that enough to prove that I am the Apostle John? :)
I actually believe you.
It is just that identities really cannot be accurately verified online, so claims of credentials have to be taken with a grain of salt. I have a friend who likes to challenge so-called “experts” in Greek that try to bully people online with a smattering of Greek words by asking them questions that require them to translate Kioine Greek for themselves to read his question. His goal is simply to expose false “scholars” so people will not accept their teaching just because they had a semester of Greek.
As for me, my degree is in Architecture with a single “Bible Course” at college that did far more harm than good. (Care to discuss the P, S and V texts that were assembled to form Genesis? ... I don’t.) So I just have to muddle through the best I can with what God breathed into His Scripture and what His Holy Spirit allowed me to understand out of that scripture. Poor me, just having to trust God with no theology degree.
[We lay Christians deserve some sort of handicap to level the playing field.] :)
[EDIT: Hey, I looked up that dissertation and it was by some guy named “Gear, Spencer D.” and not “OzSpen”.]
claims of credentials have to be taken with a grain of salt
It is utter nonsense to claim that TULIP (with a P for Perseverance of the Saints) destroys assurance of salvation.
If by OSAS you mean the “say a prayer and go back to sinning” tripe that gets offered on Christian TV, then I agree. Meeting God is a life transforming experience ... if you have no change, then you ain’t met God.It does destroy OSAS.
The P indicates that those who persevere to the end of life are saved saints.
Now that is just plain nonsense. I could do a word search for someone named Pollard and claim to be them and offer a story about my online name ... how would your “historical research” help you verify my real identity?That's not how I did research for John Dominic Crossan's views of the historical Jesus and it's not the way I'd investigate the credentials of anyone. I suggest you get more info on how to do historical research.
Yes...and?prism,
Is ALL Scripture God-breathed (2 Tim 3:16-17 NIV) or only the NT when it comes to teaching on how we respond to God? In fact when Paul wrote to Timothy, the only Scripture available to them was the OT.
Scripture is sufficient and is it's own interpreter (as it is attended with it's Author, the Holy Spirit).By the way, citing a string of Scriptures without exposition is useless in explaining your point.
Ever hear of the power of the Gospel or the illuminating/quickening of the Spirit?There is NT evidence that people can respond to the Gospel message, even though they are dead in sin. A classic example is recorded in Acts 16.
So free will applies equally to fallen man as it does to unfallen Adam?People choose (because of their free will) between alternatives: to respond in faith and repentance to the Gospel OR to reject the Gospel.
Yes, the point is where does God's sovereignty stop and human responsibility begin? You seem to be stripping God of His 'free' will in favor of man's choice.There cannot be a Gospel response to receive salvation without human responsibility of the choice between Yes or No to the Gospel. Otherwise it is God’s authoritarian dictatorship that does away with certain biblical emphases.
You seem to assume a level playing field. Many die and perish at age 23 rejecting the Gospel. Others, while rejecting the Gospel at 23 are allowed to live until past 60 and in that time come to faith. An offer in and of itself is not enough, many factors involving God's dealings go into one coming to faith. Here is just one...How can this be? It’s because God’s grace has been extended to everyone and they respond in faith or reject the Gospel. We have this partially explained in Titus 2:11 (NIV), ‘For the grace of God has appeared that offers salvation to all people’.
Salvation is offered to all but not all respond in faith. That’s not because of irresistible grace because ‘the grace of God has appeared that offers salvation to all people’.
Don't take it with a grain of salt.What a coincidence! I have a full copy of MY Gospel and all of my Letters to the Church available online, too. Is that enough to prove that I am the Apostle John? :)
I actually believe you.
It is just that identities really cannot be accurately verified online, so claims of credentials have to be taken with a grain of salt. I have a friend who likes to challenge so-called “experts” in Greek that try to bully people online with a smattering of Greek words by asking them questions that require them to translate Kioine Greek for themselves to read his question. His goal is simply to expose false “scholars” so people will not accept their teaching just because they had a semester of Greek.
As for me, my degree is in Architecture with a single “Bible Course” at college that did far more harm than good. (Care to discuss the P, S and V texts that were assembled to form Genesis? ... I don’t.) So I just have to muddle through the best I can with what God breathed into His Scripture and what His Holy Spirit allowed me to understand out of that scripture. Poor me, just having to trust God with no theology degree.
[We lay Christians deserve some sort of handicap to level the playing field.] :)
[EDIT: Hey, I looked up that dissertation and it was by some guy named “Gear, Spencer D.” and not “OzSpen”.]
Yes...and?
Scripture is sufficient and is it's own interpreter (as it is attended with it's Author, the Holy Spirit).
Ever hear of the power of the Gospel or the illuminating/quickening of the Spirit?
So free will applies equally to fallen man as it does to unfallen Adam?
Yes, the point is where does God's sovereignty stop and human responsibility begin? You seem to be stripping God of His 'free' will in favor of man's choice.
You seem to assume a level playing field. Many die and perish at age 23 rejecting the Gospel. Others, while rejecting the Gospel at 23 are allowed to live until past 60 and in that time come to faith. An offer in and of itself is not enough, many factors involving God's dealings go into one coming to faith. Here is just one...
And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God. And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.
(Mat 16:16-17)
Now that is just plain nonsense. I could do a word search for someone named Pollard and claim to be them and offer a story about my online name ... how would your “historical research” help you verify my real identity?
How will my learning the rigors of “historical research” allow me to prove your online identity matches some real world identity?
Yes, the point is where does God's sovereignty stop and human responsibility begin? You seem to be stripping God of His 'free' will in favor of man's choice.
It is utter nonsense to claim that TULIP (with a P for Perseverance of the Saints) destroys assurance of salvation.
I was thinking of this part . . .
"We are (T)otally Incapable of choosing God on our own because sin causes us to always flee from God."
If that's so, then what is the meaning of a long and involved explanation of how no one can choose God, since it won't matter to any of them. Share the Gospel with the elect, see them saved, and get on with edifying them, that's what I say!
To the non-elect, it doesn't matter what you say, since they will never choose God anyway.
Not that I believe in an elect and non-elect preselected by God. The Gospel is to all, and all may receive.
Much love!
You're assuming I'm trying to dumb you down.atp,
I wish you would engage in discussion instead of making all these assertions that try to dumb me down.
View attachment 7119
Why doesn't Genesis 2:17 say THOU SHALT NOT?GENESIS 3:
[Genesis 3:1 NASB] 1 Now the serpent was more crafty than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said to the woman, "Indeed, has God said, 'You shall not eat from any tree of the garden'?"
Observation: Wherever you go, temptation will find you … even in paradise.
Speculation: Since temptation is unavoidable, the key must be how we deal with it.
[Genesis 3:2-3 NASB] 2 The woman said to the serpent, "From the fruit of the trees of the garden we may eat; 3 but from the fruit of the tree which is in the middle of the garden, God has said, 'You shall not eat from it or touch it, or you will die.'"
Observation: “or touch it” … Even people that were created “very good” and “blessed” and had never ‘sinned’ still felt it worthwhile to add to the word of God with a “thou shall not” that God did not say.
Speculation
I haven't found this to be true for me.: It is innate in all people to “miss the mark” when it comes to understanding the commands of God and we all want to add what makes sense to what scripture actually says. Thus the benefit of an honest challenge to our assumptions and a hard “second” look at scripture.
Agreed. Some want to be like God, some are treated like gods and so it's confirmed in their mind that they are, maybe some just want to do whatever they want to and God is an inconvenience to them...but for whatever reason, yes, pre-salvation man is not in tune with God --- even those that are "good" persons.[Genesis 3:4-5 NASB] 4 The serpent said to the woman, "You surely will not die! 5 "For God knows that in the day you eat from it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil."
Observation: Temptation calls into question the truthfulness of what God said and promises people what they most desire … to be like God.
Speculation: All men want what the serpent tempted Eve with. We all question the truth of the word of God and we all want to be god of our own lives (or to choose a god of our liking). That is what pre-fall Eve wanted and that is what all post-fall mankind wants in its natural (pre-salvation) state.
We cannot even depend on our conscience, or let it be our guide.[Genesis 3:6 NASB] 6 When the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was desirable to make [one] wise, she took from its fruit and ate; and she gave also to her husband with her, and he ate.
Observation: Here we have the very first recorded exercise of moral free will. Eve knows what God wants, so her conscience is intact, and she is able to reason. Using her 100% untainted free will, Eve chooses to believe God lied to her, directly disobey the command of God, and to rebel against the authority of God by trying to become like God. Adam, who is just as much morally untainted, uses his 100% untainted free will to believe that God personally lied to him (face to face), to disobey the command that God gave him personally, and to join in the rebellion to become gods. We have a 100% record of free will, unfallen human beings choosing to embrace rebellion and reject God.
Speculation: “The apple doesn’t fall far from the tree”. What Adam and Eve were, we are (only more so). It is innate in human nature to want to be a god and to reject the authority of God Almighty.
Were their eyes opened when they sinned....or did God open their eyes so they could see their sin? Monergism/Synergism[Genesis 3:7 NASB] 7 Then the eyes of both of them were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together and made themselves loin coverings.
Observation: Adam and Eve gained experiential knowledge of sin … they knew what it was to be in rebellion against God. As a result, they lost the freedom to be naked and unashamed (Gen 2:25) and felt the shame that they wanted to hide. They made covering of leaves to attempt to hide their nakedness (guilt and sin), but their covering was inadequate.
Speculation: We are born with an innate urge to sin (to be a god and rebel against God), but something still changes when we sin for ourselves. We are “spiritually dead” in our sins and we have lost that original communion and communication with God that Adam and Eve were born with and is our forfeited birthright as beings created in the image of God. Even in our ignorance, we instinctively attempt to clothe our spiritual nakedness in some sort of man made “religion” that is inadequate to the task. This is part of our natural spiritual “Total Inability”.
First, there is no greater sin today.[Genesis 3:8 NASB] 8 They heard the sound of the LORD God walking in the garden in the cool of the day, and the man and his wife hid themselves from the presence of the LORD God among the trees of the garden.
Observation: The often repeated “free will” mantra is that people choose to come to God for forgiveness. Here are two people that have no experiential reason to fear God (God has never harmed them) and the very first opportunity they have to exercise their free will and run to God, they exercise their free will and run and hide instead.
Speculation: How much more reason do we, living today, have to run and hide from the presence of God to hide our far greater sins? This is “Total Inability” of people to choose to come to God for forgiveness because of our human nature.
There were no other individuals to call except for Adam and Eve![Genesis 3:9 NASB] 9 Then the LORD God called to the man, and said to him, "Where are you?"
Observation: God initiated contact with the people that were trying to hide from Him. God called to a specific person, not a general call to whomever might be listening.
Speculation: God always initiates contact because God must initiate contact; fallen people only want to hide from God. God always calls specific individuals because nobody would respond if they had a choice in the matter.
Interesting, but not correct.[Genesis 3:10-12 NASB] 10 He said, "I heard the sound of You in the garden, and I was afraid because I was naked; so I hid myself." 11 And He said, "Who told you that you were naked? Have you eaten from the tree of which I commanded you not to eat?" 12 The man said, "The woman whom You gave [to be] with me, she gave me from the tree, and I ate."
Observation: Adam was confronted by God and showed no intention of revealing what he had done, but just made empty excuses rather than confess and repent. God knows what happened (omniscience) and invites Adam to confess his sin. Adam responds in typical fallen human fashion by first blaming others (Eve) and then blaming God (“whom you gave me”) for the sin, but never accepting responsibility for his actions. This is human nature without any “special curse”.
Speculation: What Adam was, we still are. We have no intention of coming out of hiding to face God if we have a choice. God must draw us out individually and confront us with the reality of our sin. We will and do respond just like Adam, by first blaming everyone else and then blaming God for our sins. Adam was “Totally Unable” to do what was right and face God, confess his sin and repent of that sin all under the power of his free will … and we have the exact same “Total Inability” as children of Adam.
I've already commented on this.[Genesis 3:13 NASB] 13 Then the LORD God said to the woman, "What is this you have done?" And the woman said, "The serpent deceived me, and I ate."
Observation: Eve only confronts her sin when forced to confront it by God, and she uses her free will to choose to blame someone else rather than acknowledge, confess, repent and ask forgiveness.
Speculation: Eve is no less “Totally Unable” to do what is right than Adam was. This is the “Total Inability” of the human free will to do what God requires without some external compulsion by God.
[Genesis 3:21 NASB] 21 The LORD God made garments of skin for Adam and his wife, and clothed them.
Observation: God clothed Adam and Eve to cover their nakedness. Human attempts to cover nakedness are always inadequate. Something had to die to cover their nakedness … sin has a blood cost.
Speculation: Only God can cover the shame of our sin and guilt. All human efforts to cover our sin and guilt are “Totally Ineffective”. Only the shedding of blood, from the sacrifice chosen by God, by the hand of God, will cover our sin and guilt … anything and everything we do to “help” God is “Totally Ineffective”.