Eve blamed the snake.
The snake does not have a leg to stand on.
Faithlicist wrote:Faith therefore is a gift and work wrought in our hearts by the Holy Spirit.........Aaahh it's good to be back. Time for some real TULIP Calvinism around here. Happy Sunday folks.
However! Good to see you back Faithlicist.
Now as to your reply to my post, I must say I'm very disappointed with you, as you ignored completely what I said.
It's enough to make a grown man cry.
However, with your spiritual wellbeing in mind, I will continue to inform you as to my opinion concerning enlightenment before justification, which I can easily prove from the scripture.
Have a happy Lord's Day, and may the Lord bless your brain (faculty) immensely.
John UK wrote:Ooooooh,
Mike wrote:How do you manage
I've been away for a week and you go back to your old ways of trying to save yourselves. What am I going to do with you?
Now remember when the sinner is in his natural estate before being called inwardly, he is about as much use to truth and salvation as a plastic duck can drive a double decker bus. Because the Bible says so.
5 "Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost;"
See - NO works required!!
8 "For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: 9 Not of works, lest any man should boast."
See - Faith is the GIFT of God!!
13 "We having the same spirit of faith, according as it is written, I believed, and therefore have I spoken; we also believe, and therefore speak"
Faith therefore is a gift and work wrought in our hearts by the Holy Spirit.
Aaahh it's good to be back. Time for some real TULIP Calvinism around here.
Happy Sunday folks.
Faithlicist wrote:Here we go again; - Raising sinner and denying Sovereignty!!!John, Mike, BiblicistHow many times must we teach you that salvation by self does not work. The Holy Spirit is the one who guides the sinner into all truth - NOT the sinner himself. Your statement above denies the need of the Holy Spirit.The sinner, when in his natural estate, cannot spiritually discern the Word of God as Scripture teaches.This Arminian teaching of yours is based on the same premise as papistry. Again you underestimate the power of sin."But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned." 1Cor 2:14
Faithlicist wrote:Your statement above denies the need of the Holy Spirit.....
Keep an open mind, my friend. Open, that is, to the Bible's teaching, instead of allowing yourself to be browbeaten into submission to men.
I believe in 'every member ministry'. Don't you? No you don't!
John UK wrote:So the question is "Why does a man that is 'dead' in trespasses and sins, like 'Christian' in the Pilgrim's Progress, begin seeking the Light, if he is totally 'dead' spiritually?I would put it down to 'enlightenment from the word', which is before new birth.
John, Mike, BiblicistHow many times must we teach you that salvation by self does not work.
The Holy Spirit is the one who guides the sinner into all truth - NOT the sinner himself. Your statement above denies the need of the Holy Spirit.
The sinner, when in his natural estate, cannot spiritually discern the Word of God as Scripture teaches.
This Arminian teaching of yours is based on the same premise as papistry. Again you underestimate the power of sin.
"But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned." 1Cor 2:14
Mike wrote:I might try to convince them that God does not make man believe or disbelieve, but allows them to do either. But I'm afraid this would fall on stopped ears.
If the difference is down to how the individuals process the enlightenment that they receive, then one of them must have a better thinking capacity, or maybe developed a better receptivity or some such thing, and this qualitative difference achieved by them is their contribution to arriving at faith!! Any such contribution is then considered to be a work.
For them the bottom line is:
If God is not the one making the difference, then you are, and hence you are contributing to your own salvation.
Biblicist wrote:Good post Mike I guess a calvinist would not be happy with the answer you gave because it does not explain why some believe and others do not. To them if the difference cannot be tracked back to God, then salvation becomes works based.How would you answer their concern?
Mike wrote:Not all who have been given some light seek more. And dead isn't as dead as some propose. Man is held responsible for a reason. If a man hates the light, it is because he can discern it enough to hate it."Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath showed [it] unto them." (Ro 1:19) "so that they are without excuse" (Ro 1:20) When he rejects the light that is made manifest in him, it does not show that he is unable to do otherwise, but that he is unwilling, thus without excuse.You are right in that enlightenment is before the new birth.
I guess a calvinist would not be happy with the answer you gave because it does not explain why some believe and others do not. To them if the difference cannot be tracked back to God, then salvation becomes works based.
How would you answer their concern?
John UK wrote:Oh I see.....I think. So the question is "Why does a man that is 'dead' in trespasses and sins, like 'Christian' in the Pilgrim's Progress, begin seeking the Light, if he is totally 'dead' spiritually?I would put it down to 'enlightenment from the word', which is before new birth.
"Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath showed [it] unto them." (Ro 1:19) "so that they are without excuse" (Ro 1:20)
When he rejects the light that is made manifest in him, it does not show that he is unable to do otherwise, but that he is unwilling, thus without excuse.
You are right in that enlightenment is before the new birth.
Biblicist wrote:JohnGod does not lie, and therefore that they did die should not be doubted by any Bible believing Christian.They started to die physically and there was also spiritual death. But the issue to my mind is really what is it to die spiritually?Those who see man as tri-partite say that the spirit within man died. Although most reformed folk do not agree with the tri-partite view, they nevertheless come to the same conclusion. And so spiritual death to them means the same as physical death. What the body cannot do as a result of death must now by analogy be transferred to man in the spiritual realm. All spiritual activity therefore should cease.When one points to men and women "dead" in sins and tresspasses who still seek the spiritual, they can produce no good answer, but will resort to all sorts of philosophical nonsense, with quotes from their favorite authors, but with no biblical support. For my take on this, refer to Is. 59:2.
So the question is "Why does a man that is 'dead' in trespasses and sins, like 'Christian' in the Pilgrim's Progress, begin seeking the Light, if he is totally 'dead' spiritually?
I would put it down to 'enlightenment from the word', which is before new birth.
John UK wrote:And I for another.Now what's this about the calvinist's understanding of spiritual death being defective? How so? We've not even mentioned it yet. But alas, my time is out, and must away to the Land of Nod once again.But post it up bro, and in the morn I will have a look and see why you think the Frenchies have it all in a muddle.
I've touched on this in my previous posts. See for instances the following:
7/27/09 5:47 PM
7/28/09 5:59 PM
Biblicist wrote:Lurker, please exercise a little patience with 2 uneducated barbarians. I for one am interested to know exactly what you were getting at. Care to have another go?John, where to now? If the calvinist's understanding of spiritual "death" is defective, what of the philosophical premises that follow on from their view?
Now what's this about the calvinist's understanding of spiritual death being defective? How so? We've not even mentioned it yet. But alas, my time is out, and must away to the Land of Nod once again.
But post it up bro, and in the morn I will have a look and see why you think the Frenchies have it all in a muddle.
Lurker wrote:Just have a minute during lunch to check in. Thank you both for your comments and I'll receive them in the spirit in which I know they were given...it is clear that we do not speak or understand the same biblical language. Therefore further "discussion" would not be profitable.
John, where to now? If the calvinist's understanding of spiritual "death" is defective, what of the philosophical premises that follow on from their view?
John UK wrote:Say, Lurker, are you okay? Still Baptist? Still sane? Your posts of late have been most mystical and enigmatic - not like you at all.
Yes, very much like me, John. But I will end my comments here as it is clear that we do not speak or understand the same biblical language. Therefore further "discussion" would not be profitable.
Lurker wrote:The eleventh commandment? What you call a law was a warning for "death" reigned from Adam to Moses outside and east of the garden where the ground was cursed. I fear you are being overcome by the writings of men and paying too little attention to the metaphoric language of the bible. I'll not be able to comment further till tonite so do continue without me.
You've been reading too many novels.
You reckon only part of the world was cursed? Man if I believed that, I'd be searching for the safe spot and live there forever.
Oh and the first commandment was not a warning but a simple declaration of fact (a commandment). Sin is "trangression of the law" according to the New Testament, so you tell me what law Adam transgressed that brought in sin and death to the human race.
Say, Lurker, are you okay? Still Baptist? Still sane? Your posts of late have been most mystical and enigmatic - not like you at all.
Lurker wrote:The wages of sin is indeed death. That said, if death always comes immediately upon sin then Paul's discourse in Romans 7 cannot be reconciled with your following statement: "Adam died the moment he disobeyed God!" or with the prophets for the "chief of sinners" was alive without the law until the commandment (law) came. My post was mostly scripture which I find relevant to the subject matter. I don't find biblical phrases like "ministration of death" and "death reigned" and the day Paul's transgressions were repaid (Deut 32:35)cryptic.
Also, the word "death" does not carry a single uniform meaning in the Scriptures, which is what I think you are trying to impose on those passages you quoted.
Of the references you gave Romans 5 refers to physical death, Romans 7 refers to a moral death in the consciousness of Paul, and the reference to the "ministration of death" points to the legal dispensation, declaring that the keeping of the Law could not produce life!
So what may appear plain to you is not to me. Merely quoting scripture does not make it any plainer!
Biblicist wrote:What about the wages of sin is death? Adam died the moment he disobeyed God! IOW the estrangement took place before he was kicked out of Eden.
Biblicist wrote:Your post is very cryptic!
John UK wrote:But surely Adam had a law? "Thou shalt not eat...
I'll not be able to comment further till tonite so do continue without me.
Lurker wrote:Adam died the moment he exited the garden setting foot on cursed ground. He sinned in the garden but it was not until he was exposed to the law that his sin was imputed working his death.(Romans 5:13) Outside the garden he came under the law of works which is the curse and death. Read the following passages taking careful note of the metaphors for they are consistent throughout the bible.
Your post is very cryptic! Can you please explain?
Lurker wrote:John,Adam died the moment he exited the garden setting foot on cursed ground. He sinned in the garden but it was not until he was exposed to the law that his sin was imputed working his death.(Romans 5:13) Outside the garden he came under the law of works which is the curse and death........
Now this text says:
For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law. Romans 5:13 KJV
But surely Adam had a law? "Thou shalt not eat...." Plus the basis for the later law was established at creation. So I really cannot see what you're saying. Did you agree with our conclusions? Or are you countering them?
If you missed the very first post, I was asking what 'die' meant in this very commandment:
And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat: But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die. Genesis 2:16-17 KJV___________________BiblicistAmen!We're in agreement? Oh dear, whatever shall we do now? Oh yes, you were going to bring Frenchie out.
