The Good News/The Bad News

[Hospes]

two words FREE WILL did anyone drag you to the altar hold a gun or any other type persuasion .the time you got saved .? BTW i have had that question used many times . i been called a freewiller false teacher few other in carm. you guys can present your case .but it will not fly

My questions were "If God wills that all come to repentance, then why don't they? Is it that He is incapable of carrying out His own will?"

Your answer is "Free will".

Can I assume your answer is to my first question? (If so, I'd love to also hear your answer to the second question.) Also, if your answer is for the first question, is it that our free will overrides God's will that all come to repentance?

 

[Hospes]

did anyone drag you to the altar hold a gun or any other type persuasion .the time you got saved .?

No. The way I see it is that God opened my eyes to the beauty of His glory and my need for His mercies. Given what He did, all my resistance to His grace melted away and He caused me to be born again. In that event, you could say that His grace became irresistible.

 

[daninthelionsden]

I,say again,plenty of so called spirit filled churches where by its said we dont believe in commentaries and they don't even agree

en route to my church I pass by two of them .they are less then a mile apart.

some don't even half a statement of faith ,just well the holy ghost led me here .

another is a oneness church.i came from a cult ,yeah about that

As a young man I joined a cult named The Way International. I don't regret it as it was the first time I ever rejected a group. Before that, I was always the one being rejected. I learned to think for myself in the face of severe peer pressure and walk away. Though it took the police to get me outta there. I have lived a strange life.
Staying with the OP, I asked the Lord to show me my spiritual image in a spiritual mirror. I looked like a zombie. Alive, yet dead, yet alive. Horror at my extreme need for God to save me brought my knees before my Lord.

 

[OzSpen]

Thank you for taking the time to point out what commentaries have to say. As you know from our past discussions I’m not a big fan of commentaries because they confuse the body of Christ with the opinions on man, especially in this case of what believe and faith mean, whereby many people use faith and believe interchangeably not understanding the basic difference in the two words, one being a noun and one being a verb.


One is something we receive from God when He speaks to us, and is substance, something we have.


The other is a verb and is something we do.


I guess my question is... why are we looking at Bible dictionaries for a meaning of a biblical word, when the Bible itself defines for us what faith is?


Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. Hebrews 11:1


Faith is what we have, before we have the reality of what God desires us to have, whether salvation, healing, a job, a wife a husband, financial miracle or whatever, if we will believe, and demonstrate that we believe by confessing with our mouth, or doing whatever it is that God tells us to do, which is how faith comes to us.


Can’t we all find common ground in the words that the Bible defines for us?


If this person uses a certain Bible dictionary and another uses a different then there is grounds for division. But if we all agree on the definition the Bible uses, we can find common ground.


Doctrines are made up of words.

Misunderstand a biblical word and you will likely misunderstand the doctrine, especially with the word believe.

Many people understand the word “believe” to mean “realizes that something exists“ such as God.


Oh, I believe in God. I believe Jesus is the Son of God.


Therefore they believe by “believing” these things they are saved, and they go about there lives thinking they have all they need to “go to heaven” when they die.


The biblical word believe carries a much deeper meaning.


Please don’t get me wrong, I admire and appreciate you and the work you are doing in this Forum and all you do for people in your country. I can’t thank you enough.

You are very gifted and I truly am thankful for you.


Please consider this as a discussion point and not me trying to argue.



JLB

JLB,

I happen to believe in exegesis of the text and that means digging into the etymology of words, grammar and syntax of the Greek language. You may be able to find that information from a plain reading of the text. I can't. I don't want a simplistic reading of the text.

I cited from the most extensive word studies every produced, Kittel & Friedrich's (eds)Theological Dictionary of the New Testament.


Oz

 

[OzSpen]

Everything depends on your belief about free will.
If you come to believe that have have free will....
all your ideas about calvinism would come crashing down.

I've posted several verses about free will...
I never received a reply to them because, really, there is no answer.

The bible teaches that we have free will and that God does not coerce us into any moral action or any
other type of action for that matter.

wondering,

You may be interested in a couple articles I've written on this topic:

• What is the nature of human free will?
• Calvinists, free will and a better alternative

Oz

 

[GodsGrace]

O.K. ... let's see if your premise and conclusion works.

Premise1: The cause [salvation] is available to all men who seek the cause.
Premise2: I am a American Indian in the year 1292 who seeks to be saved (live forever)
Premise3&4: Faith cometh by hearing (Romans 10:17) and only by hearing as there is ONE Gospel (Gal. 1:8)
Premise5: The American Indian has no way to hearing the gospel
Conclusion: Your premise #1 is false OR no one seeks the cause (salvation)

Let's be reasonable ...
1) if God died for everyone without exception and
2) if He wished all to be saved without exception and
3) if God is all-powerful then
4) it stands to reason that God would ensure everyone got to hear the gospel as that is a perquisite for salvation. Thus, each of premises 1 through 3 is suspect. (Aside: I assume we both feel premise 3 is true)


In the same way the bible speaks of the Gentiles being without hope before Christ. Eph. 2:12

Were at that time without Christ - Having no faith in, or knowledge of, him. Being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel - Both as to their temporal privileges and spiritual blessings. And strangers to the covenants of promise - The great promise in both the Jewish and Christian covenant was the Messiah. Having no hope - Because they had no promise whereon to ground their hope. And being without God - Wholly ignorant of the true God, and so in effect atheists. Such in truth are, more or less, all men, in all ages, till they know God by the teaching of his own Spirit. In the world - The wide, vain world, wherein ye wandered up and down, unholy and unhappy. Wesley

Ephesians 2 Commentary - Wesley's Explanatory Notes

Read Ephesians 2 commentary using Wesley's Explanatory Notes. Study the bible online using commentary on Ephesians 2 and more!...

www.biblestudytools.com

So you're sure that American Indian was lost?
He who seeks God, finds Him.
So many verses --- you know them.

Or are you trying to say that only those after Jesus could possibly have been saved?
Your premise would be wrong.....

Also, you're "Let's be reasonable" numbers 1 and 2 and 3 and 4 are also wrong.
God WANTS everyone to be saved...

BUT ALAS...
Due to man's FREE WILL,
not everyone will be.
ONLY those who wish to be.

Matthew 23:37
37“Jerusalem, Jerusalem, who kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to her! How often I wanted to gather your children together, the way a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, and you were unwilling.


How do you not see FREE WILL all over the bible???

 

[JLB]

James is about us justifying ourselves before men (otherwise, James and Paul have contradictory statements)

Paul and James teach the same principle of faith; the obedience of faith.


God is the one who justifies a man. We do not justify ourselves.


The scripture says Abraham was justified when He obeyed God, to offer his son Isaac on the altar.

Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered Isaac his son on the altar? James 2:21


It was God who gave the command to Abraham, and therefore it was God who declares Abraham to be righteous, when Abraham obeyed.

This is what Paul teaches; the obedience of faith, which is the principle of faith.


But now is made manifest, and by the scriptures of the prophets, according to the commandment of the everlasting God, made known to all nations for the obedience of faith:
Romans 16:26


The entire book of Romans begins and ends with this principle of faith. This principle is how we are saved, when we obey the Gospel.

So no, James and Paul do not contradict each other.



JLB

 

[OzSpen]

My questions were "If God wills that all come to repentance, then why don't they? Is it that He is incapable of carrying out His own will?"

Your answer is "Free will".

Can I assume your answer is to my first question? (If so, I'd love to also hear your answer to the second question.) Also, if your answer is for the first question, is it that our free will overrides God's will that all come to repentance?

Hospes,

Why don't you provide an exegesis of this verse for us, particularly dealing with the words in bold?

• "The Lord is not slow to fulfil his promise as some count slowness, but is patient towards you, not wishing that any should perish, but that all should reach repentance" (2 Peter 3:9 ESV).
• "The Lord does not delay His promise, as some understand delay, but is patient with you, not wanting any to perish but all to come to repentance" (HCSB).
• "The Lord is not slow concerning his promise,[a] as some regard slowness, but is being patient toward you, because he does not wish[b] for any[c] to perish but for all to come to repentance[d] (NET).
• "The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. Instead he is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance" (NIV).
• "The Lord isn’t really being slow about his promise, as some people think. No, he is being patient for your sake. He does not want anyone to be destroyed, but wants everyone to repent" (NLT).
• "The Lord is not slow about his promise, as some think of slowness, but is patient with you,[a] not wanting any to perish, but all to come to repentance" (NRSV).

So, what is the meaning of "not wishing" or "not wanting" in this verse?

Oz

 

[JLB]

I happen to believe in exegesis of the text and that means digging into the etymology of words, grammar and syntax of the Greek language.

That’s great.

But the question remains, why do we look to Bible dictionaries written by men for the definition of a word when the Bible defines that word for us?

Can‘t we agree on the definition that the Bible gives us?


Faith comes to us from God, and is the substance of the thing hoped for and the evidence of things not seen.



JLB

 

[JLB]

I cited from the most extensive word studies every produced, Kittel & Friedrich's (eds)Theological Dictionary of the New Testament.

I cited the word of God.


Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. Hebrews 11:1



God bless you.




JLB

 

[GodsGrace]

Agreed!. Did I write something that led you to think I did not agree?

What a strange question! The last thing you should be concerned with is my view of your salvation! It is all in the hands of Christ and I am sure He is not concerned with what I think on the matter. Furthermore, I can assure you that your salvation does not hinge on whether or not we agree on free will.

Just curious: did you see and understand the point of my post? Was it lost on you? Not asking if you agree; just asking if you understood.

Hospes,
You know very well that you and jerry63935 do not agree.
Jerry does NOT agree that a person is so depraved and dead that he is unable to
raise his mind enough to feel the presence of God and to answer to Him.

Jerry is saying that we are able, through our free will, to reply to God's call.

 

[Hospes]

Hospes,

Why don't you provide an exegesis of this verse for us, particularly dealing with the words in bold?

• "The Lord is not slow to fulfil his promise as some count slowness, but is patient towards you, not wishing that any should perish, but that all should reach repentance" (2 Peter 3:9 ESV).
• "The Lord does not delay His promise, as some understand delay, but is patient with you, not wanting any to perish but all to come to repentance" (HCSB).
• "The Lord is not slow concerning his promise,[a] as some regard slowness, but is being patient toward you, because he does not wish[b] for any[c] to perish but for all to come to repentance[d] (NET).
• "The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. Instead he is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance" (NIV).
• "The Lord isn’t really being slow about his promise, as some people think. No, he is being patient for your sake. He does not want anyone to be destroyed, but wants everyone to repent" (NLT).
• "The Lord is not slow about his promise, as some think of slowness, but is patient with you,[a] not wanting any to perish, but all to come to repentance" (NRSV).

So, what is the meaning of "not wishing" or "not wanting" in this verse?

Oz

As far as I can tell, the words have an obvious meaning. They convey God's volition and disposition and gives reason for His patience. The word used conveys the desire on God's part is a strong desire. Where it used elsewhere in the scriptures it invariably is closely linked to potential or actual action.

I do not see much value in listing six translations, in that they convey the same meaning and provide no significant additional insight into the use of the words in question.

 

[GodsGrace]

Agreed. God justifies us before from his perspective. James is about us justifying ourselves before men (otherwise, James and Paul have contradictory statements) So, Christ died for you and by your faith you are justified to God. By your action you are justified to man.

I still don't know where you get the idea that we need to JUSTIFY ourselves before men.
I don't believe Paul and James have contradictory statements.
If they did, one or the other does not belong in canonized and inspired scripture.
God is not a God of confusion. 1 Corinthians 14:33

Help.

It's a complex issue. See post #276. I doubt you will agree. Perhaps @oz agrees with me and post #276, and if so you might be willing to listen to him (perhaps he doesn't). I can tell by previous post the JLB does not agree (assuming I understand him). Good luck.

This is the problem with calvinism.
Everything is so complex...
Jesus made it so easy.

It's complex because MAN has changed what the bible clearly teaches...
the men like Calvin, Zwingli, Knox, etc.

I'll check out the two posts you mention....

And I'll say further that I cannot stress enough how much I respect and appreciate JLB and OzSpen,
and I have learned from them.....but I will agree with them ONLY when it matches scripture.
Acts 17:11
10The brethren immediately sent Paul and Silas away by night to Berea, and when they arrived, they went into the synagogue of the Jews.
11Now these were more noble-minded than those in Thessalonica, for they received the word with great eagerness, examining the Scriptures daily to see whether these things were so.

 

[GodsGrace]

Re: "Justification" in James (in regards to previous posts)
What can James mean when he says, “You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone” (James 2:24). Here we must realize that James is using the word justified in a different sense from the way Paul uses it. In the beginning of this chapter we noted that the word justify has a range of meanings and that one significant sense was “declare to be righteous,” but we should also notice that the Greek word dikaioō can also mean “demonstrate or show to be righteous.” For instance, Jesus said to the Pharisees, “You are those who justify yourselves before men, but God knows your hearts” (Luke 16:15). The point here was not that the Pharisees went around making legal declarations that they were “not guilty” before God, but rather that they were righteous by their outward deeds. Similarly, the lawyer who put Jesus to a test by asking what he should do to inherit eternal life answered Jesus’ first question well. But when Jesus told him, “Do this, and you will live,” he was not satisfied. Luke tells us, “But he, desiring to justify himself, said to Jesus, ‘And who is my neighbor?’” (Luke 10:28-29). Now he was not desiring to give a legal pronouncement about himself that he was not guilty in God’s sight; rather, he was desiring to “show himself righteous” before others who were listening. Other examples of the word justify meaning “show to be righteous” can be found in Matthew 11:19b; Luke 7:35; Romans 3:4.

Our interpretation of James 2 depends not only on the fact that “show to be righteous” is an acceptable sense of the word justified, but also on the consideration that this sense fits well in the context of James 2. When James says, “Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he offered his son Isaac upon the altar?” (v.21) he is referring to something later in Abraham’s life, the story of the sacrifice of Isaac, which occurred in Genesis 22. This is long after the time recorded in Genesis 15:6 where Abraham believed God “and he reckoned it to him as righteousness.” Yet this earlier incident at the beginning of Abraham’s covenantal relationship with God is the one that Paul quotes and repeatedly refers to in Romans 4. Paul is talking about the time God justified Abraham once for all, reckoning righteousness to him as a result of his faith in God. But James is talking about something far later, after Abraham has waited many years for the birth of Isaac, and then after Isaac had grown old enough to carry wood up the mountain for a sacrifice. At that point Abraham was “shown to be righteous’ by his works, and in the sense James says that Abraham was “justified by work, when he offered his son Isaac upon the altar” (James 2:21). Grudem’s Explanation – Systematic Theology

OK FF,
Here's the problem:

You have above an entire commentary by someone named Grudem.
Now, should I post a commentary that agrees with me??

I doubt anyone even reads something like this.

Please post YOUR beliefs and use scripture for support.

Some persons post commentaries because they feel they explain something better than they do....
Fear not...we're all here to learn and to share.



As to the above, I did skim quickly through it and I want to say that the words
Justification and Sanctification are used, sometimes, with different meanings in the N.T.
However, theologians (real ones) have described what the two words mean and
I wish we could learn to use them in that sense....
(Just my opinion).

 

[GodsGrace]

two words FREE WILL did anyone drag you to the altar hold a gun or any other type persuasion .the time you got saved .? BTW i have had that question used many times . i been called a freewiller false teacher few other in carm. you guys can present your case .but it will not fly

I've been called a free willer many times.
And said with anger too.
I can't say that I'm angry with calvinists....
I just wish they would see the light and the true character and attributes of God.

Of course, they feel the same about us "free willers".

 

[Hospes]

Hospes,
You know very well that you and jerry63935 do not agree.
Jerry does NOT agree that a person is so depraved and dead that he is unable to
raise his mind enough to feel the presence of God and to answer to Him.

Jerry is saying that we are able, through our free will, to reply to God's call.

Let me step you through how to take into consideration context when understanding my reply to jerry63935:

Context is everything. He wrote

THE SPIRIT QUICKENS breaths new life into us the moment we are saved.

Note that his statement has no mention of total depravity, free will, man's inability to save himself, God's call, or any of the other things you somehow think is relevant to my reply. And then here is my reply to his statement:

Agreed!. Did I write something that led you to think I did not agree?

This reply of mine is not a broad statement of agreement with everything jerry63935 has ever written. You are exactly right in that we do not agree on many things. But given I am replying to a specific statement, I am thinking you should have seen my agreement in that context. I also consider it a courtesy to note common ground with people with whom I have other disagreements. I want to do what I can to keep the conversation civil, and this is one useful way of accomplishing this.

So if we can take the time to note the context of what others write, we can avoid making mistakes such as implying that a poster is not writing honestly. I hope you can imagine how offputting it is to be on the receiving end of such.

 

[GodsGrace]

Paul and James teach the same principle of faith; the obedience of faith.


God is the one who justifies a man. We do not justify ourselves.


The scripture says Abraham was justified when He obeyed God, to offer his son Isaac on the altar.

Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered Isaac his son on the altar? James 2:21


It was God who gave the command to Abraham, and therefore it was God who declares Abraham to be righteous, when Abraham obeyed.

This is what Paul teaches; the obedience of faith, which is the principle of faith.


But now is made manifest, and by the scriptures of the prophets, according to the commandment of the everlasting God, made known to all nations for the obedience of faith:
Romans 16:26


The entire book of Romans begins and ends with this principle of faith. This principle is how we are saved, when we obey the Gospel.

So no, James and Paul do not contradict each other.



JLB

JLB,
At first glance, it might seem to some that Paul and James are in disagreement...
however, I can agree with you that they are not.

Paul explained that we are not saved by works but by faith.
I think all Christians understand this initial salvation and how it can only be by faith.

But then, yes, we must obey Jesus or we cannot be His disciples.
Both James and Paul believed this and Paul stressed the TYPE of life we should be living in each of his epistles.
Paul never stated that faith alone will save eternally.


Paul to:

Titus 3:1-2
1Remind them to be subject to rulers, to authorities, to be obedient, to be ready for every good deed,
2to malign no one, to be peaceable, gentle, showing every consideration for all men.


Romans 2:13
13for it is not the hearers of the Law who are just before God, but the doers of the Law will be justified.


and many more verses by Paul to show that he certainly believed in obedience.

 

[GodsGrace]

Let me step you through how to take into consideration context when understanding my reply to jerry63935:

Context is everything. He wrote

Note that his statement has no mention of total depravity, free will, man's inability to save himself, God's call, or any of the other things you somehow think is relevant to my reply. And then here is my reply to his statement:

This reply of mine is not a broad statement of agreement with everything jerry63935 has ever written. You are exactly right in that we do not agree on many things. But given I am replying to a specific statement, I am thinking you should have seen my agreement in that context. I also consider it a courtesy to note common ground with people with whom I have other disagreements. I want to do what I can to keep the conversation civil, and this is one useful way of accomplishing this.

So if we can take the time to note the context of what others write, we can avoid making mistakes such as implying that a poster is not writing honestly. I hope you can imagine how offputting it is to be on the receiving end of such.

Context has nothing to do with what jerry63935 posted and what you replied.

I see your reply as not being totally honest.

You have no common ground with Jerry.
You are as far apart as can possibly be.

 

[GodsGrace]

Let me step you through how to take into consideration context when understanding my reply to jerry63935:

Context is everything. He wrote

Note that his statement has no mention of total depravity, free will, man's inability to save himself, God's call, or any of the other things you somehow think is relevant to my reply. And then here is my reply to his statement:

This reply of mine is not a broad statement of agreement with everything jerry63935 has ever written. You are exactly right in that we do not agree on many things. But given I am replying to a specific statement, I am thinking you should have seen my agreement in that context. I also consider it a courtesy to note common ground with people with whom I have other disagreements. I want to do what I can to keep the conversation civil, and this is one useful way of accomplishing this.

So if we can take the time to note the context of what others write, we can avoid making mistakes such as implying that a poster is not writing honestly. I hope you can imagine how offputting it is to be on the receiving end of such.

And please remember to reply to my post to you no. 260.
Please show me how faith is a work.
Thanks.

 

[GodsGrace]

Usually, when we speak of a work, it is in the context where there is an implied agent doing the work. The article you pointed me to reads i part:

To begin with, it helps to remember the definition of faith we learned earlier: Faith is being convinced or persuaded that something is true. As such, we cannot choose to believe. Faith is not a work and is not meritorious because faith happens to us. We are convinced, we are persuaded, as God reveals Himself to us through His various forms of revelation.​

The author clearly implies the work is not the work of the person, but gives God credit in that faith is caused by Him revealing "Himself to us through His various forms of revelation." It may not be a work done by a person, but it is a work done by God. (Just to be clear, I am not claiming the author has my beliefs on salvation, but on this one point I think I am agreement with him.)

If when you write that "faith is not a work" you mean "faith is not a work done by a person", then I'd fully agree with you. If you mean it is not a work done by any agent, then I'd disagree. Being a big fan of the Law of Causality, if faith exists, something caused it. The question is what/who caused the faith.

Of course you believe faith is something (a work) done by God.
You believe EVERYTHING is done by God.
This is why there is a distorted view of biblical doctrine.

God reveals Himself to us.
We RESPOND by either believing Him or not...of our own free will.
IF we believe in Him,,,then we have faith in Him.

Revelation is God's part.
Faith in Him is our part.

And if you still don't understand free will after many posts to you....
Just stop any man on the street and ask him what free will is.

Only calvinists have changed the meaning.