Calvinism / pre-destination

[Noeb]

In James5:19-20 a man can certainly be "born-again", again.

I explained how it's not. It's fine that you don't accept what I said, but there's no point in repeating the same things over and over.

In Romans11;18-23, those who were cut off from salvation (they were "born-again"),

Israel was not born again.

The story of the Prodigal Son (who was lost/dead but now is alive again) is all about being "born-again", again.

Again. I explainned this as well. There's no point in repeating the same things over and over.

As I said, I perceive "born-again", to be the same as "born-from-above", and 'born-of-God", and "begotten-of-God", and "become-adopted-children-of-God". Why is any of those wrong, and how do you perceive it?

They're not wrong.

Trying to understand the double-negative --- is there a kind of "born-again" that is not fully indwelt by Jesus and the Spirit?

There's no double negative. They are indwelt. Either indwelt or not. There is no fully indwelt anymore than there's a partial indwelt.

So you're focusing on some amount of time?

Scripture does. Why wouldn't I? When I was a child I spoke as a child but when I grew up....Romans.....Galatians......Ephessians.....1Pe ter......Jesus' parable of the good seed and different types of ground. That's a process, like it or not.

The late James Kennedy ("Coral Ridge Ministries") taught once on how it does not take a lifetime to realize what we are in Jesus, but an instant. I look forward to how you perceive a difference between "born-again" and "fully indwelt".

I don't know of any such distinction in scripture. I completely agree a person can receive and believe the unadulterated gospel and walk in holiness. Happens all the time in small ministries and individuals that actually preach it. Unfortunately, not many preach it and not many believe it when they hear it after thave been deceived by the false/half gospel's propagated by the vast majority of the church.

I'll look at your post. But he's not saying "walk in the LAW of the Spirit", but "walk in the Spirit".

Walking in the Spirit is walking in the new man believing the old is dead and so the law of the Spirit of life delivers, leaving you walking in life. You can nit pick on the wording if you want to but you cannot separate them. The law is effectual when one believes they are crucified because God sent his Son and condemned sin in the flesh. That's the point.

Why does it take long periods of time to be mature?

I said it doesn't have to. That doesn't mean it doesn't or can't.

Romans7-8 is teaching the answer to that; it's an explanation, and there is nothing of "years" (or even months!) of learning indicated. Indeed, how long does it take to read from chapter 7, through chapter 8?

There is conviction of sin, if one truly desires the Spirit. They will be led to healing; one who does not progress (just as those in Hebrews5-6 were languishing in sin and not progressing), are clearly "unsaved".

You did not explain what walking in the Spirit is and how a believer does it. I did. Can you put it in your own words?

[Yahweh1]

good to read your response!

will be able to "engage" in a little while...

Just curious...

How do you define the concept of Biblical Election, and are you a classic Arminianist or what Sotierology model holding too?

[Gadgeteer]

good to read your response!

Hi! Is this addressed to me? BTW, welcome to the boards --- hope you have fun and are blessed! :-)

will be able to "engage" in a little while...

Gosh, I've never been engaged before!!!

Just curious...

How do you define the concept of Biblical Election...

The doctrine of "election", that is "predestined-salvation", begins with Eph1:4-5 and 11; Romans9:11-21 and Romans8:29-31 form the "four founding passages of Reformed Theology". There are around 35 "secondary passages", verses thought to promote "sovereign election/predestination". All can be shown to not promote "predestined-salvation", but the secondaries are more easily proven even to Reformed Theologians. I messed up above, should have been 1Cor2:12 (where it is the received Spirit by which the things of verse 14 are taught) --- there is no defense to this. It does not prove "free will", but it destroys the idea that Paul meant "sovereign predestination". Some have said that Acts13:48 should be a fifth "founding passage" --- but there is no answer as to how the Jews could unelect themselves ("consider themselves unworthy of eternal life") in verse 46, if sovereign-election was the theme.

Actually, the word "elect", is interchangeable with "saved". In the story of Matt22:2-14, everyone in view was invited, and each made his own decision why or why not to go. We're only told of three reasons "no" (there were plenty more who refused) --- business, farming, and refusal to accept clean clothes (rejection of God's regeneration). "Many are called but few are chosen/elected/saved".

In Matt24:24 we're told that deceivers will lead astray even the elect, "if possible". Many people see "ei-dunatos" and change it into "it's-not-possible". But look at Acts20:16 --- Paul hurried to be in Jerusalem for the Pentecost, if possible. If "ei-dunatos" means it IS possible in Acts20:16, then how could it mean anything other than "it is possible" in Matt24:24?

Focusing on Eph1:4-5, we were chosen before the foundation according to the kind intention of His will --- which is stated in Jn6:40, that "The will (thelema-desire) of God is that all who see Jesus and believe, may (be saved)". This kind-intention-of-His-will was bestowed on us in the Beloved, Jesus.

So it was the PLAN that was set in place before the foundation (1Pet1:20-21 says "Jesus was foreknown before the foundation of the world, but has appeared for the sake of you who through Him believe in God"). Eph1:13 says that we are sealed with the Spirit after belief; belief always precedes "have-life/made-alive/born-again", opposite to the base of Calvinism. He who believes, joins God's predestined-before-the-foundation plan.

Note that the right to BECOME adopted children is granted to those WHO believe and receive Jesus, Jn1:12. Jn1:13 says the begottenness is all of God and nothing of us, but becoming begotten is granted to believers. This opposes Reformed Theology's claim that "the right to be adopted children is ordained before the Earth was made". No, we were children of wrath/Hell, same as the rest (Eph2:3); but WHEN we were dead in sins we were made alive, by His grace, through our faith.

Dead men believed, and received life. See also 1Cor1:21, it is THROUGH the foolishness of the message preached, that belief saved us. Belief is what caused the message to change from "foolish" to "wisdom"! And that is why Jesus said in Matt7:24-27 that those WHO believe (who do His words) are wise, but those who do NOT believe are foolish!

and are you a classic Arminianist or what Sotierology model holding too?

Obviously I'm much closer to Arminianist than Calvinist. But I don't hold to all Arminianism. He was right on many things, like comparing Romans9:11-21 with Gal4:21-31 --- mirror stories, both speaking of two covenants, one making an allegory with Isaac and Ishmael, the other with Jacob and Esau. Romans9 quotes Genesis 25:23. Rom9:8 is identical to Gal3:29. Romans9 goes a little further, the "two covenants" is also Gentiles --- the message being, "If God wants to also save the Gentiles, who are YOU to OBJECT?"

Subtleties are issues like whether Romans9:21-23 speak of TWO vessels (taking "atimia/dishonor" [NASV translates it "common"] to be vessels that God MADE sinful and Hell-bound) --- or if there are THREE vessels (the two in verse 21 both saved, "honor" and "common", while the vessels in 22 prepared themselves for destruction like Romans2:8 says).

I call what I hold to, "Responsible Grace". Zero "works-salvation", nor is it Pelagianism or Semi-Pelagianism. Deut30:11-20 with Rom10:6-10 and Acts17:26-31 very plainly state that the message (word-of-faith) is given to EVERYONE, and each must either choose life (by loving God and holding fast to Him), or choose death. I like to uncover "connections" so that Scripture interprets Scripture. To those who think that John6:37 and 39 and 44 and 65 assert that "God gives UNBELIEVERS to Jesus and they THEN believe", John17:6 says they belong to God before they are given to Jesus --- this fits Lydia (Acts16:14-15) perfectly, she was a worshiper of God (belonged!) AND her heart was opened to Jesus through belief (perfectly fitting John8:42).

Another connection that is solid, is understanding that the "parable of the soils" (see Luke8:13-15) is teaching that the label of "good" or "bad/rocky", reflects how people persevered; many Calvinists think that God makes a soil good or bad and THEREFORE men persevere or fall. The connection is Hebrews6:7-8 --- one soil is tilled, good fruit expected; if it bears good fruit it is blessed, but if it bears thorns it is cursed and burned.

In no way does God EVER have any part in sin; not in causing, or ordaining, or cooperating. Matt12:25-31, 1Jn3:5. It offends me when people think that verses like Prov16:4 (one of the "secondaries") casts GOD as CREATING wickedness! That is not the God that I serve!

Because we are responsible for our own faith (1Pet1:9!), we are also responsible for "building ourselves in faith" and "keeping ourselves in His love" (Jude20-21). There are dozens of warnings against being deceived away from Christ. 2Cor11:3 says we're at the same risk of that, as Eve was in the Garden.

So I do things like post on message boards, not to fight --- but to encourage others to grow strong in Christ, to fellowship with believers (I love and have fun with Calvinists and non-Calvinists, Baptists and Presbyterians and Charismatics and Greek Orthodox and Catholics and anyone who calls himself/herself a "follower of Christ"). And to learn; each person who allows me to look through his or her eyes expands my own knowledge, and blesses me. I pray that I am a blessing back to others.

[Gadgeteer]

I explained how it's not. It's fine that you don't accept what I said, but there's no point in repeating the same things over and over.

I've forgotten, sorry. Was the man in James5:19-20 "never-really-saved" (he fell away from faith he never had, and was led back to where he never was)? Or did he "not really fall away"? Or was it a "hyperbole story, can't really happen"?

Israel was not born again.

Well they were saved, weren't they?

The story of the Prodigal Son (who was lost/dead but now is alive again) is all about being "born-again", again.

Again. I explained this as well. There's no point in repeating the same things over and over.

Sorry to impose on your patience, I don't mean to offend. You've not overturned what I said.

Do we disagree on what "born-again" means?

Yes

As I said, I perceive "born-again", to be the same as "born-from-above", and 'born-of-God", and "begotten-of-God", and "become-adopted-children-of-God". Why is any of those wrong, and how do you perceive it?

They're not wrong.

Then what is our disagreement?

There's no double negative. They are indwelt. Either indwelt or not. There is no fully indwelt anymore than there's a partial indwelt.

But that's the problem! I agree with this --- so how could someone be called "carnal/milk-eating Christian"?

He who walks in sin, does so without the Lord or the Spirit; he who is fully indwelt, does not walk in sin God will not participate in sin!

So you're focusing on some amount of time?

Scripture does. Why wouldn't I? When I was a child I spoke as a child but when I grew up....

1Cor13 does not speak of "a process of growing". Indeed, 1Cor14:20 is a rebuke, Paul in effect saying "Guys, grow up!"

Romans.....Galatians......Ephessians.....1Peter... ...Jesus' parable of the good seed and different types of ground. That's a process, like it or not.

Luke8:13-15 is not about "a process"; people either persevere, or not.

I don't know of any such distinction in scripture. I completely agree a person can receive and believe the unadulterated gospel and walk in holiness. Happens all the time in small ministries and individuals that actually preach it. Unfortunately, not many preach it and not many believe it when they hear it after they've been deceived by the false/half gospel's propagated by the vast majority of the church.

Then I'm struggling to understand what you're saying; it sounds like contradictions. It seems we agree that a person belongs to Jesus heart body and soul, or not at all.

Walking in the Spirit is walking in the new man believing the old is dead and so the law of the Spirit of life delivers, leaving you walking in life. You can nit pick on the wording if you want to but you cannot separate them. The law is effectual when one believes they are crucified because God sent his Son and condemned sin in the flesh. That's the point.

But we CAN walk in the old sinful man --- if we do he's not dead any more!!!

I said it doesn't have to. That doesn't mean it doesn't or can't.

"Christian" to me is like when a woman is pregnant; she is not a LITTLE pregnant, she either is, or she is not.

You did not explain what walking in the Spirit is and how a believer does it. I did. Can you put it in your own words?

Paul said "be filled with the Spirit". It is to walk in life as though the Spirit is right beside us, His hand on ours, leading us. It is to be submitted to God, open to the Spirit's teaching. It is to commune with Him when we awake, when we fall asleep, and throughout the time in between. It is to PRAY --- embodying different prayers, like "praise/worship", and "confession", and "intercession", and "thanksgiving", and "fellowship", and "waiting-on-God", and "godly petition". It is to accept His real presence and celebrate His company, knowing that He lovingly embraces us and enjoys us. It is to walk inside of the veil, the stench of our sins washed away by Jesus' blood, and commune with all three persons of God. It is to delight in righteousness, and to find ourselves with the SAME distaste for sin that God has. It is to draw near to Him, knowing He draws near to us.

It is to really walk in fellowship, with the Spirit, and with the Father and the Son.

How would you describe it in your words?

[tea]

I'm not sure what you mean. I believe it is 100% our choice to either accept or reject Christ once we become aware of the gospel.

Then it sounds like you can take 100% credit for your salvation?

[tea]

Faith is conscious action; as Jesus said in Matt7:24-27, he WHO acts on My words (believes) is wise, but he WHO does not act (disbelieves!) is foolish. Acting/believing changes nothing of the gift; neither adds to it nor take away from it; but there is no gift without the receiving. Rom5:17 says those WHO RECEIVE the abundance of grace and the gift of righteousness shall reign with Christ.
Make sense?
:-)
PS: Speaking of lacquer --- did you hear about the guy who drank a whole quart of varnish?
It was a terrible end.
...but a beautiful finish...

Was not Jesus teaching His disciples in Mt 7?
Was not Romans, written to christians?

They had already been choosen.

Yes, it makes sense.

Did you get to my post almost at the end of Pg 49?

Was it varnish or vanish he took? Perhaps he wanted to vanish? ha ha

God bless you Gad!!

[Brother Mark]

Then it sounds like you can take 100% credit for your salvation?

Not really. Take for example, that I am dying of cancer. A doctor tells me that if he operates, he can save my life. I do nothing other than agree to submit myself to the hands of the doctor. The doctor operates and saves my life. Did I save it or did the doctor? The doctor saved it! All I did was submit to his calling and wisdom.

[Noeb]

Then it sounds like you can take 100% credit for your salvation?

We did not give ourselves the choice.

[tea]

Not really. Take for example, that I am dying of cancer. A doctor tells me that if he operates, he can save my life. I do nothing other than agree to submit myself to the hands of the doctor. The doctor operates and saves my life. Did I save it or did the doctor? The doctor saved it! All I did was submit to his calling and wisdom.

So how much is it you, after all, there is a choice for you in this?

[Brother Mark]

So how much is it you, after all, there is a choice for you in this?

No. The man dying of cancer cannot will himself better. He cannot do anything to make himself better. All he can do is trust the doctor. In the same way, salvation is through faith. Faith doesn't save. But we are saved through faith. The doctor healed through the trust. His ability (i.e. grace) was granted when the sick person trusted. Thus, the cancer patient was healed, but not of his own works, but by the works of the doctor, and in this way, he cannot boast. For he did nothing.

[Redeemed by Grace]

No. The man dying of cancer cannot will himself better. He cannot do anything to make himself better. All he can do is trust the doctor. In the same way, salvation is through faith. Faith doesn't save. But we are saved through faith. The doctor healed through the trust. His ability (i.e. grace) was granted when the sick person trusted. Thus, the cancer patient was healed, but not of his own works, but by the works of the doctor, and in this way, he cannot boast. For he did nothing.

There is so much to disagree with here, I'll just say please Mark, reconsider what you wrote...

[Brother Mark]

There is so much to disagree with here, I'll just say please Mark, reconsider what you wrote...

Grace saves RGB. Salvation comes through faith but by grace. So in that sense, faith doesn't save, grace does. Thought perhaps some would consider that semantics.

Also, I can have faith in a boat, but that won't save me. Or I can have faith in a chair, but that won't save me. And so on. So faith doesn't save. The Object of our faith is Who saves. But again, some might consider that semantics.

[Gadgeteer]

I'm not sure what you mean. I believe it is 100% our choice to either accept or reject Christ once we become aware of the gospel.

Then it sounds like you can take 100% credit for your salvation?

Hi, Tea!

What does "take credit" mean? In 1Tim4:16 Paul says "save yourselves". In Ezk18:31 he says "make for yourselves a new heart and a new spirit". Now, you and I know we don't actually save ourselves (there is only one Savior), nor do we actually regenerate our hearts. The "Saving" and "Making-New" is all of Him and none of us; the wording though does assert participation, in the same way I illustrated about your birthday present --- your "participation" is only as far as receiving the gift. You don't actually take credit for the gift, though it may be wise to receive a good gift or foolish to refuse one; the gift remains all of the giver, and so does the credit of making it.

Faith is conscious action; as Jesus said in Matt7:24-27, he WHO acts on My words (believes) is wise, but he WHO does not act (disbelieves!) is foolish.

Was not Jesus teaching His disciples in Mt 7?

Yes. But He was addressing far more than just the Disciples, for He said:
"he who does My words (believes) is ...wise... he who does not do My words (disbelieves) is ...foolish..."

That encompasses pretty much everyone...

Acting/believing changes nothing of the gift; neither adds to it nor take away from it; but there is no gift without the receiving. Rom5:17 says those WHO RECEIVE the abundance of grace and the gift of righteousness shall reign with Christ.

Was not Romans, written to Christians?

Yes --- but it is written as "generality", that is condemnation came to mankind (everyone), SO THEN / EVEN SO justification came to mankind (everyone). To be justified, one hasta believe and receive God's grace and His righteousness. But the exact equality (so-then/even-so) exposes that justification came to the exact same number as to whom came condemnation.

They had already been chosen.

What does that mean? "Chosen" in Greek is "eklektos"; in Matt22:2-14 "Many are called but few are chosen" illustrates that everyone got called, but only those who decided to come became the "chosen". Noteworthy is that the king (allegory for God!) chose no one; each made his (her?) own decision.

Make sense?

Yes, it makes sense.

;-)

Did you get to my post almost at the end of Pg 49?

Uhm, maybe not. Can you link me to it? You know how to do links? Hover your mouse over the post number, right-click and select "Copy Link Location". Then go back to the "post-editor-box" and type:

[url=___] click-here[/url]

...except instead of ___, right after you've typed "url=" just hold down your Ctrl button and press "V" (while still holding down Ctrl button). The internet address is now a LINK, the words "click-here" (or anything else you want, like "my post") will show up on BLUE, you can click on the "click-here" and it will take us to your post.

In the post-editor-box it will look like:
"This is [url=http://bibleforums.org/showthread.php/235540-Calvinism-pre-destination?p=2829250#post2829250] my post [/url]"...

....but it will display on the forums as:
"This is my post"...

The blue "my post" will be a link to your post. I'm pretty sure at 124 posts you're allowed to make links (someone with only four or five posts is not!).

Sorry if you already knew that... :-)

Was it varnish or vanish he took? Perhaps he wanted to vanish? ha ha

I dunno! Maybe it was VANISH, 'cause I haven't seen him since!!! :-D

Last week I bought some spot remover???

...now I can't find my dog...

God bless you Gad!!

And you!

[Gadgeteer]

tea View Post
Then it sounds like you can take 100% credit for your salvation?

We did not give ourselves the choice.

What do you mean? That we have no choice in our salvation?

[Gadgeteer]

No. The man dying of cancer cannot will himself better. He cannot do anything to make himself better. All he can do is trust the doctor. In the same way, salvation is through faith. Faith doesn't save. But we are saved through faith. The doctor healed through the trust. His ability (i.e. grace) was granted when the sick person trusted. Thus, the cancer patient was healed, but not of his own works, but by the works of the doctor, and in this way, he cannot boast. For he did nothing.

In Matthew9:20-22, a woman who had been bleeding for twelve years pursued Jesus, and touched His robe --- telling herself "If I only touch His robe I shall be healed".

Jesus said, "Your faith has made you well."

Whose choice was it for her to touch Jesus? And who gets the credit???

Good post, Mark!

:-)