Are those who fall from faith still saved?

[puritan lad]

Wow Jac. Your theology is a mess. Let's talk about heresy, since you bring it up.

Question to Jac: I have read in your posts you believe that even if a Christian falls from the faith and becomes, say, Muslim he or she is still saved. Is this correct? If so, why?

Jac's Response: Yes, I believe that to be true

You are suggesting that if one (a former Christian) dies as a Muslim, they are saved. That is absolute nonsense, and a total lie. I pray that no former Christian turned Muslim is led astray by your sloppy nonsense. You may have blood on your hands.

Where does your faith come from Jac? Is it something meritorious that you concocted of your own resources, your small contribution to your salvation? If so, then you have a right to boast. You were able to come up with this faith all by yourself, whereas your unbelieving neighbor wasn't skilled enough to pull this off, since “not all have faith” (2 Thessalonians 3:2). If not, then where did it come from? The ability to believe is itself granted to us by God. (Philippians 1:29). The Bible is clear that our flesh profits nothing; that a man must be born of the Spirit BEFORE he can even see the kingdom of God, let alone enter it. (John 3:3)

I have also dealt with the verses that command belief, Jac. I've made it clear that permission and ability are two different things. All men MAY come, but no man CAN come. I can give you permission to flap your arms and fly to the moon. Does that mean that you have the ability to do it? God gave Pharoah a commandment, and then proceeded to harden his heart, that he would not obey it. More on that later.

I have thoroughly refuted your arguments with scripture, but you refuse to listen. What you call “exegesis” is really just trying to “explain away”. For example, in your irresponsible dealings with Rev. 20:11-15, you claim that, “a person's sins are never mentioned in this passage. What is a man condemned for? Is it his sin? By God, I say no. A person is condemned for not being found in the Book of Life. This means that he is dead in his sins. You see, he is not condemned for his sins, but for his death—that is, for his lack of life”. You claim this despite the fact that this passage clearly states that they are "judged according to their works (sin)". You also ignore the clear teaching that it is SIN that causes us to be blotted out of the Book of Life (Exodus 32:33).

You claim that “I do not hold that Christ's work on the cross was to save everyone, but to make atonement for all sin.” Christ work on the cross was to “secure eternal redemption” (Hebrews 9:12). For whom did He do this? HIS People. He came to “save HIS people from their sins” (Matthew 1:21).

Isaiah 53:11-12
“He shall see the labor of His soul,and be satisfied.
By His knowledge My righteous Servant shall justify many,
For He shall bear their iniquities.
Therefore I will divide Him a portion with the great,
And He shall divide the spoil with the strong,
Because He poured out His soul unto death,
And He was numbered with the transgressors,
And He bore the sin of many,
And made intercession for the transgressors.”

If Christ atoned for ALL sin, then how can those in Revelation 20 be judged according to their works? On what basis does anyone to Hell? As Charles Spurgeon correctly observed, "He has punished Christ, why should He punish twice for one offence? Christ has died for all His people's sins, and if thou art in the covenant, thou art one of Christ's people. Damned thou canst not be. Suffer for thy sins thou canst not. Until God can be unjust, and demand two payments for one debt, He cannot destroy the soul for whom Jesus died."

Think about it Jac. According to you, Hell is full of souls who were just as much bought with the blood of Christ as you and I. That is just not acceptable.

You theology of “election” is also nonsense. In fact, by definition, it isn't election. It is ratification. In your view, God doesn't really elect anyone, He just ratifies their choice. You write, “What does that mean, “elected in Christ”? “In Christ” refers to location or position. If I said, “I was chosen in the house,” or “He was chosen in the field,” we would not think that I was chosen to be in the house or chosen to be in the field. The implication is that, while in the house, I was chosen, or while in the field, he was chosen. Thus, we see that God looks at those “in Christ” and He chooses them. Which ones does He choose? ALL of them!”. Again, this is not election, it is ratification. According to you, people choose to be “in Christ”, and Jesus comes along and puts His stamp of approval on their choice. This is unscriptural. No one can choose to be “in Christ” unless it has been granted to him by the Father (John 6:65). “But of Him you are in Christ Jesus…” (1 Corinthians 1:30). What is really amusing is that you call this “unconditional” election. It couldn't be more conditional. In order to be “elected”, according to you, you must choose to be “in Christ”. This is a condition (as well as a work).

You wrote “no where in Scripture do we find the doctrine that regeneration precedes faith”. The Scripture clearly says so, as I quoted in 1 John 5:1, “...everyone who believes that Jesus is the Christ has been born of God”. This clearly places belief AFTER the new birth, and anyone who can read can see this, despite your naysaying. If you believe in Christ, you have already been born of God. Furthermore, those who are born again have been “born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.” (John 1:13). Could this scripture be any clearer?

Now, if you please, quit stalling and deal with Romans 9:10-24. All of the 5 points of Calvinism are clearly taught in this passage, as well as your objection that “Calvinism slanders God”.

FYI: For those who are wondering, the quotes attributed to Jac in this post came from http://discussions.godandscience.org/vi ... highlight=

Now with Lordship, Paul gives us a clear warning.

1 Corinthians 6:9-10
"Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God".

Paul was writing this to believers, Jac (1 Corinthians 1:2). Do not be deceived.

[B. W.]

This question is posed to Jac:

I have read in your posts you believe that even if a Christian falls from the faith and becomes, say, Muslim he or she is still saved. Is this correct? If so, why?

Wing this is in response to Jac and His comment made about a Christian becoming a Muslim.

A true Christian would never become a Muslim and if they did - then they were never saved, nor had the Holy Spirit. They would violate a spiritual principle found in Matthew 12: 25

Jesus - stated a truth when He said in Matthew 12:25 "But Jesus knew their thoughts, and said to them: “Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation, and every city or house divided against itself will not stand."

Therefore, if a so called professing Christian converted to Islam - would not this person be dividing God's kingdom as a Muslim?

Interesting how the context of Matthew leads to:

Matthew12:31 “Therefore I say to you, every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven men, but the blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven men."

I am not saying that the person committed this sin. I would agree that the person still could to return to Christ and be forgiven this but if they did not? What then? Would they have committed the sin Jesus spoke of?

All through the bible warns Israel not to go after other Gods and yet here, Jac, with all do respect, you claim that this is okay to do?

Heck, I made a dumb comment on the Hell Relevancy thread and admitted to putting my foot in my mouth for that — I'll be tasting toe jam for weeks for it but I did admit I was wrong for my comment. I hope Jac you can do the same:

The good book says:

Proverbs 27: 5, “Open rebuke is better than Love carefully concealed”

Proverbs 9:8, “Rebuke a wise man, and he will love you.”

Proverbs16:20, “He who heeds the word wisely will find good, and whoever trusts in the LORD, happy is he.”
-
-
-

[WingZero0]

AHHHHH!

I kind of sat back and watched this discussion to see what each of you believes. I was hoping atleast one of you would be right. Unfortunently neither are correct.

First:

You can't just make a blanket statement. You have to show HOW I've read too much into this. Now, I laid out very clearly why it is that everlasting life must be everlasting. You need to examine my exegesis and show where it is you disagree.

It was not a blanket statement. You ARE reading too much into it. It says "He who BELIEVES in Me shall have everlasting life." I suppose I should dissect this sentence. The "He" is any man (mankind), "who believes" is the verb in the present tense. This means that any man who currently and steadfastly has faith in Christ. A former Christian who turned Muslim or any other non-Christian religion no longer believes. The good part is in the prepositional phrase right afterwards "in Me". You have to believe in Christ. Again a former Christian no longer believes in Christ. But the last phrase is even better "shall have everlasting life." Any man who, in their heart, believes in Christ will have life that is everlasting. This everlasting life does not mean "once saved, always saved." It is merely an adjective used to describe life. Your argument falls apart with the verb. Believes.

Besides there are a plethora of other statements to show otherwise. "I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life, noone gets to the Father except through me." "He who believes in Me, as the Scripture has said, out of his heart will flow rivers of flowing water." Those are the only ones I can remember from the top of my head.

I don't see a single verse in the Bible that says that God has faith in us. Tell me, Wing, what is your understanding of "faith"?

I misunderstood your post wrong and now that I look back at it I realized it. I was basing it off of the verse you stated to YLHYLH. However I misunderstood what you were saying now so I apologize for that.

Now that is cleared up (I hope) I will move on to the debate between Jac and PL:

John6:64-65: "But there are some of you who do not believe. For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were who did not believe, and who would betray Him. And He said, "Therefore I have said to you that no one can come to Me unless it has been granted to him by My Father."

The above passage shows that there is a predestination. Noone can come to Christ unless it has been preordained by the Father. However, there is no double predestination as Calvinists believe. That would make God evil.

God's foreknowledge is nothing else than this: God knows all things before they happen. This foreknowledge extends over the godly and the wicked alike. But it is not the cause of evil or of sin. In other words, it is not what causes people to do wrong (which originally arises from the devil and mankind's wicked, perverse will. Nor does it cause their ruin, for which they themselves are responsile. But foreknowledge only regulates this and fixes a limit on their ruin, how long it should last. All this happens to serve His elect for their salvation, even though such ruin is evil in itself.

Predestination, or God's eternal election, covers only the godly, beloved children of God. IT is a cause of their salvation, which He also provides. He also provides. He lans what belongs to it as well. Our salvation is founded so firmly on it that the gates of hell cannot overcome it. It is not to be investigated in God's secret counsel. It is to be sought in God's Word, where it is revealed.

God's Word leads us to Christ, who is the Book of Life, in whom all are written and elected who are to be saved in eternity. Christ calls all sinners to HImself and promises them rest. He is eager that all people should come to Him and allow themselves to be helped. He offers them Himself in His Word and wants them to hear it and not to plug their ears or despise the Word. Furthermore, He promises the power and working of the Holy Spirit and divine assistance for perseverance and eternal salvation so that we may remain steadfast in the faith and gain eternal salvation.

We should not reach conclusion about our election to eternal life based on reason or God's Law. That would lead us either into reckless, loose, Epicurean life or into despair. IT would stir up destructive thoughts in people's hearts. For they cannot, as long as they follow their reason, successfully keep themselves from thinking "IF God has elected me to salvation, I cannot be condemned, no matter what I do." And again "If I am not elected to eternal life, it doesn't matter what good I do, its in vain anyway."

The true judgement about predestination must be learned alone from the Holy Gospel about Christ, in which it is clearly testified "For God has consigned all to disobedience, that He may have mercy on all (Romans 1-2); not wishing that any should perish, but that all should reach repentance"(2 Peter 3:9)

Now, let whoever is concerned about God's revealed will act on the order that St. Paul has described in the Epistle to the Romans. Paul first directs people to repentance, to knowledge of sins, to faith in Christ, to divine obedience. Then he speaks of the mystery of God's eternal election. This doctrine is useful and consolatory to the person who proceeds in this way. However, "many are called, but few are chosen" (Matt. 22:14). This does not mean that God is unwilling to save everybody. But the reason some are not is as follows: They do not listen to God's Word at all, but willfully despise it, plug their ears, and harden their hearts. In this way they block the ordinary way for the HOly SPirit so HE cannot perform His work in them. Or, when they have heard God's Word, they make light of it again and ignore it. But their wickedness is responsible for this, not God or His election. (2 Peter 2:1-3; LUke 11:49-52; Hebrews 12:25-26)

A Christian should concern himself with the article about God's eternal election only as far as it has been revealed in God's Word. His Word presents Christ to us as the Book of Life, which He opens and reveals to us by the preaching of the HOly Gospel as it is written in Romans 8:30, "And those whom He predestined He also called." In Him we are to seek the eternal election of the Father, who has determined in His eternal divine counsel that He would save no one except those who His Son Christ and truly believe in HIm. Other thoughts are to be banished. For they do not come from God, but from the suffestion of the evil foe. With such thoughts he attempts to weaken or entirely remove us from the glorious comfort we have in this helpful doctrine. In other words, we know that out of pure grace, without any merit of our own, we have been elected in Christ to eternal life. No one can pluck us out of His hand. He has not only promised this gracious election with mere words, but has also certified it with an oath and sealed it with the holy Sacraments. We can call these to mind in our most severe temptations and take comfort in them, and with them we can quench the fiery darts of the devil. (Ephesians 6:16)

Besides, we should act with the greatest diligence, to live according to God's will. As St. Peter encourages in 2 Peter 1:10, "make your calling and election sure." We should especially cling to the revealed Word, which cannot and will not fail us.

[WingZero0]

B.W.,

A true Christian would never become a Muslim and if they did - then they were never saved, nor had the Holy Spirit. They would violate a spiritual principle found in Matthew 12: 25

Not so. A Christian can lose faith. The strongest Christian (faith-wise) is still able to fall from the faith. When they believed they were saved, however, they fell and are no longer saved. They may not have been one of God's elect (ie they were never really going to heaven when you look at the whole scheme of things) but for that time in which they did believe they were saved.

Also, the sin of blasphemy of the Holy Spirit (for clarification's sake) is when someone hears the Gospel, knows it to be true, but says "Nah, I don't want any of that."

Other than that I agree.

[B. W.]

B.W.,

A true Christian would never become a Muslim and if they did - then they were never saved, nor had the Holy Spirit. They would violate a spiritual principle found in Matthew 12: 25

Not so. A Christian can lose faith. The strongest Christian (faith-wise) is still able to fall from the faith. When they believed they were saved, however, they fell and are no longer saved. They may not have been one of God's elect (ie they were never really going to heaven when you look at the whole scheme of things) but for that time in which they did believe they were saved.

Also, the sin of blasphemy of the Holy Spirit (for clarification's sake) is when someone hears the Gospel, knows it to be true, but says "Nah, I don't want any of that."

Other than that I agree.

Okay, good point I should have explain my personal definition of a true Christian, which is as follows so people would understand better — “A True Christian would not become a Muslim, or of another no-Christian-faith, nor lose his or her faith/salvation because they remained True to God till the end.”

That is what I mean be Truly Saved.

Parable of the Sower has examples of this in action. You can interpret the parable to mean that those that fell away — believed and fell astray or you can look at from this perspective — those that believed, belief's were in other things that distract. For example: The one who received on the wayside, belief was belief on the wayside where nothing takes root to grow in the heart and it is then easily stolen away. They tossed aside God and never let their heart attach to God's heart.

Likewise, the one received on the stony ground had no root in himself to attach his heart to Christ but instead his heart attached to other things. The other who received amongst the thorns, the belief of his heart attached to the things of this world and never to God's heart. But those that hear, understand, has their heart firmly attached to God and nothing can snatch them out of Gods hands (John 10:28-29) — if so Jesus then lied here.

I am not claiming what side, or viewpoint is correct, as God's word can be so ambiguous that it takes time to understand and grow. Maybe that is a test of His — to see who will spend time to take root in God. Who knows? I just posted an idea and observation of mine collected over the years as an old-geezer in Christ. Seen the parable in action all the time
-
-
-

[WingZero0]

Ok I see what your saying. However you said that the different places "do or don't let us attach our heart to God." The fact is, however, we don't attach anything to God by our own powers. Truely, we are corrupt and evil and despise God. It is the Holy Spirit, working in the Gospel and the Sacraments, that brings us closer to God. All we have is a volitional soul.

[B. W.]

.... All we have is a volitional soul.

Volitional: with deliberate intention -

- the act, or power, of using the will
-The act or an instance of making a conscious choice or decision
-A conscious choice or decision
-The power or faculty of choosing; the will

Maybe, that was what Jesus was referring too in the Parable of the Sower? Volitional Will - as you stated.

The seed — the word of God (His call) taking root in ones heart, How can it if ones volition is centered on what ever looks good at the moment along the way side? Or for that matter, how can God's word take root when a person's character lacks volition towards God due to life's pressures and adversities? Or how can God's word take root when ones volition is focused solely on materialism?

Question: But the good soil — what is that? How does volition come to play here?

[Jac3510]

You are suggesting that if one (a former Christian) dies as a Muslim, they are saved. That is absolute nonsense, and a total lie. I pray that no former Christian turned Muslim is led astray by your sloppy nonsense. You may have blood on your hands.

Let's not make blanket assertions, PL. Now, this is obviously rooted in your belief in the Final Perseverance of the Saints, which I soundly reject. I gave up that notion years ago. Of course, I never held the belief in Total Depravity, and thus Unconditonal Election->Limited Atonement that you do, either. For me, Perseverance was purely a theological issue. For you, there is a logical foundation at stake.

Where does your faith come from Jac? Is it something meritorious that you concocted of your own resources, your small contribution to your salvation? If so, then you have a right to boast. You were able to come up with this faith all by yourself, whereas your unbelieving neighbor wasn't skilled enough to pull this off, since “not all have faith” (2 Thessalonians 3:2). If not, then where did it come from? The ability to believe is itself granted to us by God. (Philippians 1:29). The Bible is clear that our flesh profits nothing; that a man must be born of the Spirit BEFORE he can even see the kingdom of God, let alone enter it. (John 3:3)

Faith is inherent to man. We all have faith. The question is where we place it. It is NOT a gift of God to be able to believe. I reject the notion that God grants us the gift of faith. To say that by placing my faith in Christ I have earned my faith is directly contrary to Scripture. Throughout Paul's letters, he constantly sets faith against works. Does this need to be proven, PL? Then does it not follow that faith is not a work? If we work for salvation, then salvation is earned. But, we do not earn it, thus it must be without works. However, for Paul, faith is not a work. Thus, to place our faith in God is not earning our salvation.

Looking up 2 Thess. 3:2, I suppose that you are reading this in the absolute sense. Not everyone has faith because God not given it to them? What's the context, PL? Paul is talking about being delivered from evil people. Why? Because evil people don't have faith. Who do they not have faith in? Jesus Christ. So Paul is saying that not everyone has faith in Christ, and as a result of that, he and his friends will be persecuted. Because of that, he requested prayer. That's a plain reading, PL.

Looking at Phil. 1:29, keep the main thing the main thing. The main thrust of that passage is that it has been granted to the Philipians to suffer for Christ. That is an honor. It is a blessing. Furthermore, it's meritorious. The honor of suffering comes from standing firm (v. 27). Now, take that same idea and apply it to "believe in Him." How is believing meritorious? I already covered this. All men are drawn by the Spirit. They are first drawn by natural revelation, and then by special revelation. To the extent that they respond, they are granted more revelation until God opens their heart so that they are able to believe. At that point, they choose whether or not to believe. Before, they were not capable, but because they followed the drawing, they were granted the ability to believe. That is, God removed from them the spiritual blinders. That does NOT mean that He made them to believe. See Acts 10; 16:13-15.

Looking at John 3, Jesus makes the categorical statement that to see the Kingdom of Heaven, one must be born again. How is one born again? By belief (3:16). There is nothing here about faith being granted as a gift. None of us have seen the Kingdom yet. We won't until Christ returns.

I have also dealt with the verses that command belief, Jac. I've made it clear that permission and ability are two different things. All men MAY come, but no man CAN come. I can give you permission to flap your arms and fly to the moon. Does that mean that you have the ability to do it? God gave Pharoah a commandment, and then proceeded to harden his heart, that he would not obey it. More on that later.

You'll have to direct me to the posts where you have handled those passages. I've not seen them in our discussions. I've seen very little exegesis from you, PL.

As for your May/Can paradigm, I call rubbish. Suppose you give me permission to flap my arms and fly to the moon. Fine. No big deal. But, suppose you give me the COMMAND to do so, and if I don't, then I am punished for it. Well, now we are in a totally different ballpark. And let's take it even further. Suppose in some strange world you are capable of giving me the ability to flap my arms and fly to the moon. And yet, you refuse to give me that ability. If you command me to do so, it is you who are at fault, not me.

I have thoroughly refuted your arguments with scripture, but you refuse to listen. What you call “exegesis” is really just trying to “explain away”. For example, in your irresponsible dealings with Rev. 20:11-15, you claim that, “a person's sins are never mentioned in this passage. What is a man condemned for? Is it his sin? By God, I say no. A person is condemned for not being found in the Book of Life. This means that he is dead in his sins. You see, he is not condemned for his sins, but for his death—that is, for his lack of life”. You claim this despite the fact that this passage clearly states that they are "judged according to their works (sin)". You also ignore the clear teaching that it is SIN that causes us to be blotted out of the Book of Life (Exodus 32:33).

You have a strange definition of "explain away." In every passage you've presented, I've offered a simple exegesis that actually teaches a positive lesson. To my knowledge, I've shown what I see the passages in question to actually mean . . . not just what they don't mean. The latter would be explaining away. If I've missed offering the explanation of the actual meaning of any passages, feel free to give me a list.

As for Rev. 20:11-15 . . . what is that you said about repeating a lie long enough and loud enough? I've already shown in detail why your position doesn't work. Now, your problem is that you equate "works" with "sins." But, PL, that's NOT WHAT THE PASSAGE SAYS. Can you find me a manuscript that reads hamartia there and not ergon? Works may or may not be sins.

Now, for those who aren't familiar, there are two possible understandings of this passage. The first is that the works in this passage are used to determine the level of one's punishment. My theology professor holds this view, although he admits it is more for emotional reasons. He just can't see God letting the little old lady who was really nice but just never accepted to gospel suffer as much as Hitler. I appreciate the sentiment, but I reject it in favor of the second view.

The second possibility, which I hold, is that God is being a perfectly fair judge, as per Rom. 2:5-7, which the NIV renders as follows:

• But because of your stubbornness and your unrepentant heart, you are storing up wrath against yourself for the day of God's wrath, when his righteous judgment will be revealed. God "will give to each person according to what he has done." To those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality, he will give eternal life.

I take this to mean exactly what Paul is saying. If a person persists in doing good and seeking glory and honor, he will be granted eternal life. Keep in mind, up to this point, Paul has not yet presented the gospel of faith in Christ! He has been focusing on the sinfulness of man. By their own works they will show themselves condemned.

So, God is going to offer these people a fair trial. They are going to come forward and offer their best defense. Their good has outweighed their bad. So, the books will be opened. Their evidence will be honestly evaluated. Have they persisted in seeking glory and doing good? The answer will be no. So, God will look to see if their name is in the Book of Life. If it isn't there, they will be condemned, because they will be dead in their sins.

The condemnation, then, is for the state of spiritual deadness. This is the ultimate example of the concept of sowing and reaping. A dead person cannot be in the presence of a living and holy God forever, so they must be assigned the place of the dead . . . in this case, the Lake of Fire.

Now, it may be that their works will also play a part in the level of their torment. But, I'd rather not go that far, only because the text doesn't say so. I personally doubt it on other grounds. Remember, in my view, ALL sin has been paid for. I'm just reading the text straight forward, PL. It doesn't say people are condemned for their sins. It doesn't say they are condemned for their works. It says they are judged by them. It says they are condemned for not being in the Book of Life. How do you get there? By being alive. How do you become alive? By being born again. how do you get born again? By believing in Christ alone for your salvation. QED.

You claim that “I do not hold that Christ's work on the cross was to save everyone, but to make atonement for all sin.” Christ work on the cross was to “secure eternal redemption” (Hebrews 9:12). For whom did He do this? HIS People. He came to “save HIS people from their sins” (Matthew 1:21).

I've already handled Hebrews 9:12, just as I already handled Rev. 20:11-15. See, this is what I got on to you before about, PL. You can't ignore an argument. If you don't like my exegesis, point out the flaws. Don't pretend I never dealt with your arguments. That's your game, not mine.

If Christ atoned for ALL sin, then how can those in Revelation 20 be judged according to their works? On what basis does anyone to Hell? As Charles Spurgeon correctly observed, "He has punished Christ, why should He punish twice for one offence? Christ has died for all His people's sins, and if thou art in the covenant, thou art one of Christ's people. Damned thou canst not be. Suffer for thy sins thou canst not. Until God can be unjust, and demand two payments for one debt, He cannot destroy the soul for whom Jesus died."

Hopefully my above exegesis should explainn how a person can be judged for their works, even if sin is atoned for. Note that I reject the view that torment is increased for increasing sin . . . at least, I do on those grounds. There are other grounds on which I may be inclined to accept it . . . that's an issue I still have to think through.

Anyway, I just refer you to the above exegesis.

Think about it Jac. According to you, Hell is full of souls who were just as much bought with the blood of Christ as you and I. That is just not acceptable.

No, sir, it isn't. Hell is full of people who sins are not held against them, yes. But we are bought the moment we are elected. That required the shedding of blood--Christ's, do be exact--thus, we were bought by His blood. We were redeemed. But those who rejected the free gift of grace have not been bought.

I don't think you really understand how important election is in my view of salvation, PL . . . good for me it's the next idea you pick up on.

You theology of “election” is also nonsense. In fact, by definition, it isn't election. It is ratification. In your view, God doesn't really elect anyone, He just ratifies their choice. You write, “What does that mean, “elected in Christ”? “In Christ” refers to location or position. If I said, “I was chosen in the house,” or “He was chosen in the field,” we would not think that I was chosen to be in the house or chosen to be in the field. The implication is that, while in the house, I was chosen, or while in the field, he was chosen. Thus, we see that God looks at those “in Christ” and He chooses them. Which ones does He choose? ALL of them!”. Again, this is not election, it is ratification. According to you, people choose to be “in Christ”, and Jesus comes along and puts His stamp of approval on their choice. This is unscriptural. No one can choose to be “in Christ” unless it has been granted to him by the Father (John 6:65). “But of Him you are in Christ Jesus…” (1 Corinthians 1:30). What is really amusing is that you call this “unconditional” election. It couldn't be more conditional. In order to be “elected”, according to you, you must choose to be “in Christ”. This is a condition (as well as a work).

No, you've misrepresented my view. What you are saying is logically impossible. Follow this VERY closely with me . . . slow down your reading here:

Christ cannot have stamped his seal of approval on our belief, thus electing us, simply because our belief was subsequent to election. Election is a PRETEMPORAL event. Thus, it is NOT based on our belief. It is a logical impossibility to base something on something that has not happened.

Now, as I have already explained, God chose before the foundations of the world certain people, and these people are saved. You see, PL, being in Christ does NOT save. God chose to save those in Christ. Let me say that again:

Being in Christ does not save. God chose to save those in Christ.

How do we get "in Christ"? By being born again. How are we born again? By belief. So, your entire argument against my position is moot. Try again.

You wrote “no where in Scripture do we find the doctrine that regeneration precedes faith”. The Scripture clearly says so, as I quoted in 1 John 5:1, “...everyone who believes that Jesus is the Christ has been born of God”. This clearly places belief AFTER the new birth, and anyone who can read can see this, despite your naysaying. If you believe in Christ, you have already been born of God. Furthermore, those who are born again have been “born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.” (John 1:13). Could this scripture be any clearer?

No, sir, it does not "clearly" say so. Why do you insert the word "already"? Do you know there is a word in Greek for "already"? If what you are saying is true, shouldn't John have used it?

But, let's get a bit more technical, shall we? First off, what translation are you using? "Has been born" is very different in meaning from "is born." The former is a perfect tense, while the latter is a present tense. Every major translation that I looked up . . . the NASB, KJV, NKJV, NIV, and ESV all render this a simple present. The word here is definitely in the perfect tense . . . anyway. That bothers me, because that seems like a pretty simple translation. If ALL the major translations are going with that, though, there is probably something I don't know.

Actually, before I go and lay out the argument I had planned, let me talk to my Greek professor. I don't want to explain away a text. I know what I think it means, but I want to confirm it. Believe it or not, I don't know everything .

Moving on:

As for John 1:13, my post on election above should clear that up as well.

Now, if you please, quit stalling and deal with Romans 9:10-24. All of the 5 points of Calvinism are clearly taught in this passage, as well as your objection that “Calvinism slanders God”.

LOL. Seriously, thanks for the laugh. Seriously . . . how many of my arguments have you failed to answer? Over and over and over again . . .

Besides, I have absolutely no problem with Rom. 9 at all. Do you really think there is a "gotcha" in there I haven't thought about, PL? Seriously. As common as the position is, do you think I've not already considered it? If and when I get around to exegeting that passage, I'll do it properly. I have other things to work on that that particular passage. And, again, you haven't answered hardly anything I've thrown your way. How about the regeneration coming through faith, as proved previously? How about the responsiveness of the spirituall dead? How about the exegesis of the "all" verses that you just covered with a blanket statement that ignored my arguments? How about in this very thread, about the rejection of the OFFER of salvation?

You start answering arguments, PL. I've been doing that for you since day one.

And, I've already dealt with what it means to "inherit the Kingdom," so we've covered the last verse you mentioned as well.

Anything else you'd like me to answer?

[puritan lad]

When they believed they were saved, however, they fell and are no longer saved. They may not have been one of God's elect (ie they were never really going to heaven when you look at the whole scheme of things) but for that time in which they did believe they were saved.

What were they saved from when they believed?

[puritan lad]

My assertion is based on the fact that if one dies as a non-believer, that person will go to Hell. For he that believes not is condemned already. That person was never saved. Jesus Never knew them.

1 John 2:19
“They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would have continued with us; but they went out that they might be made manifest, that none of them were of us.”

The “backslider” was never saved. He was “not of us”. If what you say is true, then all of the warnings in scripture against apostasy are meaningless. All you have to do is believe, even for a brief moment, and your guaranteed heaven.

Faith is inherent to man. We all have faith.

Says Who? 2 Thess. 3:2 disagrees.

The question is where we place it. It is NOT a gift of God to be able to believe. I reject the notion that God grants us the gift of faith. To say that by placing my faith in Christ I have earned my faith is directly contrary to Scripture. Throughout Paul's letters, he constantly sets faith against works. Does this need to be proven, PL? Then does it not follow that faith is not a work? If we work for salvation, then salvation is earned. But, we do not earn it, thus it must be without works. However, for Paul, faith is not a work. Thus, to place our faith in God is to earn our salvation.

Again, if this is true, then you should receive some of the glory for your own salvation. You were smart enough to put your faith in the right place, while your unbelieving neighbor just wasn't as wise as you.

Looking up 2 Thess. 3:2, I suppose that you are reading this in the absolute sense. Not everyone has faith because God not given it to them? What's the context, PL? Paul is talking about being delivered from evil people. Why? Because evil people don't have faith. Who do they not have faith in? Jesus Christ. So Paul is saying that not everyone has faith in Christ, and as a result of that, he and his friends will be persecuted. Because of that, he requested prayer. That's a plain reading, PL.

The plain reading, Jac, tells us that “not all have faith”. Everything else, such as “Paul … saying that not everyone has faith in Christ” is stuff you added. Faith in Jesus Christ is the only kind of faith that matters, and not all have it.

All men are drawn by the Spirit.

Wow. Poor Holy Spirit. I didn't realize that He was so weak that He was unable to overcome the will of His own creation. I can't imagine what it is like to serve a god who is a failure, a god who wants to save every single person on planet earth, but just couldn't get the job done.

They are first drawn by natural revelation, and then by special revelation. To the extent that they respond, they are granted more revelation until God opens their heart so that they are able to believe. At that point, they choose whether or not to believe. Before, they were not capable, but because they followed the drawing, they were granted the ability to believe. That is, God removed from them the spiritual blinders. That does NOT mean that He made them to believe. See Acts 10; 16:13-15.

??? Why did God not do this for the Pharisees? Why did He purposely blind them?

John 12:39-40
“Therefore they could not believe, because Isaiah said again: “ He has blinded their eyes and hardened their hearts, Lest they should see with their eyes, Lest they should understand with their hearts and turn, So that I should heal them.”

How would you deal with this Jac? Jesus did NOT open their hearts to “give them a choice to believe”. In fact, He did just the opposite. He hardened their hearts, so that they would not believe. Why? Because only His sheep will believe (John 10:27). The Pharisees did not believe, BECAUSE they were not His sheep (John 10:26). They were “disobedient to the word, to which they also were appointed” (1 Peter 2:8). There is some "plain reading" for you Jac.

Looking at John 3, Jesus makes the categorical statement that to see the Kingdom of Heaven, one must be born again. How is one born again? By belief (3:16). There is nothing here about faith being granted as a gift. None of us have seen the Kingdom yet. We won't until Christ returns.

Nowhere did Jesus say that one is born again by belief. John 3:16 never explains how one comes to believe in the first place (I couldn't help notice that you ignored John 1:13). How is one born again, according to Jesus?

John 3:8
“The wind blows where it wishes, and you hear the sound of it, but cannot tell where it comes from and where it goes. So is everyone who is born of the Spirit.”

You can't control the wind with your “free will”.

As for your May/Can paradigm, I call rubbish. Suppose you give me permission to flap my arms and fly to the moon. Fine. No big deal. But, suppose you give me the COMMAND to do so, and if I don't, then I am punished for it. Well, now we are in a totally different ballpark. And let's take it even further. Suppose in some strange world you are capable of giving me the ability to flap my arms and fly to the moon. And yet, you refuse to give me that ability. If you command me to do so, it is you who are at fault, not me.

Maybe Pharoah should bring this argument against God, since that is exactly what God did to him. Pharoah should hire you for his defense attourney. Good Luck. Paul addresses this very complaint.

Romans 9:19-24
“You will say to me then, “Why does He still find fault? For who has resisted His will?” But indeed, O man, who are you to reply against God? Will the thing formed say to him who formed it, “Why have you made me like this?” Does not the potter have power over the clay, from the same lump to make one vessel for honor and another for dishonor? What if God, wanting to show His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath prepared for destruction, and that He might make known the riches of His glory on the vessels of mercy, which He had prepared beforehand for glory, even us whom He called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles?”

This is God, Jac. His most important attribute is His Sovereignty, which you would approve of with words, but deny with your theology. He does whatever He pleases (Psalm 115:3). He works HIS WILL among the armies of heaven and among the inhabitants of earth. No one can restrain His hand or say to Him "What have you done?" (Daniel 4:35). Do you think this unfair? Paul responds, "Too bad".

The very fact that you bring this argument up shows that Paul was a Calvinist.

As for Rev. 20:11-15 . . . what is that you said about repeating a lie long enough and loud enough? I've already shown in detail why your position doesn't work. Now, your problem is that you equate "works" with "sins." But, PL, that's NOT WHAT THE PASSAGE SAYS. Can you find me a manuscript that reads hamartia there and not ergon? Works may or may not be sins.

Jac, this is vain philosophy and empty deceit. “Works may or may not be sins.”??? Are you serious? They are judged according to their works and “cast into the lake of fire”. Of course they are sins. Furthermore, you are faced with the need to make the sin of unbelief a separate sin, a sin that Christ did not pay for.

The second possibility, which I hold, is that God is being a perfectly fair judge, as per Rom. 2:5-7, which the NIV renders as follows:
But because of your stubbornness and your unrepentant heart, you are storing up wrath against yourself for the day of God's wrath, when his righteous judgment will be revealed. God "will give to each person according to what he has done." To those who by persistence in doing good seek glory, honor and immortality, he will give eternal life.
I take this to mean exactly what Paul is saying. If a person persists in doing good and seeking glory and honor, he will be granted eternal life. Keep in mind, up to this point, Paul has not yet presented the gospel of faith in Christ! He has been focusing on the sinfulness of man. By their own works they will show themselves condemned.

Whoa Jac. Using this line of reasoning in this scripture, you would conclude that He will give eternal life to unregenerate man for “doing good”. Surely you don't believe that.

So, God is going to offer these people a fair trial.

God is not just fair Jac. You assume that a fair and just God would give the same offer of salvation to everyone. In fact, if God were fair and just, and only fair and just, He would save no one. God could completely wipe out the human race and send us all to Hell, and be totally justified in doing so. It is His grace and mercy and that alone that saves anyone, and He does not give that to everyone.

Romans 9:18
“Therefore He has mercy on whom He wills, and whom He wills He hardens.”

Hopefully my above exegesis should explain how a person can be judged for their works, even if sin is atoned for.

Only to your satisfaction. It is SIN that blots of out of the book of life.

Therefore, it is sin that the unbeliever will be judged for.
Hell is full of people who sins are not held against them, yes. But we are bought the moment we are elected. That required the shedding of blood--Christ's, do be exact--thus, we were bought by His blood. We were redeemed. But those who rejected the free gift of grace have not been bought.

Matthew 5:29-30
“If your right eye causes you to sin, pluck it out and cast it from you; for it is more profitable for you that one of your members perish, than for your whole body to be cast into hell. And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and cast it from you; for it is more profitable for you that one of your members perish, than for your whole body to be cast into hell.”

Try again Jac. Jesus make it clear that sin will cause one to be cast into Hell. (Hint: they haven't been paid for by Christ. They are paying for their own sins.)

2 Peter 2:4,9-10
“For if God did not spare the angels who sinned, but cast them down to hell and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved for judgment…then the Lord knows how to deliver the godly out of temptations and to reserve the unjust under punishment for the day of judgment, and especially those who walk according to the flesh in the lust of uncleanness and despise authority. They are presumptuous, self-willed. They are not afraid to speak evil of dignitaries.”

Those who “according to the flesh in the lust of uncleanness and despise authority” (SIN) will be cast into Hell.

No, you've misrepresented my view. What you are saying is logically impossible. Follow this VERY closely with me . . . slow down your reading here:

Christ cannot have stamped his seal of approval on our belief, thus electing us, simply because our belief was subsequent to election. Election is a PRETEMPORAL event. Thus, it is NOT based on our belief. It is a logical impossibility to base something on something that has not happened.

Now, as I have already explained, God chose before the foundations of the world certain people, and these people are saved. You see, PL, being in Christ does NOT save. God chose to save those in Christ. Let me say that again:

Being in Christ does not save. God chose to save those in Christ.

How do we get "in Christ"? By being born again. How are we born again? By belief. So, your entire argument against my position is moot. Try again.

Jac, According to the above statement, you have verified my argument. You have verified that, according to you, Belief (which comes from “inherent faith” which we choose to use a certain way) leads to the new birth (even though both concepts are foreign to the Bible). The “new birth” then leads to being "in Christ" (even though the Bible clearly says that “By Him we are in Christ”. Then after we have accomplished all of this of our own free will, we become one who God elected, since God knew ahead of time who would choose to be “in Christ”. You're view is Arminianism Jac. It is not election. It is ratification. God chooses all who chose Him. Therefore, according to your theology, God does in fact “put His stamp of approval” on our belief, regardless of when He did it. Having Him do so before the foundation of the earth doesn't change that fact.

First off, what translation are you using? "Has been born" is very different in meaning from "is born." The former is a perfect tense, while the latter is a present tense. Every major translation that I looked up . . . the NASB, KJV, NKJV, NIV, and ESV all render this a simple present. The word here is definitely in the perfect tense . . . anyway. That bothers me, because that seems like a pretty simple translation. If ALL the major translations are going with that, though, there is probably something I don't know.
Actually, before I go and lay out the argument I had planned, let me talk to my Greek professor. I don't want to explain away a text. I know what I think it means, but I want to confirm it. Believe it or not, I don't know everything.

Feel free to take your time. As far the tense of the verb "born", it really doesn't matter. Your view would require future tense, which is clearly not there, ie. “Whoever believes that Jesus is the Christ will be born of God”. The text clearly tells us that condition of believing that Jesus is the Christ. They are those who are born of God, not will be as a result of their belief.

As for John 1:13, my post on election above should clear that up as well.

No, it didn't. You didn't address it at all. John 1:13 refutes your idea about being born again as a result of putting your faith in the right place (the will of man). Try again.

Besides, I have absolutely no problem with Rom. 9 at all. Do you really think there is a "gotcha" in there I haven't thought about, PL? Seriously. As common as the position is, do you think I've not already considered it? If and when I get around to exegeting that passage, I'll do it properly.

I'll be waiting.

Anything else you'd like me to answer?

Yes. “Why did God hate Esau?” Your previous answer is unscriptural.

Jac's Answer (Pure Arminianism): “God hated Esau because, in His foreknowledge, He knew what kind of man Esau was. This was a man who would reject the birthright. He would be the man who would reject the Covenant.”

Paul's Answer: “(for the children not yet being born, nor having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works but of Him who calls), it was said to her, “The older shall serve the younger.” As it is written, “Jacob I have loved, but Esau I have hated.””

Since Paul was inspired by the Holy Spirit, I'll go with what he said.

The theology of Arminians and other "free-willers" will naturally lead your your "easy-believism"-"no Lordship" heresy. Today's so-called "gospel" message says, "Come to Jesus, He'll give you a better life". The gospel message that was preached in the Bible was "REPENT", "Flee from the wrath to come".

[FFC]

The theology of Arminians and other "free-willers" will naturally lead your your "easy-believism"-"no Lordship" heresy. Today's so-called "gospel" message says, "Come to Jesus, He'll give you a better life". The gospel message that was preached in the Bible was "REPENT", "Flee from the wrath to come".

I would think a loving and merciful God would want to make it easy for the sinner to believe...not being willing that any should perish and all.

In romans 10:21 Paul writes quoting God: But to Israel he saith, All day long I have stretched forth my hands unto a disobedient and gainsaying people. I find it hard to believe that He would waste his time on these people if they were already doomed, and on top of that It doesn't seem like His irresistible grace is functioning properly here. I hate it when that happens.

Jesus came to seek and to save that which was lost (weren't we all lost?)

Jesus said in Mat 18:12 How think ye? if a man have an hundred sheep, and one of them be gone astray, doth he not leave the ninety and nine, and goeth into the mountains, and seeketh that which is gone astray? (all we like sheep have gone astray haven't we? At least that's what Isaiah said.)


Remember the Philippian jailor?

Act 16:29 Then he called for a light, and sprang in, and came trembling, and fell down before Paul and Silas,

Act 16:30 And brought them out, and said, Sirs, what must I do to be saved?

Act 16:31 And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house.

Why didn't Paul and silas say "there is nothing you can do, it's up to God. Either you're in or out, sorry pal." No, they told him what the "requirement" was and the guy did it. I'm not against repentance but that didn't seem to come up here and if you read on he did what they suggested and was saved. Yeah yeah I know...he was already predestined to be saved and Paul and silas happened to be there at the right time....

God is sovereign and Holy and stands on His own name which means He can do whatever he wants and we don't have the right to say squat, but if He is love like it says in 1st john, and just and fair, and his mercy endures forever than I am at a loss when I hear that he came up with a plan before the foundation of the earth to save some and let the rest go to hell just so that He could show how sovereign He is and how much he loves those that He chooses.

I'm sorry, the God I see in the scriptures is not that egotistical or insecure in who He is to have to prove anything to anyone.

If one of us said to a friend "I'm going to kill your whole family but spare you...see how much I love you." we'd call him a sociopath, but when your calvinist God does it He is justified in his sovereignty. I'm mystified.

[IRQ Conflict]

Act 16:31 And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house.

Why didn't Paul and silas say "there is nothing you can do, it's up to God. Either you're in or out, sorry pal." No, they told him what the "requirement" was and the guy did it. I'm not against repentance but that didn't seem to come up here and if you read on he did what they suggested and was saved. Yeah yeah I know...he was already predestined to be saved and Paul and silas happened to be there at the right time....

What was the "action" required of this? The action was repentance and subjection to the will of the Almighty. The action of believing on Christ is more than saying, ya I believe and leaving it at that.

When we believe Christ we believe what He say's and follow His doctrine, not the worlds. Do you know how many people claimed "Lord, Lord!" ?

Hitler was one such man. Claiming to be a christian and 'being' (action) a christian are two different ball parks. Have you never heard people say things like "if thats what being a christian is, I want no part of it"? I have.

It's a sad, sad state of affairs when people use the Grace of God for as in Pauls words "an occasion to sin". If the world see's someone professing to be a christian and not doing what even the heathens know is right then what do you think the world should think of christianity?

Christ taught Grace through Him. He taught that followers of Him would be a light unto the world. It has nothing to do with God trying to prove anything.

If one of us said to a friend "I'm going to kill your whole family but spare you...see how much I love you." we'd call him a sociopath, but when your calvinist God does it He is justified in his sovereignty. I'm mystified.

Is this how you view the Grace of God? Or how you think others view it?

Jesus taught repentance (action), and warned that any who didn't repent (action) would be cast into the lake of fire. It's really quite simple.

Mat 4:17 From that time Jesus began to preach, and to say, Repent: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.

Mar 1:15 And saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe the gospel.

Mar 6:12 And they went out, and preached that men should repent.

Luk 13:3 I tell you, Nay: but, except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish.

Luk 13:5 I tell you, Nay: but, except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish.

Act 3:19 Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, when the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord;

Act 8:22 Repent therefore of this thy wickedness, and pray God, if perhaps the thought of thine heart may be forgiven thee.

Act 17:30 And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent:

Act 26:20 But showed first unto them of Damascus, and at Jerusalem, and throughout all the coasts of Judea, and then to the Gentiles, that they should repent and turn to God, and do works meet for repentance.

Rev 2:5 Remember therefore from whence thou art fallen, and repent, and do the first works; or else I will come unto thee quickly, and will remove thy candlestick out of his place, except thou repent.

There are more examples, but you get the idea. Gods ability to forgive man his sins was inhibited by His Law, therefore He sent His Son as a sacrifice to enable us to what? REPENT! and believe on Him who was sent by Him.

We have all sinned, fallen from Glory. The law in this matter is clear. We deserve death, for that is the wage of sin. Gods love and Mercy sought to redeem us from our fallen state so we might be heirs with Christ for eternity! Praise God Almight! His love is righteous, but so are His Judgments. If we deny Christ, in front of ment (unrepentance) He will deny us in front of the Father.

[Locker]

Act 16:31 And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house.

Why didn't Paul and silas say "there is nothing you can do, it's up to God. Either you're in or out, sorry pal." No, they told him what the "requirement" was and the guy did it. I'm not against repentance but that didn't seem to come up here and if you read on he did what they suggested and was saved. Yeah yeah I know...he was already predestined to be saved and Paul and silas happened to be there at the right time....

What was the "action" required of this? The action was repentance and subjection to the will of the Almighty. The action of believing on Christ is more than saying, ya I believe and leaving it at that.

When we believe Christ we believe what He say's and follow His doctrine, not the worlds. Do you know how many people claimed "Lord, Lord!" ?

Hitler was one such man. Claiming to be a christian and 'being' (action) a christian are two different ball parks. Have you never heard people say things like "if thats what being a christian is, I want no part of it"? I have.

It's a sad, sad state of affairs when people use the Grace of God for as in Pauls words "an occasion to sin". If the world see's someone professing to be a christian and not doing what even the heathens know is right then what do you think the world should think of christianity?

Christ taught Grace through Him. He taught that followers of Him would be a light unto the world. It has nothing to do with God trying to prove anything.

If one of us said to a friend "I'm going to kill your whole family but spare you...see how much I love you." we'd call him a sociopath, but when your calvinist God does it He is justified in his sovereignty. I'm mystified.

Is this how you view the Grace of God? Or how you think others view it?

Jesus taught repentance (action), and warned that any who didn't repent (action) would be cast into the lake of fire. It's really quite simple.

Mat 4:17 From that time Jesus began to preach, and to say, Repent: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.

Mar 1:15 And saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe the gospel.

Mar 6:12 And they went out, and preached that men should repent.

Luk 13:3 I tell you, Nay: but, except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish.

Luk 13:5 I tell you, Nay: but, except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish.

Act 3:19 Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, when the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord;

Act 8:22 Repent therefore of this thy wickedness, and pray God, if perhaps the thought of thine heart may be forgiven thee.

Act 17:30 And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent:

Act 26:20 But showed first unto them of Damascus, and at Jerusalem, and throughout all the coasts of Judea, and then to the Gentiles, that they should repent and turn to God, and do works meet for repentance.

Rev 2:5 Remember therefore from whence thou art fallen, and repent, and do the first works; or else I will come unto thee quickly, and will remove thy candlestick out of his place, except thou repent.

There are more examples, but you get the idea. Gods ability to forgive man his sins was inhibited by His Law, therefore He sent His Son as a sacrifice to enable us to what? REPENT! and believe on Him who was sent by Him.

We have all sinned, fallen from Glory. The law in this matter is clear. We deserve death, for that is the wage of sin. Gods love and Mercy sought to redeem us from our fallen state so we might be heirs with Christ for eternity! Praise God Almight! His love is righteous, but so are His Judgments. If we deny Christ, in front of ment (unrepentance) He will deny us in front of the Father.

I think that was Jesus's point on loving God with one's whole being and that fulfills the law. If you love God - you will live a repenant life. If you do not, you'll rely on works of repentance to prove that you love God and thus earn God's love-grace-etc...Rather selfish means I would say.

Realizing that God loved us and sent His son to pay the price for sin redeems us from our fallen state to truly love God. One should feel a sense wonder at this. We do not dreserve this - God must truly love in order to this. This melts me, and I discover that it slowly disolves my selfishness. The works of faith are done from a heart of love and not done from a sense to earn my way back to God's favor.

I think repentence is a reflection of gratitude over God's undeserved favor to save and not as an grudging obliagtion to keep one saved or earn it either.

Hope I make sense - rough week at work. Like that TV commerical in the USA that says, "My Boss is a jerk, then his boss is a bigger jerk, I am working for a company full of jerks!"

Another story for another time...

[WingZero0]

Faith is inherent to man. We all have faith. The question is where we place it. It is NOT a gift of God to be able to believe

Puritan Lad's comments about this is correct. Ephesians 2:8-9 show that "It is by grace that you have been saved through faith. And this is not of yourselves but is the gift of God, not by works so no man can boast." 2 Thess. 3:2 also shows that not all men have faith. They may have faith in certain ungodly things, but they do not have justifying faith. It is by the Holy Spirit that we are given faith. Why are some given faith and not others? Noone knows. Scripture is silent on the reason. So you should be grateful to God that you have faith.

I reject the notion that God grants us the gift of faith. To say that by placing my faith in Christ I have earned my faith is directly contrary to Scripture. Throughout Paul's letters, he constantly sets faith against works. Does this need to be proven, PL? Then does it not follow that faith is not a work? If we work for salvation, then salvation is earned. But, we do not earn it, thus it must be without works. However, for Paul, faith is not a work. Thus, to place our faith in God is not earning our salvation.

How are you placing your faith in Christ if God gives you faith? Is it not God who is placing the faith in Christ not you? If you already had faith and you then needed to place it in Christ, then you are doing a work. I do not see your reasoning in this arguement. You are saying that faith is not a gift because we would earn it? Isn't a gift something undeserved?

Looking up 2 Thess. 3:2, I suppose that you are reading this in the absolute sense. Not everyone has faith because God not given it to them? What's the context, PL? Paul is talking about being delivered from evil people. Why? Because evil people don't have faith. Who do they not have faith in? Jesus Christ. So Paul is saying that not everyone has faith in Christ, and as a result of that, he and his friends will be persecuted. Because of that, he requested prayer. That's a plain reading, PL.

How does this disprove that faith is a gift? If anything it proves it. The evil people have not been given the gift of faith. Why? We don't know. Again, I do not see your reasoning here. You are trying to disprove that faith is a gift by showing that not all people have faith because...? You gave no reason here.

Looking at Phil. 1:29, keep the main thing the main thing. The main thrust of that passage is that it has been granted to the Philipians to suffer for Christ. That is an honor. It is a blessing. Furthermore, it's meritorious. The honor of suffering comes from standing firm (v. 27). Now, take that same idea and apply it to "believe in Him." How is believing meritorious? I already covered this. All men are drawn by the Spirit. They are first drawn by natural revelation, and then by special revelation. To the extent that they respond, they are granted more revelation until God opens their heart so that they are able to believe. At that point, they choose whether or not to believe. Before, they were not capable, but because they followed the drawing, they were granted the ability to believe. That is, God removed from them the spiritual blinders. That does NOT mean that He made them to believe. See Acts 10; 16:13-15.

Philippians 1:29 does say that it has been granted on behalf of Christ to suffer, but also to have faith. It is an honor and a blessing, but how is it meritorious? Noone earned it, it was granted to them. If you want to know how believing is meritorious (ie you earned it) well its not. You are not proving your point. You are assuming that to be GRANTED suffering for Christ, that you some how earned it. That is just not so.

Not all men are drawn to the Holy Spirit. Certainly He gives His Holy Spirit to all people, but His grace is resistable and thus they are not drawn to the Spirit, but away from it. That is our nature due to original sin. We despise the things of God. The Holy Spirit certainly opens our hearts, but that doesn't give us the choice to believe. Our will is bound to sin. We cannot choose God by our own powers because of the corruption we have in original sin. Why are some given the gift of faith and others not? We don't know. Scripture is silent on the topic. To try and reason is to become a heretic. Everything man has tried to explain this has been contradictory to Scripture. The "free-willers" contradict the Scriptural teaching on original sin, the Calvinist contradict God's attribute of being infintely good.

Looking at John 3, Jesus makes the categorical statement that to see the Kingdom of Heaven, one must be born again. How is one born again? By belief (3:16). There is nothing here about faith being granted as a gift. None of us have seen the Kingdom yet. We won't until Christ returns.

You have overlooked a critical part. One must be born again "through water and the Word." Baptism is the mean by which we are born again. In Baptism we are granted the grace of salvation. Also, we will see the Kingdom of Heaven when we die, not just when Christ returns. John 3:16 also doesn't talk about being born again through belief. It shows that God gave His Son to die for the world so that all may have eternal life. However, I do agree that this isn't a proof text to show faith is a gift.

As for your May/Can paradigm, I call rubbish. Suppose you give me permission to flap my arms and fly to the moon. Fine. No big deal. But, suppose you give me the COMMAND to do so, and if I don't, then I am punished for it. Well, now we are in a totally different ballpark. And let's take it even further. Suppose in some strange world you are capable of giving me the ability to flap my arms and fly to the moon. And yet, you refuse to give me that ability. If you command me to do so, it is you who are at fault, not me.

Hmm. Interesting little thing you guys have going on. To say "May I..." is to ask permission. To say "Can I..." is to ask about ability. So "Can all people enter heaven?" Yes. "May all people enter heaven." No. Why? First, all people CAN enter heaven because Christ died for ALL people's sins. However not all people MAY enter heaven. Why? Because a prerequiste to enter heaven is to believe in Christ as one's Lord and Savior. If one doesn't believe that, then they cannot enter heaven. What condemns a person to hell is not their sins, but their unbelief. I'm not quite sure if God commands us to believe. Even if He does, we can resist His grace. We believe because God has given us faith. So why are some given faith and not others? (Which I think is the crux of your arguements) Noone knows. Scripture is silent.

If you have any questions, please ask and I will answer.

[FFC]

What was the "action" required of this? The action was repentance and subjection to the will of the Almighty. The action of believing on Christ is more than saying, ya I believe and leaving it at that.

I didn't say it wasn't. Repentance as a change of mind is implied here when Paul and Silas tell the jailor to Believe in the "Lord" Jesus Christ and you shall be saved and your house. Peter is big on using the word "repent"...his audience, the Jews, understood it's meaning. Paul was big on using "believe" for his audience the gentiles. To me if I really look at the heart attitude behind both and the object that that attitude is focused on it takes us to the same place.

My point was that Paul hadn't brushed up on his Calvinism when he told the jailor to Believe, because according to Calvinists only God can make them believe since they have no free will of their own.

Quote:
If one of us said to a friend "I'm going to kill your whole family but spare you...see how much I love you." we'd call him a sociopath, but when your calvinist God does it He is justified in his sovereignty. I'm mystified.


Is this how you view the Grace of God? Or how you think others view it?

No to the first and yes to the last How many times have we ask the calvinist "how can a fair and loving God select some to be saved and let the rest go to hell" and receive the answer that "if God was fair we would all go to hell but because of His love and grace He saved some". Tell that to the ones who never even had the chance to repent, believe and surrender there wills over to the Calvinist God.