Evidence for God from Science

RIck, Does Christ save us on the condition that we believe?

What does John 3:16 say?

If so, how does a person obtain saving faith?

From a mail order catalog by paying prepaid postage?

how does that affect your view of fallen man's ability to come to Christ?

It doesn't affect it at all. No one can come to Christ without God letting him. I still don't get your argument. Why couldn't God be drawing every person to Himself? that doesn't mean every person will receive the call.

RickD wrote:

RIck, Does Christ save us on the condition that we believe?

What does John 3:16 say?

It does NOT say that Christ saves us on the condition that we believe. Faith is the means of our justification, not the cause.
What does John 10:26, Acts 13:48, and Philippians 1:29 say?

RickD wrote:

If so, how does a person obtain saving faith?

From a mail order catalog by paying prepaid postage?

See above. Remarks like this add nothing to the discussion.

RickD wrote:

how does that affect your view of fallen man's ability to come to Christ?

It doesn't affect it at all. No one can come to Christ without God letting him. I still don't get your argument. Why couldn't God be drawing every person to Himself? that doesn't mean every person will receive the call.

Too many arguments tend to focus on what God could have done as opposed to what God did do. Certainly God could have done this. But what sayeth the scriptures? What does it mean when God calls a sinner? When God calls, one cannot avoid receiving the call. God does not draw all to himself in any effectual sense, (See the High Priestly prayer for one of many examples- Luke 10:21)

"And those whom he predestined he also called, and those whom he called he also justified, and those whom he justified he also glorified." (Romans 8:30)

God calls the predestined, as well as justifies and glorifies them. This he does not do for everyone.

RickD wrote:

If so, how does a person obtain saving faith?

From a mail order catalog by paying prepaid postage?


See above. Remarks like this add nothing to the discussion.

I thought it added a little humor. I'm sorry, Mr. Snappypants.

Please keep the focus on the topic of discussion and not the person engaging. Banter and light-hearted ribbing is often welcome, but both parties need to be seeing the humor otherwise, it's best to tone it down.

PL, do you have assurance? How do you know you are one of the elect?

Yes. I am saved because of the faith that God has granted to me, and secure in the promise that he has predestined me, not just for salvation, or even for sanctification, but for adoption.

I would ask you the same question. Do you have assurance? What is the basis for such assurance?

puritan lad wrote:Yes. I am saved because of the faith that God has granted to me, and secure in the promise that he has predestined me, not just for salvation, or even for sanctification, but for adoption.

I would ask you the same question. Do you have assurance? What is the basis for such assurance?

Yes I have assurance of salvation because God's Word tells me I do. The basis is that I believe the Bible is God's word, and I believe God doesn't lie. His word says:John 3:16, John 3:36, John 1:12, John 5:24, Ephesians 2:8-9, Titus 3:5-7, Acts 4:12, John 14:17 and Romans 8:14.

RickD wrote:

puritan lad wrote:Yes. I am saved because of the faith that God has granted to me, and secure in the promise that he has predestined me, not just for salvation, or even for sanctification, but for adoption.

I would ask you the same question. Do you have assurance? What is the basis for such assurance?

Yes I have assurance of salvation because God's Word tells me I do. The basis is that I believe the Bible is God's word, and I believe God doesn't lie. His word says:John 3:16, John 3:36, John 1:12, John 5:24, Ephesians 2:8-9, Titus 3:5-7, Acts 4:12, John 14:17 and Romans 8:14.

Super. But what if you decide not to believe? Is this possible, or did you give up free will once you became a Christian?

puritan lad wrote:

RickD wrote:

puritan lad wrote:Yes. I am saved because of the faith that God has granted to me, and secure in the promise that he has predestined me, not just for salvation, or even for sanctification, but for adoption.

I would ask you the same question. Do you have assurance? What is the basis for such assurance?

Yes I have assurance of salvation because God's Word tells me I do. The basis is that I believe the Bible is God's word, and I believe God doesn't lie. His word says:John 3:16, John 3:36, John 1:12, John 5:24, Ephesians 2:8-9, Titus 3:5-7, Acts 4:12, John 14:17 and Romans 8:14.

Super. But what if you decide not to believe? Is this possible, or did you give up free will once you became a Christian?

If I am born again with the Holy Spirit inside me, it tells me that God is the One working in me. Philippians 1:6 says so. The Holy Spirit is a deposit guaranteeing what is to come Ephesians 1:13-14. And I believe God's word.

That sounds like Calvinism to me. The Ephesians 1 passages are teaching you well. What about Ephesians 1:4-6, 11?

puritan lad wrote:That sounds like Calvinism to me. The Ephesians 1 passages are teaching you well. What about Ephesians 1:4-6, 11?

Sounds like believing God's word, to me. I can see how you use these verses in Ephesians to justify what you believe. I just don't interpret them as you do. God knew those who are saved before He saved them. They still had to believe. It doesn't mean God made them believe. Just that He knew they would.

When God calls, one cannot avoid receiving the call.

But you are equating receiving to accepting. You are saying that God's call is irresitable, that man is both incapable of receiving or rejecting. In fact there technically isn't a receiving or rejecting. Now, we both believe that righteousness is imputed to the believer, but you believe that faith is imputed to the elect, regardless of what the person willingly believes of doesn't believe. It's Programmed. Just like flicking a switch on a computer. It is off, then on. And then belief follows. Not sure this is how Paul explained it to the Phillipian jailer.

Rick, ultimately this is a vicious circle. Because everything PL quotes is fully dependent on his determined Calvinist's definitions of election, predestination, soverignty, etc. I mean you might as well subsitute election for programed. It is futile to discuss with him, because he dogmatically holds those verses interpreted through those Calvinists presuppositions. I even pulled up an old thread that had over 10 pages of this. http://discussions.godandscience.org/vi ... &start=135

John 3:17-20 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God
(Not because he didn't receive faith through regeneration, but because he hath not believed)
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. 20 For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved.

Why do they not come to the light? Not because they are not elect, but because they hate the light, and thus can't be elected (ordained).

Rev 3:20 Behold, I stand at the door, and knock: if any man hear my voice, and open the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with me.

The word grace itself is unmerited favor. Yet we are to believe that God is withholding that grace from the majority of mankind. God sends light into the world, and then prohibits people from being enlightened.

The five points of Calvinism for the non-elect:
T - You must but you can't be born again.
U - You are damned for all of eternity because you were damned from all eternity.
L - Christ did not die for you.
I - No grace to resist.
P - You cannot persevere in faith because you cannot begin in faith.

Rick, ultimately this is a vicious circle. Because everything PL quotes is fully dependent on his determined Calvinist's definitions of election, predestination, soverignty, etc. I mean you might as well subsitute election for programed. It is futile to discuss with him, because he dogmatically holds those verses interpreted through those Calvinists presuppositions. I even pulled up an old thread that had over 10 pages of this. http://discussions.godandscience.org/vi ... &start=135

. Yes, jlay. I Guess you're right. We would just be going around in circles if I continue. And jlay, I like your tulip for the non elect.

A huge amount of this is based in semantics and definitions. The irony, as I think I pointed out earlier is that there's a great deal of the framework and definitions that pull from sources other than the Bible and in places, even take Biblical terms and redefine them in the manner necessary to hold the systematic framework in place.

In fairness, that's not just true of Calvinism, it's also an issue in most any other form of systematic theology including Arminianism. If you're going to use terms you have to use them precisely and with narrowly defined meanings. That's well and good, as long as the Bible itself does the same. If not, then your framework and definitions themselves become elements of eisogesis and over-riding philosophy pushing the Bible into it's mold.

It's easy to see in systems you don't agree with. The systems you do agree with you tend to state that yours is the Biblical position and then go to work proving everyone else to be wrong.

Does anyone know if it's true that the members of the infamous westboro baptist church are calvinists?