Calvinism / pre-destination

[John146]

I believe once God gives us faith, this faith becomes our, just like salvation. Before I was regenerated, salvation was NOT mine, but once regenerated, salvation.
This is answer to Heb 11 too.

Would you say that your faith in Christ is a case of God believing in Christ for you? Do you believe you have any responsibility at all to put your faith in Christ of your own volition (your own free will choice)?

[John146]

In 2 Pet we see there are two sides to our responsibility ONCE we have recieved faith.

I'm not sure what you are talking about here so can you elaborate on that?

[Noeb]

Well, Paul says (Eph4:22-24), "Lay aside the old man, which is being corrupted in accordance with the lusts of deceit, and ...put on the new man, which in the likeness of God has been created in righteousness and holiness of the truth." (Be renewed in the spirit of your mind.) This to me teaches "two men" (or natures), and a constant decision in which to walk.

We were discussing Eph2.3 and what nature means. If you are posting this because you think it means there is an old and new nature living together in us, that's not correct. The old man is dead, for those that are in Christ. Eph4.20- tells you that is what you have learned about what Christ did, so walk in that truth, that the old man is dead and you are a new creature. You don't have to live like you did before you were born again because you are free. He that is dead is free from sin. Paul is saying that same in Ephesians he did in Romans 6-8.

Genesis2:17 God said "In the day that you eat of it, you shall surely die". This is spiritual death, separation from God. That is why the veil tore, the moment Jesus died --- Jesus bridged the separation that began with Adam; we are invited once again into the presence of Almighty God. We can walk with Him in spirit, as Adam once did.

Well, that's also physical death, but it doesn't tell me how Adam's nature differs from ours.

Jn15:5 says "Apart from Me you can do nothing". Romans8:3 says "what Law could not do, weak as it was through the flesh, God did --- sending His Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and as an offering for sin, He condemned sin in the flesh."


If we are capable of being good, then why did Jesus need to die on the Cross? Jesus took OUR charges and nailed them to the Cross. Col2:14. Do you understand what Paul meant? You may know that back then, someone who incurred a debt, would receive a "certificate of debt", with charges listed on it. So Jesus took OUR certificate (the wages of sin are death!), and nailed it to the Cross. "TETELESTAI" is what He cried --- and "tetelestai" is what they would stamp on your certificate when your debt was paid and the charges finished.

Tetelestai --- debt paid! Jesus said "I paid your debt!"

Being good doesn't mean no sin. Jesus died for sin.

I cited Eph4:22-24; if we walk in sin and the flesh, then it is said that we "embody a sin nature". But if by the Spirit we put to death the flesh, then we embody a "new godly righteous nature". Doesn't matter if you perceive it as TWO natures, as if it's a clean coat and a dirty coat; or if you perceive it as ONE nature that either IS clean or IS dirty --- the end is the same.

No, it doesn't say this at all. If you follow the flesh the new creature is sinning. If you follow the Spirit you kill deeds of the body, not kill the flesh. Scripture does not teach to crucify your flesh. It teaches Christ did that already for you.

There is only One "Overcomer". Jesus said, "In this world you will have tribulation; but take courage, for I have overcome the world." Jn16:33

Right, but what do you do with all the others that say we do and we are rewarded for doing?

No; James said it well in 4:7-10, draw near to God and God will draw near to us.

It's not by works, "Noeb"; Eph2:9, Titus3:5. If salvation rested on ANY of our own works, then Jesus would not have been perfect and complete, His sacrifice not sufficient; He was, and it was.

you are confusing salvation by works and works by salvation.

No, it's THROUGH Him we become the righteousness of God. Do you reject what I quoted about "our own righteousness is as filthy rags"? That verse is valid, isn't it?

Were they called righteous before Christ as scripture says or not? You are confusing someone thinking they are saved by their own righteousness with God calling men righteous.

[Gadgeteer]

The common understanding is that "when Adam died, all died" (Rom5:15, 2Cor5:14).

I don't have much time so I'll have to address the other things tomorrow. Both of these are about physical death, not "spiritual death". See surrounding context.

"Therefore just as through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin, so death spread to all men because all sinned. ...But the free gift is not like the sin; for if by the win of the one many died, much more did the grace of God and the gift by the grace of the one Man Jesus Christ, abound to the many. ...So then as through one transgression there resulted condemnation of all men, even so through one act of righteousness there resulted justification of life to all men." Rom5:12, 15, 18.

Clearly "death" is equated to "condemnation", so it can't be physical death; likewise, set opposite to "death/condemnation", is "justification of life" (can only mean "eternal life"). No, it's talking about "spiritual death, and Jesus came to make us spiritually alive"...

[Gadgeteer]

Question for Gadgeteer and John146, what happened to the children who would have been killed by this command given by God in Deut 20?

16 Only in the cities of these peoples that the LORD your God is giving you as an inheritance, you shall not leave alive anything that breathes. 17 But you shall utterly destroy them, the Hittite and the Amorite, the Canaanite and the Perizzite, the Hivite and the Jebusite, as the LORD your God has commanded you,

Please explain why God would do this and where you believe the souls of the children would spend eternity and why.

I don't know. I can speculate --- maybe anyone left alive could have infected their spiritual position. Maybe there was something also about the lineage. But for infants, perhaps what Jesus said in Matt19:14 applies --- the kingdom of Heaven belongs to children. A child who has not reached the ability to make responsible choices, cannot be held responsible.

[Gadgeteer]

Then this condition is within man's hands?

You don't want my answer, we both want Scripture's.

"Do you think lightly of the riches of His kindness and forbearance and patience, not knowing that the kindness of God leads you to repentance? But because of your stubbornness and unrepentant heart you are storing up wrath for yourselves ....(towards God's judgment)... To those WHO by perseverance in doing good seek glory honor and immortality, eternal life; but to those who are selfishly ambitious and do not obey the truth but obey unrighteousness, wrath and indignation." Rom2:4-8.

"Pay close attention to yourself and to your teaching; PERSEVERE in these things; as you do you will save yourselves..." 1Tim4:16

"By your endurance save your souls." Luke21:19.

"Build yourselves in holy faith, keep yourselves in the love of God". Jude20-21.

"Receive as the outcome of your faith salvation". 1Pet1:9.

"Therefore (against the men who WAS purified but FELL from salvation!), be all the more diligent to make your calling and election firm; as long as you practice these things you will not stumble/ptaio/become-wretched; in THIS way the gates of Christ's eternal kingdom will be ...provided." 2Pet1:5-11

"Cast away from you all your sins that you have committed. Make for yourselves a new heart and a new spirit! For why will you die, Oh Israel? I have no pleasure in the death of anyone who dies; so repent and live." Ezk18:31-32.

You tell me --- which of those (and many just like them!) do NOT teach "within man's own hands"? And lest one might argue the Ezk18 passage is "nation-wise" (not individual, as if that answers the passage), verse 24 talks about when a RIGHTEOUS MAN (who by definition MUST belong to God, he could not be righteous otherwise!) turns from his righteousness and becomes wicked (what happened to his regeneration!) he will die.

Whaddya think, "Redeemed"? Do we participate in our salvation, or are we passive recipients of God's sovereign choice?

[Gadgeteer]

Hi Gad,

I trust you are having a blessed day!
Did you imply you were in London,or coming for a visit, though you'll have to come up North a bit?
It will be great to get a visit from you.

Alas, no trips planned in the near future, no matter how much I want to! Perhaps if I bolted a few more tanks onto my car, I could drive there! Don't laugh, several Cubans have done just that! A blue 1940's Ford made the trip, and a yellow pickup truck! One of them, they disconnected the drive-shaft and welded on a propeller! Coast Guard shouldn't have scuttled them, they should have gone to a museum somewhere!

(Of course, the drive to England is a little farther than the 90-mile Cuban excursions...)

Just wondering if you got this part, and have you noticed the different way you've put Rom 10 on the previous page?
From post 584, I posted; 'Notice your quote from Rom 10 is very different from the New King James;
Your quote;'says it is NOT in Heaven that one must go get it, give it to us to make us hear it & observe it'

Can you see the difference, hence your different interpretation of Christ GIVING faith.'?

I don't perceive that Christ gives faith-to-salvation. Look just at 2Tim3:15 --- where does "faith-in-Christ-to-salvation" come from, there? It comes from wisdom (hasta be similar to "conviction"), from studying Scripture. That's why this verse must be contrasted with Jesus' rebuke in John5:39-47. There also they studied Scripture, but in this case they REFUSED to believe and come to Him to have life. Jesus clearly said why they would not believe --- because they sought their own glory rather than God's, because they refused to believe Moses, and mostly because they did not love God.

When God commands us to love Him, it's a command that He thinks we're capable of doing.

[Redeemed by Grace]

You don't want my answer, we both want Scripture's.

But it's become obvious to me that we both understand scriptures so differently.. I've gone back and reviewed our posts and I don't think I found one point that we agree on... Of all my time here, with that said, you've become the top poster with me for whom we disagree on what every verse of scripture is about... I say up, you say down, I say red, you say green, I offer light you say heavy Even with John143, we don't agree on much, but have some common understandings within eschatology. So yea... I want your answer of what scriptures mean.

"Do you think lightly of the riches of His kindness and forbearance and patience, not knowing that the kindness of God leads you to repentance? But because of your stubbornness and unrepentant heart you are storing up wrath for yourselves ....(towards God's judgment)... To those WHO by perseverance in doing good seek glory honor and immortality, eternal life; but to those who are selfishly ambitious and do not obey the truth but obey unrighteousness, wrath and indignation." Rom2:4-8.

"Pay close attention to yourself and to your teaching; PERSEVERE in these things; as you do you will save yourselves..." 1Tim4:16

"By your endurance save your souls." Luke21:19.

"Build yourselves in holy faith, keep yourselves in the love of God". Jude20-21.

"Receive as the outcome of your faith salvation". 1Pet1:9.

"Therefore (against the men who WAS purified but FELL from salvation!), be all the more diligent to make your calling and election firm; as long as you practice these things you will not stumble/ptaio/become-wretched; in THIS way the gates of Christ's eternal kingdom will be ...provided." 2Pet1:5-11

"Cast away from you all your sins that you have committed. Make for yourselves a new heart and a new spirit! For why will you die, Oh Israel? I have no pleasure in the death of anyone who dies; so repent and live." Ezk18:31-32.

You tell me --- which of those (and many just like them!) do NOT teach "within man's own hands"? And lest one might argue the Ezk18 passage is "nation-wise" (not individual, as if that answers the passage), verse 24 talks about when a RIGHTEOUS MAN (who by definition MUST belong to God, he could not be righteous otherwise!) turns from his righteousness and becomes wicked (what happened to his regeneration!) he will die.

Whaddya think, "Redeemed"? Do we participate in our salvation, or are we passive recipients of God's sovereign choice?

Again, you don't hear me... I have never called salvation passive... but there are time folks want to hear what they want to hear.... this is one of those enduring times.

God gives faith: He then tests for that faith... It is He who is within me that saved me and holds me. It is God's wisdom not mine. So when instruction comes, I can now understand and heed... I now hate the sin I do because I'm becoming more like Jesus each day... All the instruction is for naught without Christ living within you... All the warnings go unnoticed, if He does not live within you to show you... Passive Gadgeteer? Hardly... actively passionate for Christ. You won't understand unless you ask Him to understand.... man thinks plans and does things; God directs man's ways. I can't be any more clearer at this point... for my desire is not to persuade, but to declare, and that is my normal and reasonable service to my Lord.


For His Glory...

[Gadgeteer]

I have never found "exclusive calling" in Scripture. I like how Jesus 'splained it in Matt22; everyone-in-view ("as many as you find") were invited, each chose for himself whether or not to come.

Exactly. In the Reformed view salvation is not offered because they know if it is offered then that implies that the ones it is offered to must choose to accept or reject it. That is not how they believe salvation works. Yet, Jesus clearly portrayed salvation as being something that is offered and then accepted or rejected in Matt 22:1-14. There is simply no way to reconcile the Reformed view with Matt 22:1-14.

Too true; they say "you can't put too much stock in a parable". Yes, I can --- the same amount as Jesus did.

RE "seeking" --- in Matt7:14 Jesus used "heurisko", find-by-diligently-seeking. Diligently-seeking is in view in Heb11:6, and it's boldly stated in Jeremiah 29:11-13. It is clear in Acts17:26-31, a passage that is not given near enough publicity. "God determines men's places and time, so that they SHOULD seek Him and grope for Him and perhaps FIND Him, though He is not far from any of us" (from memory). And God commands all men everywhere to repent.

How can there still be a doctrine portraying men as passive, mere recipients of God's sovereign choice? We are not passive in our salvation, we are active. It's all His gift, all His grace; but the faith which receives His grace is our own.

"Receive as the outcome of YOUR FAITH salvation"! 1Pet1:9!

[keyzer soze]

I don't know. I can speculate --- maybe anyone left alive could have infected their spiritual position. Maybe there was something also about the lineage. But for infants, perhaps what Jesus said in Matt19:14 applies --- the kingdom of Heaven belongs to children. A child who has not reached the ability to make responsible choices, cannot be held responsible.

Gadgeteer, first thanks for answering, I fully realize that this is a HARD question. I am blown away at the difficult passages in the O.T. where God displays his wrath and judgement on people.

The reason that I ask is because this is one of the underlying, fundamental concepts that form my position on the definition of the sovereignty of God. No matter how I break this down I see election creeping in the logic otherwise I am at a loss. Simply what do you do with the babies? Here are some options and why I think like I do.

a) Babies all go to heaven, see Matt 19:14 passage that Gadgeteer referenced as well as King David stating that he would go to his dead son after his life. If this is the case, and we recognize that God is saying that these people needed to go because they were too far from God to ever be turned back, then aren't we saying that God is directly intervening between man and his "free-will" to alter the course of eternal future for these babies? If God allows them to mature and choose, they will all turn away. So by wiping them out as babies, if indeed they go to heaven, then God is electing them into heaven against where their natural "free-will" would have taken them.
b) these babies will be judged based on how they would have theoretically lived and if they would have theoretically repented. Well it doesn't get any more "Calvinistic" or sovereign of a concept than this so I will not elaborate further.
c) they are obliterated out of existence or left in some limbo land. I believe this is what the RCC taught me years back but I can't remember for sure.
d) we simply don't know but can trust God. I again find myself thinking this is a super sovereign-salvation way to look at this matter which is fine by me but would struggle with how the "free-will" position can swallow this. These children were never given their "God given free-will choice" that I keep reading about in this thread so there can be no loving relationship ever between them and God because if they do go to heaven it is FORCED outside of their "free-will"

Anyways, due to family issues and personal life the issue of what happens to babies as well as mentally handicap has always weighed heavily on my heart. I have focused a lot of time, effort and questioning to this very issue and the only way I can process it is to totally run to the sovereignty of God and believe that God knew my family members were going to be mentally handicapped before time began and He had a plan for THEM. A lost child and/or a mentally handicap adult does not "fit" into any of the FAITH arguments so I am left to think that they are absolutely lost because of their inability to call out to their savior OR I can believe that they are "elect" and saved outside of their own consciousness of even having a choice to make in the first place. It is a DIFFICULT question, but it is one that has kept me up at night and confused me at times to the meaning of it all. Perhaps this is one of the fundamental reasons that my theology is what it is. If grace is only extended through faith that is generated from within, outside of God's sovereign control, then all is lost for those who can not intellectually grasp the gospel message to process it and means that they are created with one option only, eternal destruction and that doesn't seem to line up with with God's attributes.

Mind you, I fully acknowledge that my rationale above is not without its own set of tough questions as well, I fully acknowledge that. Therefore I land on the concept of PARADOX. Meaning somehow both are true. We are called to believe and trust in Jesus Christ AND God works a miracle in us which allows us to believe in what we can not see and further, goes beyond that to save those who can not even comprehend that they are lost or need a savior or never got the opportunity to.

I am very tempted to delete this post because it is so personal but I will not in hopes that perhaps God can use it for someone else. God bless.

[Gadgeteer]

I couldn't agree more. If faith is given to people then why did Paul spend so much time trying to reason with people and to persuade them to believe (Acts 17-18)? It seems to me that if faith was given by God then all we would need to do is preach the gospel and leave it at that. There would be no need to try to persuade people if it's completely up to God and not up to them at all to decide whether or not to believe the gospel. Why didn't Paul just preach the gospel and move on if faith is given to people rather than people needing to be persuaded to choose to believe?

Acts 17:1 Now when they had passed through Amphipolis and Apollonia, they came to Thessalonica, where was a synagogue of the Jews: 2And Paul, as his manner was, went in unto them, and three sabbath days reasoned with them out of the scriptures, 3Opening and alleging, that Christ must needs have suffered, and risen again from the dead; and that this Jesus, whom I preach unto you, is Christ. 4And some of them believed, and consorted with Paul and Silas; and of the devout Greeks a great multitude, and of the chief women not a few.

Acts 18:1 After these things Paul departed from Athens, and came to Corinth; 2And found a certain Jew named Aquila, born in Pontus, lately come from Italy, with his wife Priscilla; (because that Claudius had commanded all Jews to depart from Rome and came unto them. 3And because he was of the same craft, he abode with them, and wrought: for by their occupation they were tentmakers. 4And he reasoned in the synagogue every sabbath, and persuaded the Jews and the Greeks.

Why would all that time reasoning with them and persuading them be required if faith was simply given to people? I don't see how reason and persuasion would have anything to do with it if people are not responsible to choose how to respond to what they have heard.

Notice what follows the passage I quoted from Acts 18 above:

5And when Silas and Timotheus were come from Macedonia, Paul was pressed in the spirit, and testified to the Jews that Jesus was Christ. 6And when they opposed themselves, and blasphemed, he shook his raiment, and said unto them, Your blood be upon your own heads; I am clean; from henceforth I will go unto the Gentiles.

Was Paul just wasting his time trying to reason with and persuade the Jews to believe in Jesus as their Messiah/Christ or did he do that because he knew it was their choice of whether or not to accept what he was preaching? If they had no ability to accept what he was preaching why would God have led him to preach to them? It would have been a complete waste of time and effort in that case.

Wish I could "rep" this one. Very excellent post!!!

[keyzer soze]

Wish I could "rep" this one. Very excellent post!!!

I couldn't agree more. If faith is given to people then why did Paul spend so much time trying to reason with people and to persuade them to believe (Acts 17-18)? It seems to me that if faith was given by God then all we would need to do is preach the gospel and leave it at that. There would be no need to try to persuade people if it's completely up to God and not up to them at all to decide whether or not to believe the gospel. Why didn't Paul just preach the gospel and move on if faith is given to people rather than people needing to be persuaded to choose to believe?

Acts 17:1 Now when they had passed through Amphipolis and Apollonia, they came to Thessalonica, where was a synagogue of the Jews: 2And Paul, as his manner was, went in unto them, and three sabbath days reasoned with them out of the scriptures, 3Opening and alleging, that Christ must needs have suffered, and risen again from the dead; and that this Jesus, whom I preach unto you, is Christ. 4And some of them believed, and consorted with Paul and Silas; and of the devout Greeks a great multitude, and of the chief women not a few.

Acts 18:1 After these things Paul departed from Athens, and came to Corinth; 2And found a certain Jew named Aquila, born in Pontus, lately come from Italy, with his wife Priscilla; (because that Claudius had commanded all Jews to depart from Rome and came unto them. 3And because he was of the same craft, he abode with them, and wrought: for by their occupation they were tentmakers. 4And he reasoned in the synagogue every sabbath, and persuaded the Jews and the Greeks.

Why would all that time reasoning with them and persuading them be required if faith was simply given to people? I don't see how reason and persuasion would have anything to do with it if people are not responsible to choose how to respond to what they have heard.

Notice what follows the passage I quoted from Acts 18 above:

5And when Silas and Timotheus were come from Macedonia, Paul was pressed in the spirit, and testified to the Jews that Jesus was Christ. 6And when they opposed themselves, and blasphemed, he shook his raiment, and said unto them, Your blood be upon your own heads; I am clean; from henceforth I will go unto the Gentiles.

Was Paul just wasting his time trying to reason with and persuade the Jews to believe in Jesus as their Messiah/Christ or did he do that because he knew it was their choice of whether or not to accept what he was preaching? If they had no ability to accept what he was preaching why would God have led him to preach to them? It would have been a complete waste of time and effort in that case.

I totally get what you are saying there but couldn't we use that exact same logic and say that it was Moses who enabled the Israelites to defeat the Amalekites and not God? If Moses lowered his hands they began to lose thus it was Moses and not God who was causing this to happen... right?

Exo 17:11 As long as Moses held up his hands, the Israelites were winning, but whenever he lowered his hands, the Amalekites were winning.

[Gadgeteer]

Yes, I see what you are saying, and on this we agree! I think ? That Rom and Deut was written to those who already had received faith.

Hi, "Tea"! :-)

No, they have received the "word of faith" --- it's how they respond that is at issue. In Rom10:9-10, they can confess and believe and be saved, or in Deut30:17 they can turn away disbelieve and perish.

Thus the word of faith is proclaimed to the believing, and both communities are commanded to share their faith with those on the 'outside'.

Are we in agreement here?

"Exclusivity" is the issue; is it there? Or is "the word of faith" given to everyone, both those who believe and those who disbelieve?

Faith is NEVER far from anyone, we just don't know whom He has chosen to receive it?

Okay --- let's presume that "sovereign election" is the Scriptural theme; exclusive conspicuous predestined-salvation, and monergistic regeneration.

To those who are "elected" --- does it make sense to say "faith is never far from them"? You and I might think, "Well duh, of course it's not, it's irresistible!" And what about those who are NOT "elected"? "Faith" is infinitely too far and too difficult, isn't it?

So it's still the question, "who did he mean with 'it's not too far nor too difficult'?" In Acts17:26-31, context includes "all men everywhere" (commanded to repent). So if he meant both those who end up believers, and all the rest who disbelieve, then that makes much more sense --- "it's not far from ANY of us, any person".

You may prefer to say we just don't know whom will choose it, either way, our responsibility is to SHARE it!

All milk comes from machines man, come on, which society are you living in?

Hah hah hah! But how does it get into the machines? Must be "magic"! I remember reading a sci-fi story once where they wanted to make milk on Mars, for a visiting official with a bad stomach; but they didn't have a cow! They found it very very complicated!

Gad,
I can't see your point here?
Deut 30:11 "For this commandment which I command you today is not too mysterious for you, nor is it far off. 12 It is not in heaven, that you should say, 'Who will ascend into heaven for us and bring it to us, that we may hear it and do it?'

The commandment is "to choose life". And that by loving God and by obeying Him and by holding fast to Him.

Is this not talking about the commandment of God, it was near to them, in Rom 10, the word is Christ is near to them,
What is your issue with this portion?

It seems to be the "ability to obey that commandment", which Paul says in Rom10 is "the same word-of-faith that they were preaching about Jesus".

Poor folk, some haven't even tasted biscuits!

What's your favorite? "Butter cookies"? Those are really good with tea.

[Gadgeteer]

We were discussing Eph2.3 and what nature means. If you are posting this because you think it means there is an old and new nature living together in us, that's not correct. The old man is dead, for those that are in Christ.

Think about what you just said --- if the old nature is "dead-and-gone-forever", then we would be sinless, wouldn't we? You're right that the old nature is "dead", but it's not gone. And that is the issue. If we begin to walk in sin, they by definition we have turned away from Christ, and that "dead-but-not-gone-nature" gets resuscitated.

Eph4.20- tells you that is what you have learned about what Christ did, so walk in that truth, that the old man is dead and you are a new creature.

No, it does not assert "recognize that the old sinful nature is dead and you are now righteous and Spirit-renewed" --- it is clearly saying "do not walk in the old nature, but abide in the new nature". Towards that, look a few verses earlier, about verse 17:

"Do not walk as the heathens walk, in the futility of their minds, darkened in understanding, excluded from the life of God because of the ignorance that is in them, because of the hardness of their heart; ...given themselves over to sensuality and ...every kind of impurity..."

When he says "do not walk like this" --- is that presented as a possible thing, and if we DO walk like that would it not be "the old sinful man inside alive again? This to me is what passages like Heb10:26-29 warn; if WE continue walking in sin, after having been saved, then Jesus' sacrifice no longer covers us!!!

You don't have to live like you did before you were born again because you are free. He that is dead is free from sin. Paul is saying that same in Ephesians he did in Romans 6-8.

It's far more than "you-don't-have-to"; just as Romans8:12-14 asserts, "DO IT and DIE". It's severe.

Well, that's also physical death, but it doesn't tell me how Adam's nature differs from ours.

Have we come to agreement that "as Adam died, all died" --- refers to spiritual death?

Being good doesn't mean no sin. Jesus died for sin.

The argument was that we, of ourselves, could not atone for our sins; a perfect and spotless sacrifice had to be made. So though salvation is our faith, it's His POWER. Think about that statement --- we are not engaged in a one-time-event, but salvation is His power and grace, through our faith, every moment of ever day. Hence, "WALK/ABIDE in Him". 1Jn2:26-28, 1Jn4:16, Jude20-21, 1Tim4:16, 2Tim1:12-14, Col2:6-8, on and on. I hope people are looking these up to make sure I'm not making some major Scripture-quote mistakes. What if I am?

I cited Eph4:22-24; if we walk in sin and the flesh, then it is said that we "embody a sin nature". But if by the Spirit we put to death the flesh, then we embody a "new godly righteous nature". Doesn't matter if you perceive it as TWO natures, as if it's a clean coat and a dirty coat; or if you perceive it as ONE nature that either IS clean or IS dirty --- the end is the same.

No, it doesn't say this at all. If you follow the flesh the new creature is sinning.

If a man dwells in sin [b]then he's not a "new creature" at all! He's the OLD!!!

If you follow the Spirit you kill deeds of the body, not kill the flesh. Scripture does not teach to crucify your flesh. It teaches Christ did that already for you.

What does Romans8:12-14 mean to you?

"We are under obligation not ...to live according to the flesh, but to live according to the Spirit; for if we live by the flesh we must die --- but if by the Spirit we put to death the flesh, we will live."

Does this present as "possible" for us? CAN we live according to the flesh, can we die? "Living-by-the-flesh", is also called "living-in-sin", and it's also called "UNBELIEF". These concepts are inseparable.

Right, but what do you do with all the others that say we do and we are rewarded for doing?

Like Rev3:5? He WHO overcomes will not be blotted out of the Book of Life? We read that with the full Scriptural understanding that "we overcome, by Him-in-us". A verse springs to mind fully supporting this:

"WORK out your salvation with fear and trembling; for it is GOD who is at work in you, both to will and to work according to His good purpose."

Philip2:12-13. You --- DO this! Work our your salvation, AND it's God who works through you. Our choice, His work; our faith, His power. Just the same as Rom8:12-14, if we live by the flesh we must die; but if by the power of the Spirit we put to death the flesh, we live. It's the same as James4:7-10, as we draw near to God He draws near to us, and His heart becomes our heart.

you are confusing salvation by works and works by salvation.

Ahhhh, that is the issue! NOT salvation by works, but as you said well "works by salvation"! WORK out your salvation, for it is CHRIST IN YOU who works!

Were they called righteous before Christ as scripture says or not? You are confusing someone thinking they are saved by their own righteousness with God calling men righteous.

No one is called "righteous", apart from faith in God. That's one of "them Scriptural Absolutes".

:-)

[Gadgeteer]

But it's become obvious to me that we both understand scriptures so differently.. I've gone back and reviewed our posts and I don't think I found one point that we agree on...

I hope we agree on "salvation by grace through faith, intimate fellowship between Creator (Jesus!) and creature (you and me!), we cannot walk in sin for He dwells in us, so too the Spirit, giving us power to overcome sin; he who walks in sin does not know God". We should have perfect agreement on that!!!

Of all my time here, with that said, you've become the top poster with me for whom we disagree on what every verse of scripture is about... I say up, you say down, I say red, you say green, I offer light you say heavy

In debating Calvinism, I've striven to precisely interact with all verses used to support, defining the "founding passages" (Eph1:4-5, Eph1:11, Rom8:29-35, and Rom9:11-21), and the "secondary passages" (roughly 35, like John6:37 and 44 and 65, Jn10:26 and 28, Acts13:48, 1Cor2:14, 2Cor4:3-4, 1Tim2:25, 1Jn2:19, 1Jn5:1, Prov16:4 & 9, Ezk36:26-27, Jer17:9 & 13:23, etcetera). By methodically and thoroughly dealing with each of these passages, in context and sometimes in original language, and by making connections with other passages, it is attempted to come to a consistent and harmonious understanding. Additionally, passages that cannot accommodate any view of OSAS have been discussed. The specific view of "Predestined-Salvation" has been contrasted with Deuteronomy30:11-20 and the associated Romans10:6-10, and the clear connection with Acts17:26-31.

We've discussed "persuasion" (Acts26:28-29, Jn20:31, some excellent citations John made from Acts 17 and 18), the concept of "able to believe because of SEEING" (expressly stated by Jesus in John10:38 and John 20:29). No one of "predestinary bent" can interact with these.

Even with John143, we don't agree on much, but have some common understandings within eschatology. So yea... I want your answer of what scriptures mean.

"Do you think lightly of the riches of His kindness and forbearance and patience, not knowing that the kindness of God leads you to repentance? But because of your stubbornness and unrepentant heart you are storing up wrath for yourselves ....(towards God's judgment)... To those WHO by perseverance in doing good seek glory honor and immortality, eternal life; but to those who are selfishly ambitious and do not obey the truth but obey unrighteousness, wrath and indignation." Rom2:4-8.

"Pay close attention to yourself and to your teaching; PERSEVERE in these things; as you do you will save yourselves..." 1Tim4:16

"By your endurance save your souls." Luke21:19.

"Build yourselves in holy faith, keep yourselves in the love of God". Jude20-21.

"Receive as the outcome of your faith salvation". 1Pet1:9.

"Therefore (against the men who WAS purified but FELL from salvation!), be all the more diligent to make your calling and election firm; as long as you practice these things you will not stumble/ptaio/become-wretched; in THIS way the gates of Christ's eternal kingdom will be ...provided." 2Pet1:5-11

"Cast away from you all your sins that you have committed. Make for yourselves a new heart and a new spirit! For why will you die, Oh Israel? I have no pleasure in the death of anyone who dies; so repent and live." Ezk18:31-32.

You tell me --- which of those (and many just like them!) do NOT teach "within man's own hands"? And lest one might argue the Ezk18 passage is "nation-wise" (not individual, as if that answers the passage), verse 24 talks about when a RIGHTEOUS MAN (who by definition MUST belong to God, he could not be righteous otherwise!) turns from his righteousness and becomes wicked (what happened to his regeneration!) he will die.

Whaddya think, "Redeemed"? Do we participate in our salvation, or are we passive recipients of God's sovereign choice?

Again, you don't hear me... I have never called salvation passive... but there are time folks want to hear what they want to hear.... this is one of those enduring times.

And you just completely dismissed the verses I cited. Which of those passages does not assert "full voluntary participation by believers"? My opinion is that they all do; what is your opinion?

God gives faith:

Again and again I ask for "Scriptural support of that assertion". What letter chapter and verse? We've removed Eph2:8 from the possible answers, and Rom12:2, and 2Tim2:25; what verse is there that says "God-gives-saving-faith"? I've contrasted 2Tim3:15 (where saving-faith comes from studying Scripture), with John5:39-40 (where other study Scripture but refuse to believe, and Jesus plainly states why --- nowhere in view is "because God ordained"). Have you answered?

He then tests for that faith...

Again, what verse?

It is He who is within me that saved me and holds me.

"Saves", yes; "holds"? Who holds in 1Tim4:16? In 1Cor15:2? In Heb3:6 and 14? In Col1:21-23? In Rom11:18-23? Who holds in Deut30:29-20?

It is God's wisdom not mine.

It is, if you can support the ideas with Scripture. If I'm just forgetting or overlooking your answers, please remind me and everyone.

So when instruction comes, I can now understand and heed... I now hate the sin I do because I'm becoming more like Jesus each day... All the instruction is for naught without Christ living within you... All the warnings go unnoticed, if He does not live within you to show you... Passive Gadgeteer? Hardly... actively passionate for Christ.

"Gifted-faith-by-GOD" is "men-passive". Show me "gifted-faith-by-God".

You won't understand unless you ask Him to understand.... man thinks plans and does things; God directs man's ways. I can't be any more clearer at this point...

Is it YOUR point? Or SCRIPTURE'S? Is it Prov16:9? Where is it?

for my desire is not to persuade, but to declare, and that is my normal and reasonable service to my Lord.

Declare what? Is your doctrine founded on Scripture? That's what I'm trying to get you to confront --- what verses found your doctrine? Specifically?

Looking forward to your answers.

:-)