DJC49 wrote:
Good enough -- and you are quite correct.
But just for the sake of argument, can't we assume that Cornelius, being steeped in Judaism (devout) was taught one thing at synagogue about Israel's Messiah, and heard quite another thing about Him in the general knowledge and report "which was published throughout all Judaea"? It's very possible that Cornelius was terribly conflicted about this matter and gave it considerable attention in prayer. His beseeching for the truth about The Redeemer Messiah would be a logical surmise.
Yeah, I know, I know ... this is all speculation, but it's sometimes very edifying to put flesh and blood upon the bare bones of Scripture to make it come (more) "alive." Afterall, isn't that what commentaries do for the most part? Isn't that what rolling these matters over in your mind (meditate) and in prayer result in?
If Cornelius was human, he beseeched God about many things INCLUDING the truth re: Messiah.

DJC49 wrote:
First of all, *ml* is a woman. And it's safe for her to submit that the Holy Spirit was involved in the life of Cornelius etc.

DJC49

We could be here forever on this topic batting to and fro - and to no purpose. And that would be a great shame because we are in substantial agreement over the Cornelius passage.

ML wanted to see the work of the Spirit in Cornelius' life through the character traits mentioned of him. I don't see it as a problem to view these as natural traits of someone who is devout.

As for his prayer life - we simply do not know what he prayed for. It may have included what you alluded to, or it may simply be that as a devout man he committed everything by prayer to God, rendering thanks for all mercies granted to him. The text just says he prayed continually or constantly. Bear in mind that it was not just his prayers that came up before God as a memorial but also his alms giving. The acts therefore were more significant than the details.

As for God's providential involvement - certainly no problem.

Mike wrote:
..
But it is fun to do this sort of thing. It makes one think about what one believes. And why.

DJC49 wrote:
ml --
I've read all your posts today and in my estimation you have a good understanding of Acts 10. And I don't know why Calvinist Understanding is arguing with you.

Mike wrote:
Do you not say the work of the Holy Spirit in Cornelius prior to hearing the words whereby he would be saved is the regeneration? If so,how can you not have a problem with the man being indwelled by the Holy Spirit, yet be unsaved? Please don't say he was saved already, and Peter went on the journey just to let him know.

In reformed circles the word "regeneration" is used in 2 senses.

#1. From the first Spiritual influence from on high right through to the conscious new birth. So this would include awakening, conviction, repentance and faith and the new birth.

#2 Only of the new birth following repentance and faith.

You invariably only use it in its second sense.

In #1 the Holy Spirit does not reside in the individual until the conscious new birth, but he does act upon the person nevertheless.

The pre-conversion work is akin to your prevenient grace - difference being that prevenient grace is to all and all may take it or leave it. The calvinistic "special grace" is aimed only at the elect and is effectual to their salvation. It cannot be frusrated.

Hope this helps you to understand some of posts on this forum.

ML - OOS

Gotta go. So G'night all. Catch ya all real soon.

ml wrote:
If that's how it reads to you fine. I believe there was a work of the Spirit in Cornelius before Peter because he had a fear of God, isn’t this always present when God is at work on a sinner? etc.

Tell me ML have you read any accounts of the Great Awakening? Do you know how many thought themselves the subjects of some work of grace because they feared, and how the Evangelists would labour the point that fear in and of itself counted for very little. The Gospel command is not fear but repent and believe?

Even devils fear!

Many religious people are religious because they fear God, many of them even follow the true Protestant religion without a conversion experience, but one would not dare say that they had any genuine work of the Spirit of God.

Ditto with Prayer, Almsgiving etc. Any decent religious person is capable of doing these things. One does not have to have the Spirit's work in them to do these things, and since nothing in the text confirms your hypothesis the burden of proof is on you.

pew view wrote:
1] Do you believe that God responds to and answers to the prayers of the faithless unbelievers?

I was once a faithless unbeliever - and guess what? He heard my prayers! It was in fact answered prayers that really sparked my interest in Christianity.

But you were already half a saint, so I guess you deserved to have your prayers heard

pew view wrote:
2]+3] What any Christian should preach is the Bible. As to who can pray or repent or believe that is between them and God. I am not sent by God to make a judgment on who are Elect or not as the case may be.

ml wrote:
Calvinist Understanding, I answered your question will you answer mine?

Let me answer it by first clarifying something and then asking you a question in return, since you are so sure that you are right.

God works in many ways to draw sinners to himself. Some are providential, and others are within the heart of man.

Sometimes conversion is like that of the apostle Paul - sudden and instantaneous. And sometimes it can be a drawn out process where is takes months, sometimes even years before a person is finally brought into the fold.

Now all we know from the Cornelius account is that he was religious and that the religion he followed was Judaism. Was he attempting salvation by works? Who knows? The text simply does not say? Was the Spirit of God at work in his heart at this point in time? Who knows? You presume otherwise but with little grounds to do so - the text is silent and you are adding to it!

pew view wrote:
Calvinist Understanding
I am not denying the need to preach or receive the Gospel.
God knows who His disciples are long before we do ourselves. But our arrival at that point where we receive the inner calling, is a very special relationship with God through the Holy Spirit etc..

Now let me ask you again - and please try and answer the question. Let us say you are addressing a sunday school class of 5 and 6 year olds. What do you tell them? That God would hate their prayers so that they should not even bother? Or do you encourage them to pray, with no expectation that God will hear them? Or do you do you follow the Biblical pattern and teach them to pray with expectancy?

pew view wrote:
I think this question has been brought up before but; "Does God respond so miraculously to prayer by sending an Angel, to those who are NOT saved"?
Will a person who does not have saving faith be heard by God in prayers?

Tell me, were you:

#1 Born a Christian? or,
#2 Was there a period in your life when you were awakened and you had to seek?

If you answer 2, then did you pray during that time? If you did pray, why? Did you not realise that since you did not have saving faith that God would not hear you?

So what is the Gospel message according to you Pew View? If you cannot even tell the uncoverted to pray, how can you tell them to repent and believe?

ML

There is knowing and then there is knowing- we cannot be certain from the Acts account precisely what he did and did not know. But even assuming that he knew fully- how long did you know the gospel before you were converted? I have know people who have heard the same message for years and then one day something happens- the penny drops, and they suddenly believe!

DJC49 wrote:
Uh ... Yes! Of course!
"... why go through all the trouble? Paul was just showboating anyway as Lydia, the seller of purple, pink, and plaid was saved before the foundation of the world. She should have stayed home and baked a nice strawberry-rhubarb pie." [New World Hyper-Amplified Super Deductive Study Bible]

Mike wrote:
Anyone decide whether Lydia was born again before Paul showed up?

[URL=http://www.answersingenesis.org/kids/videos]]]Dangerous Journey[/URL]

ml wrote:
I read the posts and I still don't get the picture. ..

Total depravity means that man, who is created a moral being, is thoroughly polluted and cannot therefore do anything to earn his salvation, or indeed do anything pleasing to God for salvation. By thoroughly I mean in every part.

BUT the point is that man, who is a moral being, can nevertheless still do many good things.

So for instance our Lord could say, "..If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children, how much more shall your Father which is in heaven give good things to them that ask him?.."

Depraved, does not mean completely depraved and devoid of all morality, something that some insist it must mean! The "Imago Dei" has, according to them, been erased by the fall!

Consequently persons may do many religious and moral things even towards the one true and living God without being converted. So in the case of Cornelius the character traits mentioned of him need not refer to a saved person! These are not necessarily because of the Spirit's work in Cornelius' life.

Candle lit

Like your refreshing posts

Michael H

We have some here who insist that since from God's perspective man can do nothing towards his salvation that we must not tell him to do anything Now if the same logic were applied to the whole area of Law, we would label such folk "antinomians". Shall we therefore call these folk "antigospel"? Because they empty the gospel of any good news for sinners as sinners Makes me wonder what sort of gospel do these folk preach, if any at all?

For those who love quoting, "For the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God etc." Can you explain to me why Paul used reasoning, why he debated, why he argued and sought to persuade the unsaved? Perhaps he did not understand his own words? Maybe even if they do not receive it, it is important for them to understand what they are rejecting?

Then we have the folk on here who are so intent on seeing everything from the viewpoint of God's decrees that they can call a man saved before he is even justified Folk there is no justification without faith! And faith can only come by hearing etc..

DJC49 wrote:
"Et tu, Brute?"

As one wise poster on this thread once wrote, "Amazing what presuppositions can yield." You may even know him.

BTW. Heard the message to which you referred us. Very good indeed. Thanks!

Ah well, this 5 pointer has had his fill for the day. May look in over the weekend if the Lord permits.

May the Lord bless his true people.

DJC49 wrote:
Oh please tell me where I have gone astray!
please ... Please! ... PLEASE!!!

The character of Cornelius that is described in the text - that is just not possible for an unregenerate person. No unregenerate person can do such things towards the true God - towards false gods yes, but the true God - never! He demonstrated his faith by the things which he did.

God heard his prayer- even sending an angel to him. God does not hear the prayers of the unregenerate!

As for his knowledge- he followed Judaism - even if he was not a proselyte - and the text specifically mentions that he and his family already knew the word which wa published throughout all Judea etc (Acts 10.37) So we have to assume that he knew all about Christ.

As to why Peter was sent for- only to confirm to Peter that the gentiles were to be part of Christ's kingdom.

So what about Acts 11.14? Cornelius was already an OT believer. This passage was only to initiate him and his family into the blessings of Pentecost.

Now taken together this makes an invincible case!

By your reasoning you have undermined TD, shown your ignorance of the Calvinistic system and even broken ranks with Calvin on this

ml wrote:
Since you think that we don't understand total depravity can you explain it to us?
DJC49 I listened to the sermon it was very good.

We have not debated this and so I do not know your stance on TD. I could not therefore lump you with the others. So understand that you have included yourself with the others - not me!

I don't need to define it. It has already been done. You can read DJC49's post 2/26/09 2:00 PM under the current thread. Then read mine of same date 4:45 PM and you will get the picture.

Apercu

John UK wrote:
Phew, I'm glad I'm not one of those self-professed neo-calvinists on SA, but tring to be a whole-Bible believer in Jesus Christ.

John UK wrote:
And here is me, waiting for:::::.....
NOTHING
Ha!

# Do not understand total depravity or the spiritual nature of man's inability
# Hence do not understand what regeneration means in terms of man's faculties.
# They therefore make "faith" out to be something mystical as opposed to a conviction of the truth as it is in Christ and confidence in it granted by the Holy Spirit.
# Think, despite believing in Salvation by grace through faith, that a man may be saved without the preaching of the gospel and faith!
# Think that exhorting the unsaved to pray is useless
# Think that damnation is also unconditional.
# Think that Calvin's comments and their understanding of their systematic theology manuals should trump the Bible's plain declarations etc.

Have I missed anything?