Monday, August 27, 2007

How Dead is Dead?


I hear about being dead in sin. Then I hear "choose Christ."


If you are dead in your sins how can you "choose Christ"?


You did not choose Me, but I chose you and appointed you that you should go and bear fruit, and that your fruit should remain...John 15.16


No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him...John 6.44


If God is on one side voting for you to be saved and the devil is on the other side voting against you being saved and you have the deciding vote then it appears the power is in your hands.


And if God does want everyone to be saved then why do you pray for people to be saved? And if He wants everyone to be saved then once again, man is in control.


Does man really have 51% of controlling interest in his salvation? How about 50-50? That would put Him and man on an even level.


These illustrations sound ridiculous don't they? So does the idea that man is in control of his destiny or salvation. Salvation is 100% totally of God by God and for God. Pride is the sin that makes us want the credit for our salvation.

145 comments:

Melissa said...

Yeah, DT, but "it's all about me". You're very right that He chose us. Many Christians get this confused. I wonder, is it pride or just plain ignorance?

There's nothing more amazing than when I realized that He, Almighty God, chose me....me.

dk said...

DT,
I believe that (since it is "I", could be wrong) God calls us, then human beings can either accept or reject. I have the following verses to support my belief.

1. Behold, I stand at the door, and knock: if any man hear my voice, and open the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with me.

2. For many are called, but few are chosen

I have another story to illustrate. I used to go to a prayer meeting where once a person came from a different religion, who was very much involved in occultic practices. He accepted Jesus as his Lord and Savior, came to the meetings many times, but was later (months later) persuaded by his family go back to his original religion. Is it not that he rejected the grace even though he did believe initially that he could be saved from eternal damnation through Jesus?

dk

dk said...

In addition to the above, I also don't think there is any issue of pride coming up. What is there to be proud about in receiving a free gift? How does accepting this gift constitute pride? Doesn't make sense to me.

dk

iggy said...

DT,

At the risk of being mocked further here on your blog...

This is correct....

I always try to make the point by saying this:

We often say, "I gave my life to the Lord" when in fact all we had dwelling within us was death... so more accurately we gave our death tot he Lord Who in exchange gave us His Life which is eternal.

Yet, saying that even we as dead men are still "alive" now... as we have not yet died, but live in this corrupt flesh. With that we can hear the "call" of God, and once we see that "we are dead in our sins" we can then turn to Jesus and die with Him by the Cross and be raised anew by the Resurrection.

So, we are still in partial alive, yet spiritual are under the "covenant of death" as the prophet Isaiah stated.

We exchange the covenant of death for the covenant of life in Jesus Christ...

But then again i could be wrong...

LOL!

Be Blessed,
iggy

dsstanfield said...

I believe Spurgeon is the author of the following:

If an Arminian were to be consistent with what he believes this is what he would pray:

"Lord, I thank thee I am not like those poor presumptuous Calvinists. Lord, I was born with a glorious free-will; I was born with power by which I can turn to thee of myself; I have improved my grace. If everybody had done the same with their grace that I have, they might all have been saved. Lord, I know thou dost not make us willing if we are not willing ourselves. Thou givest grace to everybody; some do not improve it, but I do. There are many that will go to hell as much bought with the blood of Christ as I was; they had as much of the Holy Ghost given to them; they had as good a chance, and were as much blessed as I am. It was not thy grace that made us to differ; I know it did a great deal, still I turned the point; I made use of what was given me, and others did not—that is the difference between me and them."

Every true Christian prays like a Calvinist, whether they think they do or not.

If salvation all boiled down to an individual's choice, why don't we quit praying for God to save someone, and instead go beg and plead with the individual to make a "decision" for God. Maybe we could persuade them to walk an aisle, check a box at VBS, say the sinner's prayer..... Wouldn't that be all it takes?

Henry (Rick) Frueh said...

DT - Do you not suppose that I have had this discussion ad infinitum? I would hope that in all your certainty you would admit that there are many verses that seem to indicate the opposite of your position.

There are many Greek and Hebrew scholars who espouse both sides of the election debate. I am fully Arminian and a partial pelagian. The liability from my perspective is sometimes contouring the message so as to help bring conversions. The liability from your perspective is sometimes a removal of missionary urgency.

There are true believers and commited followers of the Lord Jesus in both camps!

Henry (Rick) Frueh said...

A summary.

http://judahslion.blogspot.com/2006/11/glory-of-god-in-my-choice-it-has-often.html

dsstanfield said...

henry (rick),

I am fairly certain that you would agree with the following statements. Please correct me if I am wrong.

The Bible is infallible. God can not lie.

Arminians and Calvinists can not BOTH be right. They are in direct opposition to another. A thorough reading of Romans should be enough to at least cause you to rethink your position. Even throughout the OT (you know I love that 2/3 of the Bible), God was busy calling His people unto Himself. Adam and Eve, Abel, Seth, Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob....

God's redemptive plan for His elect started before He even formed the world, even before Adam and Eve sinned.

"just as He CHOSE us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before Him in love, having PREDESTINED us to adoption as sons by Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the good pleasure of His will."

Dead Theologians said...

Rick,

I am aware of the ongoing debate of this subject. I am aware of scholars disagreeing on this issue. I am not aware of your exhaustive discussions on this subject.

Are these reasons that I should not want to "hash" it out?

To everyone,
I think the issue is central around 2 huge points:
1. How sovereign is God and the big one...
2. How dead is man?

Iggy, your first paragraph is dead-on. We differ on the idea of being partially alive. I think we are zombies (AA). Before Christ we are dead people (spiritually) walking around in bodies that are alive (physically).

dk,
Respectfully, the verse you just gave (Rev. 3.20) has nothing to do with evangelism. Look at its context. It is being said to churches.
Many are called by Iggy, Rick, myself and many other pastors every Sunday. Few are chosen by the Lord (John 13.18).

Henry (Rick) Frueh said...

The Bible is infallible.
God cannot lie.
Man's interpretation is fallible.

In the end, a Calvinist view doesn't alter hell's population regardless of the obedience of the church.

The Arminian view believes that our level of surrender matters in the salvation of souls.

I believe the five points are heresy.

You believe the free will teaching is heresy.
Hopefully we both do not believe we are heretics. There is a difference.

dsstanfield said...

Henry (rick),

You said:

"In the end, a Calvinist view doesn't alter hell's population regardless of the obedience of the church."

Your theology carried out to its logical ends, would mean that man can somehow alter hell's population, thus making man a god. What man can thwart the decrees of God?

Dead Theologians said...

Rick,

Deducting what you said "I believe the five points are heresy.

You believe the free will teaching is heresy.
Hopefully we both do not believe we are heretics. There is a difference."

If you believe my belief system is heresy then I have to be a heretic and vice versa.

DT

Douglas said...

"I believe the five points are heresy."

Sir, the five points are not heresy, they are Scriptural:

TULIP with Scriptures

Doctrines of Grace – Categorized Scripture List

ADieL said...

I dont know. Over the last year I have become more convinced of the truths of doctrines of grace... but for some reason, I am not sold on the whole "dead" thing.

"If I am dead, can I walk? If I am dead, can I talk? If I am dead, how can I choose? etc"

I have always understood it more in the sense that an executioner can refer to a living,walking,talking criminal as a "dead man walking". I understand it to mean that he is as good as dead. There is no life in him. His default destination is death, that is where he is headed, he is but a heartbeat away from it, hanging over the pit of hell by a horse's hair etc. He is as good as dead etc. He is, in Gods sight, dead. Unless something drastic happens, repentance and faith in the Son of God, he will perish.

I guess I subscribe more to the paradoxical view of salvation. I believe that those who are saved are chosen by God. He chose them, they did not choose Him etc. Yet at the same time, when the Gospel is preached, it is up to the person to "strive" to enter by the narrow gate, the person must make the choice to forsake his sins and follow Christ, its man's choice. But then again, in reality, behind the scenes, its God's decision, He chooses those who are saved based on nothing in us, according to the good pleasure of His will, yet at the same time we must "make our own calling and election sure" and be diligent to be found in Him. I believe that everyone that I preach to can repent and believe, yet at the same time, those who do only did so because God chose them etc. How can it be both? I dont know. Its a paradox. That is how I understand this.

Henry (Rick) Frueh said...

See, how many times have Calvinists refused to even admit there are legitimate views that differ from their's without compromising their own? I was attempting to be honest about how we feel about each other's views by removing the name "heretic". I guess we remain unpleasantly entrenched, what a surprise.

Nobody superceeds God's decrees and thereby become "god". But man can obey God's decree and become a conduit of God's outreach, which was decreed by the sovereign God before creation.

Melissa said...

(Another Melissa :-))

From the Blue Letter Bible: Ephesians 2:1-13

Dead - "nekros"

1) properly

a) one that has breathed his last, lifeless

b) deceased, departed, one whose soul is in heaven or hell

c) destitute of life, without life, inanimate

2) metaph.

a) spiritually dead

1) destitute of a life that recognises and is devoted to God, because given up to trespasses and sins

2) inactive as respects doing right

b) destitute of force or power, inactive, inoperative

If this is the case, we can do nothing without Him "quickening" us first. Then, He gives us the faith and the ability to believe in Him. Salvation starts and ends with the Lord, not us. I can be certain that I had not part in it whatsoever, because I did not seek Him, I enjoyed my sin.

I can say that for a few years, I was Arminian in my thinking on this issue. It was just earlier this year that, through prayer and study of scripture, that my eyes were opened to the Sovereignty of God. I am so small, but God...!

Just my 2 cents!!

iggy said...

DT,

Be careful your friends have deemed me and my friends all heretics, apostates and false teachers...

But then again men said that of Jesus also.

blessings,
iggy

Dead Theologians said...

ADieL,

It is in Romans 3 that might help you understand how dead you are. We cannot choose God (Romans 3).

DT

Dead Theologians said...

Rick,

Does it bother you that bad for someone to disagree with you?

I was simply saying that following your logic we are both heretics.

DT

Dead Theologians said...

The other Melissa,

Thanks for that comment. My sentiments exactly.

DT

Dead Theologians said...

Melissa,

That is what makes salvation so much sweeter. When you realize that you had no part in it but that He did it all; that is grace greater than all our sin.

DT

iggy said...

Douglas...

My question of total depravity is this...

Romans 1 states 21. "For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened.

So question 1 is this... how can one know God if they are not regenerate? Yet it states they knew God... does it not?

24. Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts...

Question 2 is this... If one is born totally depraved, how can God "give them over" if they are already totally depraved?

I see the clear teaching of scirpture is all have sinned and fallen short the Glory of God... in that all men have sinned all men will die. Yet, I see in scripture that there seems to be a bit of conflict with the teaching of "total" depravity...

That is just for starters...

Be Blessed,
iggy

Henry (Rick) Frueh said...

In the technical sense, yes. But the accepted definition of heretic saometimes implies one who does not teach true salvation. That is not the case with us.

And if it bothered me when someone disagreed with me I would not participate here nor would I have gotten married 29 years ago.

Dead Theologians said...

Rick,

You said "nor would I have gotten married 29 years ago."

I offer counseling pretty cheap. :0
jk

DT

iggy said...

dsstanfield,

"Arminians and Calvinists can not BOTH be right. They are in direct opposition to another. A thorough reading of Romans should be enough to at least cause you to rethink your position."

I agree that both are wrong yet both have a bit of truth in the also...

The Calvinist slaughters Romans... especially Romans 9 as they stop at verse 24... and the punchline of Paul is in the verses after that! LOL!

Arminians add works to Grace... (sorry Rick but we both know we disagree there) as they assert that one must maintain their salvation... This goes against Galatians 5...

I have looked at both and decided that since they both came about in the 16th century and one was written to refute the other... that I will agree with Paul for what he states instead of running it through he filter of Calvin or Arminius.

Be Blessed,
iggy

dsstanfield said...

iggy,

The Calvinist slaughters Romans... especially Romans 9 as they stop at verse 24... and the punchline of Paul is in the verses after that! LOL!

You will have to enlighten me as to what you mean here. I have no problem with Romans 9:24 and following....

Henry (Rick) Frueh said...

The Calvinist "slaughters" Romans? OK, I have read extensively in the Calvinist (reformed) theology and I can see why they believe what they believe. I mean it isn't from outer space.

The problem I have with many of them is that they are not honest enough to admit that they can see why we believe what we believe, even if they strongly disagree.

They sometimes act as if we've never read the Bible and are just ignorant babes in Christ. That is my problem.

ADieL said...

I guess I dont consider myself a Calvinist, but rather CalvinistIC...

I maintanin two *seeming* contradictory positions.

I understand that God chooses whom He wills based on His own counsel and will and on nothing foreseen in the sinner. It is His decision. He chose us, we didnt choose Him. He did not look into the future and see that I would believe and then chose me based on my foreseen faith. NO! He looked into the future and saw that I would never choose Him. Yet He chose me based on His good pleasure to the praise of His glorious grace.

YET...

When YOU (any given sinner) hear the Gospel YOU must STRIVE to enter by the narrow gate. YOU must deny yourself, YOU must hate and forsake your sins, YOU must repent, and YOU must throw yourself upon the mercy of God as revealed in Christ. If YOU dont DO these things, you will surely perish. If YOU DO these things, GOD will save you.

I say *seeming* contradictory positions because I do not believe they truly contradict. I believe that there is a perfect harmony between the two, I just dont know what it is. :)

As far as total depravity. Yes, I understand that sinners:

CANNOT come to Christ unless the Father draws them (John 6:44)
CANNOT listen to Gods word (John 8:43)
IS NOT and CANNOT be subject to the law of God (Rom 8:7-8)
DOES NOT and CANNOT receive the things of the Spirit of God (1 Cor 2:15)

Yet I also understand that if we are to be saved from the wrath to come, we MUST! We are commanded to! With man this is impossible, but not with God, with God all things are possible!

Henry (Rick) Frueh said...

Adiel - great comment and I say amen.

dsstanfield said...

Adiel,

You stated:

"When YOU (any given sinner) hear the Gospel YOU must STRIVE to enter by the narrow gate. YOU must deny yourself, YOU must hate and forsake your sins, YOU must repent, and YOU must throw yourself upon the mercy of God as revealed in Christ. If YOU dont DO these things, you will surely perish. If YOU DO these things, GOD will save you."

Who enables YOU to do these things? Can man in his fallen state do any of these things?

Henry (Rick) Frueh said...

"Who enables YOU to do these things? God

Can man in his fallen state do any of these things?" Only if God enables him.

Is God sovereign and powerful enough to enable a fallen man to understand Him by His Spirit? Yes, if He so desires, and that is the ONLY way a fallen can can come to Christ. The only question is has God given that insight to every man.

dsstanfield said...

Henry (rick),

"Who enables YOU to do these things? God

Can man in his fallen state do any of these things?" Only if God enables him.

Your answers sound suspiciously Calvinistic.

"The only question is has God given that insight to every man."

If by "insight" you mean that God has enabled EVERY man to be saved, the answer is no. Had God desired every person to be saved, then ALL men would be saved.

Mark said...

So if the calvanist is so sure he's right, dosen't that mean God is choosing to send some to hell?

If the Arminian is right dosen't he put himself up as God?

Do you think that being so sure of one position is a sin of pride?

We cannot pretend to know it all. The Jews were sure Jesus was wrong. It did not make sense to them, they could not understand. God can and must hold both of these things in perfect unity because the Bible declares both. Ever consider that we will never be able to reconcile these two things that seem to be the polar opposites of each other until we see Him face to face?

The God of the Bible is much more than even the pages of Scripture has revealed, yet man can think he has got him all figured out perfectly.

To walk by faith is just that, not only believing that He IS, but that we believe what He has said about Himself is all true even if our puny little brains cannot accept a seeming contradiction.

Nuff said

Steve said...

Everyone,

Wow, this is quite an exchange. I've read some really good comments and believe that all are truly seeking to understand the God of their salvation, and hoping to serve him faithfully with their lives. And that is commendable!

If I may add to the conversation, I would like you to consider that both of the following statements are biblically true:

1. Sovereign election exists (and all the verses quoted by DT and others are true.

And

2. Man's responsibility to choose Christ as his savior exists, and all the verses that state such are true.

Adiel hit this on the head when he said that God is a paradox. God is a paradox. To become rich you must first become poor. To be first you must make yourself last, etc., etc..

The fact that the bible teaches both is called an "Antinomy."

an·tin·o·my
1. opposition between one law, principle, rule, etc., and another.
2. Philosophy. a contradiction between two statements, both apparently obtained by correct reasoning.

"For whosoever wills may come...Whosoever calls upon the name of the Lord will be saved..."

"Only those who the Father draws can come to me...No one on his seeks after God..."

I see that both exist, and neither diminishes the others necessity.

For my Reformed friends, I embrace the sovereignty of God,sovereign election, total depravity, etc., etc., so don't put me in another camp. It's just that I don't think arguing from a "camp" other than that of Christ alone is very wise!

If Peter said some of Paul's writings were hard to understand, then they probably are.

Be Blessed!

DT - What happened to Tattoos Part 2? :)

iggy said...

dsstanfield,

Sorry that this will be a long comment, I tried to break it down to the most important differences and points... but it would take a volumes to go over each detail.

I am doing a teaching series on my blog on Romans. It would take a bit ti unravel the Calvinist view from the passage as it starts in chapter 8 and ends in chapter 10. Again even this does not go into the depth I desire to go into to explain things but it goes much deeper than I will go here.

I think that the issue is that most debates are between Calvinists and Arminian... which concentrate on "nations verses individuals" which if you look in the scripture you will see that the phrase "Jacob I loved, Esau I hated" in one place is about "nations" (Malachi ~ who points out that though the Moabites are "godless" show more faith in that the rebuild their nation than the Jew who show their lack of faith by they inferior sacrifices) and the other about individuals (Genesis tells the story in how Esau gave up his birthright which is liken to the Gentile who does not give a thought toward God) Yet in Hebrews 11: 20. By faith Isaac blessed Jacob and Esau in regard to their future.


We see then that there is this blessing of Abraham that is again a blessing of individuals that become nations....

Yet the thing is as from chapter one of Romans and all through it, we find that Paul is stating over and over that "the two men become one"... that there is not longer Jew and Gentile.

Again this would also take a bit of a discussion on predestination as I see that since man is mortal there is not way that a man can be "in Christ" before he exists... that is a logical leap and is actually if you follow the philosophical thread from Plato, Aquinas, Augustine to Calvin there is a dualist/Platonist thread that runs throughout that is not "Christian" but is Gnosticism.

Note that this thread also appears in the form of dualism in the Arminian view a bit also...

Yet, if one is NOW, "in Chirst" as God foreknew Jesus would fulfill the plan of the Father, those then are now, "conformed to the image of Jesus" who is the Only Immortal.

We then partake in the divine nature we did not have before being in Christ. Calvinism teaches we have a divine nature as we "existed in Christ" before the foundations of the world... again this is a bit hard to explain without going into great er depth. That was a summary of a summary of a summary of chapter 8, chapter 9 simply teaches that the vessels of wrath are now vessel of mercy and the vessel of mercy are now vessel of wrath... in which the focus is on God's mercy over His wrath... though as I state this means the Gentile who the Jews considered dogs and less than human, were now equal and the Jew who lived by the belief he was saved because of his blood heritage would now be lost... for it is all by Grace through faith we are saved which this faith is the true linage of those who are saved.

Most Calvinist focus on the elect being "vessels of mercy" which is true, yet instead of Esau now being the vessel of wrath, he is now the vessel of mercy as he was blessed of Abraham and God has now showed His "mercy on who He give mercy" and has now displayed His grace to all mankind.

This is summed up in chapter 10: 12. For there is no difference between Jew and Gentile--the same Lord is Lord of all and richly blesses all who call on him,
13. for, "Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved."


and in verses 19. Again I ask: Did Israel not understand? First, Moses says, "I will make you envious by those who are not a nation; I will make you angry by a nation that has no understanding."
20. And Isaiah boldly says, "I was found by those who did not seek me; I revealed myself to those who did not ask for me."
21. But concerning Israel he says, "All day long I have held out my hands to a disobedient and obstinate people."

Again, this is not a conclusive study and I do go into things on my blog (search word is Romans) a bit more in detail...

Suffice it to say I get a bit frustrated by both sides as i see they both miss the point...

The best one though on the Calvinist side is James White, though I think that his focus on "vessels of wrath" being the non-elect, is the major issue in where he goes off the track in his understanding of Romans 9.

Blessings
iggy

Henry (Rick) Frueh said...

We both believe that no one can be saved apart from the drawing of the Spirit. We both believe only the elect will be saved. This is the bottom line issue:

Did God elect them before creation solely on His own choice -

or

Did He elect them according to His forknowledge of their God given choice.

And in the end, what does it matter? It basically is a fine china doctrinal dinner for theologians.

dsstanfield said...

iggy,

I am going to have to chew on what you posted for a while. I have to be honest with you. My first initial reaction was:

"Say what???"

When time permits, I will check out your blog and see if I can understand from where you are coming. Please keep in mind though that I am just a "little ole southern gal" with no formal theological training.

iggy said...

The last time i mentioned my lack of educational training i was mocked... LOL!

It is a hard thing to develop, but if one can for a second (longer really) try to "just read" what Paul states, from Romans 1 to the end he repeats his points over and over building on them a bit more and more... so if his point is that the Jew and Gentile are equal because they both die in chapter one... that is his theme throughout the book... that the Jew and Gentile are now equal. Look for the themes as see how Paul builds on those points... it takes time and I am in no way even close to understanding as men have studied for years and still do not even see some of the thing I am touching on (that means I am missing much also not that i am so great! LOL!)

The real issue is that of reading what Paul wrote versus reading through a doctrinal stance or as I found in my early years that one can read the bible through doctrinal glasses and miss the point completely...

Be Blessed,
iggy

dsstanfield said...

Henry (rick),

I have been thinking about what you said:

"Did God elect them before creation solely on His own choice -

or

Did He elect them according to His forknowledge of their God given choice.

And in the end, what does it matter?"

Can you see that in the second choice, God is limited by man's choice? If man has even .00000001% to do with his own salvation (by making a decision or choice) then doesn't that constitute a work's salvation?

dss

Henry (Rick) Frueh said...

I do not consider the gift of faith a work, do you? There is only one work, the cross. You believe God gives the gift of faith only to the ones He chooses, we believe He gave that same gift to everyone.

The only difference is choice, you believe man has none and we believe man was GIVEN one by God. Both retain God's sovereignty.

Again, why does it matter, it is what it is and we both believe God uses the Word to draw and save regardless of anyone's perspective of election. People get saved uder free will messages also, so God doesn't seem to mind.

Debbie said...

"Dead" means dead.
"Believe" is not a one time event but continual.
God "chooses," "predestines," "calls," and "elects." Noone can thwart back His hand. His will and purpose stands.
He also will "...put the fear of Me in their hearts so that they will not turn away from Me." Jeremiah 32:40
Calvin didn't name Calvinism and would probably be appalled that his name gets such credit. The doctrines of grace are clearly laid out in scripture.
Blessed to be reformed!
DC

ADieL said...

Whenever someone mentions God granting a sinner the choice to choose Him, people are quick to say that this limits God...

I guess this got me thinking, is there any Scriptural basis to believe that our sovereign God EVER limits Himself?

He does whatever He pleases, what if He pleases to give man a choice? Noone can thwart back His hand. His will and purpose stands. What if He purposed and willed to allow man to choose? Is He capable of this? Or would this automatically negate His sovereignty?

iggy said...

"I guess this got me thinking, is there any Scriptural basis to believe that our sovereign God EVER limits Himself?"

The incarnation in which God became a man and the words of Jesus (though being God in flesh) stating:

John 5:19 " Jesus gave them this answer: "I tell you the truth, the Son can do nothing by himself; he can do only what he sees his Father doing, because whatever the Father does the Son also does."

It seems that though Jesus was "God" He was limited to only what he say the Father doing... that speaks of "God limiting Himself" I would say.

Be Blessed,
iggy

dsstanfield said...

I have children who are assuring me that if they don't eat soon they will surely perish.

Here are a few Scriptures that should prove the following statement:

God chose us.

Exodus 6:7   ‘I will take you as My people, and I will be your God. Then you shall know that I [am] the LORD your God who brings you out from under the burdens of the Egyptians.

Deut 7:6   For thou [art] an holy people unto the LORD thy God: the LORD thy God hath chosen thee to be a special people unto himself, above all people that [are] upon the face of the earth.

John 1:12-13   12 But as many as received Him, to them He gave the power to become children of God, to those who believe in His name: 13 who were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.

John 15:16   Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you, and ordained you, that ye should go and bring forth fruit, and [that] your fruit should remain: that whatsoever ye shall ask of the Father in my name, he may give it you.

John 15:19   If ye were of the world, the world would love his own: but because ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you.

John 17:1-2   1 Jesus spoke these words, lifted up His eyes to heaven, and said: "Father, the hour has come. Glorify Your Son, that Your Son also may glorify You, 2 "as You have given Him authority over all flesh, that He should give eternal life to as many as You have given Him.

John 6:65   And he said, Therefore said I unto you, that no man can come unto me, except it were given unto him of my Father.

Acts 13:48   And when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad, and glorified the word of the Lord: and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed.

Rom 8:29   For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate [to be] conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren.

1Pet 2:9   But ye [are] a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light:

Rom 9:21   Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?

Pro 16:4   The LORD hath made all [things] for himself: yea, even the wicked for the day of evil.

Romans 9:11-13   11 (for the children not yet being born, nor having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works but of Him who calls), 12 it was said to her, "The older shall serve the younger." 13 As it is written, "Jacob I have loved, but Esau I have hated."

Romans 11:5-7   5 Even so then, at this present time there is a remnant according to the election of grace. 6 And if by grace, then it is no longer of works; otherwise grace is no longer grace. But if it is of works, it is no longer grace; otherwise work is no longer work. 7 What then? Israel has not obtained what it seeks; but the elect have obtained it, and the rest were blinded.

Psa 33:12   Blessed [is] the nation whose God [is] the LORD; [and] the people [whom] he hath chosen for his own inheritance.

Psa 65:4   Blessed [is the man whom] thou choosest, and causest to approach [unto thee, that] he may dwell in thy courts: we shall be satisfied with the goodness of thy house, [even] of thy holy temple.

Psalms 106:4-5   4 Remember me, O LORD, with the favor You have toward Your people; Oh, visit me with Your salvation, 5 That I may see the benefit of Your chosen ones, That I may rejoice in the gladness of Your nation, That I may glory with Your inheritance.

Mat 11:27   All things are delivered unto me of my Father: and no man knoweth the Son, but the Father; neither knoweth any man the Father, save the Son, and [he] to whomsoever the Son will reveal [him].

Mat 22:14   For many are called, but few [are] chosen.

Col 3:12   Put on therefore, as the elect of God, holy and beloved, bowels of mercies, kindness, humbleness of mind, meekness, longsuffering;

1Th 5:9   For God hath not appointed us to wrath, but to obtain salvation by our Lord Jesus Christ,

Titus 1:1   Paul, a servant of God, and an apostle of Jesus Christ, according to the faith of God's elect, and the acknowledging of the truth which is after godliness;

1 Peter 1:1-2   1 Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, To the pilgrims of the Dispersion in Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia, 2 elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, in sanctification of the Spirit, for obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ: Grace to you and peace be multiplied.

Rev 17:14   These shall make war with the Lamb, and the Lamb shall overcome them: for he is Lord of lords, and King of kings: and they that are with him [are] called, and chosen, and faithful.

Rom 9:16   So then [it is] not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy.

Ephesians 1:11-12   11 In Him also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestined according to the purpose of Him who works all things according to the counsel of His will, 12 that we who first trusted in Christ should be to the praise of His glory.

2Tim 2:10   Therefore I endure all things for the elect's sakes, that they may also obtain the salvation which is in Christ Jesus with eternal glory.

Eph 1:5   Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will,

1 Corinthians 1:27-29   27 But God has chosen the foolish things of the world to put to shame the wise, and God has chosen the weak things of the world to put to shame the things which are mighty; 28 and the base things of the world and the things which are despised God has chosen, and the things which are not, to bring to nothing the things that are, 29 that no flesh should glory in His presence.

Eph 1:11   In whom also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestinated according to the purpose of him who worketh all things after the counsel of his own will:

Eph 2:5   Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved;)

Acts 15:14   Simeon hath declared how God at the first did visit the Gentiles, to take out of them a people for his name.

Acts 22:14   And he said, The God of our fathers hath chosen thee, that thou shouldest know his will, and see that Just One, and shouldest hear the voice of his mouth.

John 10:2-3   2 "But he who enters by the door is the shepherd of the sheep. 3 "To him the doorkeeper opens, and the sheep hear his voice; and he calls his own sheep by name and leads them out.

Romans 11:1-11   1 I say then, has God cast away His people? Certainly not! For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin. 2 God has not cast away His people whom He foreknew. Or do you not know what the Scripture says of Elijah, how he pleads with God against Israel, saying, 3 "LORD, they have killed Your prophets and torn down Your altars, and I alone am left, and they seek my life"? 4 But what does the divine response say to him? "I have reserved for Myself seven thousand men who have not bowed the knee to Baal." 5 Even so then, at this present time there is a remnant according to the election of grace. 6 And if by grace, then it is no longer of works; otherwise grace is no longer grace. But if it is of works, it is no longer grace; otherwise work is no longer work.
7 What then? Israel has not obtained what it seeks; but the elect have obtained it, and the rest were blinded. 8 Just as it is written: "God has given them a spirit of stupor, Eyes that they should not see And ears that they should not hear, To this very day." 9 And David says: "Let their table become a snare and a trap, A stumbling block and a recompense to them. 10 Let their eyes be darkened, so that they do not see, and bow down their back always."
11 I say then, have they stumbled that they should fall? Certainly not! But through their fall, to provoke them to jealousy, salvation has come to the Gentiles.

Have you any Scriptures that state:

Man chose God?

dss

Dead Theologians said...

Steve,

You said "What happened to Tattoos Part 2? :)"

I was thinking about letting Rick and Iggy do that post!! :)

When you have the first Tattoo post with over 150 comments (although many of the comments were theological in context rather than the topic of tattoos) I had to sit back and sort it out as to what part 2 will be about.

It should come soon.

DT

Henry (Rick) Frueh said...

"Have you any Scriptures that state:

Man chose God?"

None. Wesley, Moody, Torrey, Tozer, Ravenhill, all idiots and false teachers that should have read the Bible. And can you give me Scriptures that state a woman can be an elder and have the gift of teaching doctrine?

ADieL said...

Hey dss,

Interesting question. Imagine if you were talking to someone (I guess you might call him a hyper-Calvinist) who says that man must do nothing to be saved, just sit there sinning his heart out, waiting for God to regenerate him. What would you say to this person and what verses would you use to support your case?

Thanks

dsstanfield said...

Henry (rick),

"And can you give me Scriptures that state a woman can be an elder and have the gift of teaching doctrine?"

Ouch! I assure you that I am certainly no elder, nor would I ever aspire to that position as it is contrary to God's Holy Word. I was under the impression that this was a discussion. I didn't think it was a Men's Only site as I saw where other women had posted.

For the record, the men and women at my church discuss doctrine together frequently, both genders being quite sagacious.

If it violates your conscience to discuss theological issues with me because I am female, then I respect that and won't address you personally again. I hope there are no hard feelings.

dss

Henry (Rick) Frueh said...

No, I enjoyed a discussion. I felt that your last voluminous comment was a pile on and was an attempt to insinuate that we free will people have absolutely no Scrtipture that even hints at a free choice. It bordered on rebuke.

So a discussion is appropriate with a general understanding that these issues are not just simple, great men of God have been on both side of this issue. I do appreciate you love for the Word.

Dead Theologians said...

Everyone,

I wanted to make it clear that this site is for everyone. I do not mind women or men commenting.

Just in case anyone was wondering.
DT

Henry (Rick) Frueh said...

I did not see where anyone questioned that. I believe the operative word is "commenting". As I had feared in the beginning a discussion about election always seems to deteriorate into a demeaning of views rather than a presentation of the same.

I am sorry if I offended anyone, I should have followed my first instincts.

dsstanfield said...

Henry (rick),

Phew.... I must admit that my stomach lurched when I read your comment. I am glad that you want to continue our discussion. I have so enjoyed it.

I want to assure you that the post I made containing all the Scripture was not a rebuke, but an attempt to show that the Bible teaches in many places that God chooses man.

I think I had better quit for the evening.

More tomorrow?

dsstanfield said...

DT,

Thanks for allowing this southern gal to continue in these discussions. If at any point you ever feel I have crossed the "biblical line" as a female discussing theological ideas amongst males (as well as females), please don't hesitate to correct me.

I am curious about the alcohol post. Is that still in the working?

dss

iggy said...

I find it interesting that God Himself mandates that we "choose" Life...

Deut 30: "18. I declare to you this day that you will certainly be destroyed. You will not live long in the land you are crossing the Jordan to enter and possess.
19. This day I call heaven and earth as witnesses against you that I have set before you life and death, blessings and curses. Now choose life, so that you and your children may live
20. and that you may love the LORD your God, listen to his voice, and hold fast to him. For the LORD is your life, and he will give you many years in the land he swore to give to your fathers, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.


And we are told this in the NT:
1 John 5: 10 -12
10. Anyone who believes in the Son of God has this testimony in his heart. Anyone who does not believe God has made him out to be a liar, because he has not believed the testimony God has given about his Son.
11. And this is the testimony: God has given us eternal life, and this life is in his Son.
12. He who has the Son has life; he who does not have the Son of God does not have life.

So God laws down in the
shadow of he Law a choice to choose Life... and we find out that Jesus is that very Life we must choose...

Interesting that this is missed in the dialog of "choosing".

Be Blessed,
iggy

iggy said...

I might add that John 7:17 is interesting also...

"If anyone chooses to do God's will, he will find out whether my teaching comes from God or whether I speak on my own."

Again it seems we do have a choice in matters.


I do not deny that God chooses us, yet it seems we also must make choices...

Even the very revelation that one is dead in the sins makes one need to choose whether God revelation of Himself is true... One need to choose whether they will believe the truth or continue in the lie...

I see salvation as God's hand from beginning to end, but I also see this as a loving relationship. In a relationship both parties interact with each other... if they do not then that is not a relationship but a loveless servant-hood on one sides part.

Be Blessed,
iggy

approvedworkman said...

Faith comes by hearing and hearing by the Word,

Faith comes from God lest any man should boast.

Let he who has an ear hear....
the only ones who can "choose" are those who have heard. Where does one get an easr to hear?
God chooses us first.

Interesting that the ones who choose life, as Moses directed,are the "chosen people".
They must keep the law, i.e. obey the voice of the Lord, as the evidence of their choosing life
Deut 28

iggy said...

Workman,

If your view is that faith comes by hearing then the question that Paul asks in Romans 10:18 should be of interest...

How do you explain those that Paul states "heard" but yet in chapter 11 it seems God let them hear, but also gave them a spirit of "stupor" that they not respond to that calling. This is out of the same theme and original question I asked somewhere on this blog that "how can God give one over to "shameful lusts" when they are already "totally" depraved?

So, it seems that though you are going in a good direction you open more questions that need answers than just a pithy (mis)quote from scripture...

Be Blessed,
iggy

Dead Theologians said...

dss,

You said "I am curious about the alcohol post. Is that still in the working?"

Yes, it actually is in the making.
I am sure I will make lots of friends with that post.
jk

DT

dk said...

Paul must be praying "Lord, I thought I was only clarifying a few things.."

dk

dk said...

It seems to me that the Calvinists are those who think theirs the most correct interpretation.

DT,
Does it mean your group considers others to be not saved?

dk

dk said...

DT,

Sorry to add another question. I am a totally confused person now. So many questions, but probably I already have an answer in my mind when I ask.. what do you think about the good samaritan? Was he really good? How can he be good, if he was dead in sins? If he was not good, why did Jesus call him good?

The answer I have in mind is, even though man is dead in sin, there is some good that is left in him (that likeness of God) that makes him do good. That is also the reason why I believe we should appreciate those people who are not believers, but do great works that even Jesus would say as good.


dk

dsstanfield said...

dk,

Apart from faith, can one do "good?"

Romans 14:23 "But he who doubts is condemned if he eats, because he does not eat from faith; for whatever is not from faith is SIN."

Dead Theologians said...

dk,

Good works do not lead to or help us attain salvation. According to James good works give evidence of our already received salvation.

DT

andy said...

The idea of spiritually dead seems to contradict the very searching of so many people,what in them feels they must find God(of any faith)..Surly you wouldn't feel any need if you were spiritually dead..

You say "its all about me" as if thats a bad thing..But what can be bad about something that seems such a natural part of our DNA?? It seems a God giving need,not a arrogance thats implying we save ourselves,just a yearning for something..

Oh and of course Cornelius still blows the totally depraved idea out the water!!

ADieL said...

Hey dk, when did Jesus ever call the Samaritan "good"?

Also, Can someone please answer this question for me:

Whenever someone mentions God granting a sinner the choice to choose Him, people are quick to say that this limits God...

He does whatever He pleases, what if He pleases to give man a choice? No one can thwart back His hand. His will and purpose stands. What if He purposes and wills to allow man to choose? Is He capable of this? Or would this automatically negate His sovereignty?

ADieL said...

Hey dss,

Please answer this question for me. Thanks: Imagine if you were talking to someone (I guess you might call him/her a hyper-Calvinist) who says that man must do nothing to be saved, just sit there sinning his heart out, waiting for God to regenerate him. What would you say to this person and what verses would you use to support your case?

Thanks

andy said...

PS Iggy's point is excellent,if were totally depraved how can God make us more so i.e harden our hearts turn us over to shameful lust..


Thats like saying i'm going to make this endless hole deeper..

Dead Theologians said...

Andy,

Good to have you back though I feel that you and I are picking up where we left off.

You said "You say "its all about me" as if thats a bad thing.."

It is a bad thing. It is all about God and His glory.

You said "But what can be bad about something that seems such a natural part of our DNA?"?

I lust just like any other human. Is it wrong to lust after things or women which is part of my DNA?

I told you before that this is part of understanding who we are as sinful creatures separated from a Holy God.

You said "Oh and of course Cornelius still blows the totally depraved idea out the water!!"

How?

DT

dsstanfield said...

adiel,

I will answer your question concerning the hyper-calvinists. Off the cuff, I will say that there is a major difference between Calvinists and Hyper-Calvinists.

I will have to do some digging, which may take some time. I am in the middle of homeschooling my children right now, so maybe by this afternoon I can post an answer....

dss

Douglas said...

"My question of total depravity is this...

Romans 1 states 21. "For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened.

So question 1 is this... how can one know God if they are not regenerate? Yet it states they knew God... does it not?"

Yes it does, Iggy. Even the atheist knows God exists. His laws are written upon the tablets of everyones hearts. Everyone knew/knows God in the intellectual sense, in that He exists, but not everyone knows God in the salvic sense, as He being their Saviour. Just having a head knowledge of God and His existence does not save. Satan knows God and so do the demons, (maybe even more so than some Christians?), after all is said and done they were angels once were''t they, they must have known God for a very long time? But does that knowledge of God save them, will the demons and Satan ever be saved? Does their knowledge of God regenerate them? Not likely. Does our mere head knowledge of or thinking belief in the LORD Jesus Christ cause our new-birth? Does faith precede regeneration? Or does regeneration precede faith? If all it takes is a simple intellectual belief in God, then everyone, including Satan and demons, will be saved. Is that true? Belief/faith in God is not a blind leap of faith into the dark but it is a child like (not childish) step into the glorious light of His truths, a complete trust, clinging to and absolute reliance upon the LORD Jesus Christ and all the work He accomplished for us at the Cross. Faith/belief is the fruit of regeneration, not the cause of regeneration, a gift from God Himself. Yet we do the believing, God does not do the believing for us. Even repentance is granted by God (Acts 11:18), repentance is not something we can conjure up in and of our sinful selves. God grants repentance and we repent, God does not do the repenting for us. We repent and believe, at and in consequence of the new birth, not before. We do not have the ability to repent and believe prior to the new birth because we, our wills, are in bondage/a slave to/sold under to sin (Rom. 7:14; Rom. 3:9), yet we are still morally responsible to repent and believe. Our inability does not negate our responsibility.

If you look at the preceding verses there in Romans 1 from verse 18 it says; "For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth. 19For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. 20For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse" and Psalm 19 :1 says; "The heavens declare the glory of God, and the sky above proclaims his handiwork" so all of creation is evidence of God's existence but sinful mankind suppresses, represses, holds down in unrighteousness the truth of God's existence, which leaves them without excuse. From there they go from bad to worse. Romans 1:18-32 is not describing believers, it is clearly describing non-believers who wickedly deny the truth and then describes the consequences of their denials. They urgently need to hear the true gospel. Law to the proud and grace to the humble.

Please allow me to quote a study note from p1767 of the New Geneva Study Bible (now called The Reformation Study Bible):

Mankinds Guilty Knowledge of God

"All people are naturally inclined to some form of religion, yet they fail to worship their Creator, whose general revelation makes Him universally known. Sinful egoism and aversion to our Creator's claims have driven humanity into idolatry, the error of giving worship and homage to any power or object other than God ( Is. 44:9-20; Rom. 1:21-23; Col. 3:5). In their idolatry, apostate humans "suppress the truth" and have "changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like corruptible man-and birds and four-footed animals and creeping things" (Rom. 1:18, 23). They smother and quench, as far as they can, the awareness that general revelation provides of the transcendent Judge and Creator, and they transfer the ineradicable sense of deity to unworthy objects. This in turn leads to drastic moral decline and misery, as a first manifestation of God's wrath against apostasy (Rom. 1:18, 24-32).

God will not allow human beings to suppress entirely their sense of God and of His judgment. Some sense of right and wrong, as well as of accountability to God, always remains. Even in the fallen world everyone is endowed with a conscience that from time to time condemns them, telling them that they ought to suffer for wrongs they have done. When conscience speaks in these terms it speaks with the voice of God.

In one sense, fallen humanity does not know God, since what people believe about the objects of their worship falsifies and distorts the truth about God. In another sense all human beings do know God, but in guilt, with uncomfortable inklings of the judgment they cannot avoid. Only the gospel of Christ can speak peace to this aspect of the human condition"

"24. Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts...

Question 2 is this... If one is born totally depraved, how can God "give them over" if they are already totally depraved?"

God gives people over to the sinful desires of their hearts because even though they know Him, through general revelation (ie:creation), they refuse to honour, obey, worship and give thanks to God as He deserves.

The doctrine of total depravity is not teaching about how evil mankind can be, and throughout history some have certainly been evil, total depravity is talking about the effects of the fall, the inability to make any right move towards God prior to regeneration. That the degenerate sinner can do no good that pleases God.

R. C. Sproul says in "Essential Truths of the Christian Faith":

"The Bible teaches the total depravity of the human race. Total depravity means radical corruption. We must be careful to note the difference between total depravity and utter depravity. To be utterly depraved is to be as wicked as one could possibly be. Hitler was extremely depraved, but he could have been worse than he was. I am a sinner. Yet I could sin more often and more severely than I actually do. I am not utterly depraved, but I am totally depraved. For total depravity means that I and everyone else are depraved or corrupt in the totality of our being. There is no part of us that is left untouched by sin. Our minds, our wills, and our bodies are affected by evil. We speak sinful words, do sinful deeds, have impure thoughts. Our very bodies suffer from the ravages of sin.

Perhaps radical corruption is a better term to describe our fallen condition than "total depravity." I am using the word radical not so much to mean "extreme," but to lean more heavily on its original meaning. Radical comes from the Latin word for "root" or "core." Our problem with sin is that it is rooted in the core of our being. It permeates our hearts. It is because sin is at our core and not merely at the exterior of our lives that the Bible says:

There is none righteous, no, not one; there is none who understands; there is none who seeks after God. They have all turned aside; they have together become unprofitable; there is none who does good, no, not one. (Romans 3:10-12)

It is because of this condition that the verdict of Scripture is heard: we are "dead in trespasses and sins" (Ephesians 2:1); we are "sold under sin" (Romans 7:14); we are in "captivity to the law of sin" (Romans 7:23) and are "by nature children of wrath" (Ephesians 2:3). Only by the quickening power of the Holy Spirit may we be brought out of this state of spiritual death. It is God who makes us alive as we become His craftsmanship (Ephesians 2:1-10). Biblical passages for reflection: Jeremiah 17:9; Romans 8:1-11; Ephesians 2:1-3; Ephesians 4:17-19; 1 John 1:8-10.

Iggy, please read this whole essay, it really does explain some points very well:

The Apparent "Good" in Natural Man

"If natural man's condition is Total Depravity, How do we account for the apparent "good" in the unregenerate?

Good question because the meaning of total depravity is often misunderstood. It should first be pointed out what "total depravity" does not mean. The doctrine does not refer to man being as evil a creature as he can be. All fallen, unregenerate human beings are endowed with many of God's common graces. God has blessed all men with a conscience and the capacity to promote virtue and civil righteousness. It is abundantly clear that many beautiful aspects of the world we live in have been brought forth by those which are unredeemed by God's regenerative grace. God has gifted natural men and women with the skill to create beautiful music, make profound works of art, to invent intricate machines and do countless things that are productive, excellent and praiseworthy. John Calvin said,

"Those men whom Scripture calls "natural men" were, indeed, sharp and penetrating in their investigation of inferior things. Let us, accordingly, learn by their example how many gifts the Lord left to human nature even after it was despoiled of its true good." (Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, 274-275)."

This is very good as well:

Total Depravity (Inability)

"The doctrine of total depravity (or total inability) understands the Bible to teach that all men, as a consequence of the Fall, are born morally corrupt, enslaved to sin, and unable of themselves to please God or even to turn to Christ for salvation."

Iggy, I do hope and pray this helps you.

ADieL said...

I think you are misunderstading total depravity. Total depravity does not teach that people are as bad as they can possibly be. Rather it teaches that every facet of our beings are depraved, in other words, our "totality" is depraved. For example, our hearts are depraved (Jer 17:9, Matthew 15:19), our minds are depraved (Romans 8:7-8, Colossians 1:21), our consciences are evil (Hebrews 10:22) etc. So yeah, some totally depraved people pay their taxes and give charity to the poor while others murder families depending on how far God gives them over to fulfill the desires of their own hearts.

andy said...

Hi DT i was singing your praises to Ken recently,your much more what i'd expect of an Calvinist : humble and grateful for your(alleged) election more like Bunyan,shame more aren't like you..

With Cornelius i still see a man dead in his sins,but still considered a devout man,who God hears while he's still spiritually dead..He as a yearning to find God like we all do!!

I'm not saying its good to think we can save ourselves,i'm just arguing when God calls, i think its inside everyones naturally..

Maybe i'm missing something about total depravity i'm not to bright,does totally deprave mean not interested in God?

How do you explain peoples yearning for God of any faith ?

ADieL said...

Hey dss,

I understand that there is a difference between Calvinists and Hyper-Calvinisits. My interest is in how you would respond to a Hyper-Calvinist! (Unless you are one, which I dont think is the case)

Hope to hear from you soon!

andy said...

Hi someones post as clarified my question..I find total depravity and Romans 1 a contradiction i.e

Rom 1:19 For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them.


How is that possible if ur totally depraved..How is it possible to be totally depraved but still see what God as shown us "confused"

ADieL said...

Regarding Romans 1, my understanding is that God has equipped us to know Him, yet we suppress this knowledge. He has given us creation that we may know there is a Creator, and He has given us our conscience that we may know we have sinned against Him, and His hope is that we will grope for Him and find Him (cause He is not far from any one of us). Yet we suppresse our God-given knowledge of Him. Why? Because we love our sins! Why? Because our total depravity consists of us loving our sins and thus suppressing anything that confronts them ie the true God.

As far as people searching for God, its not "god" we are against (that is, false gods who encourage our sin) it is God we are against, the true One, the holy and righteous One. Some people do use their God-given hunger for GOD to search for gods but NEVER to search for GOD. Make sense?

dsstanfield said...

Hey adiel,

Here goes:

I found the following comparison on www.monergism.com. I will attempt to provide adequate scriptural references disproving hyper-calvinists.

“In one sense, hyper-Calvinism, like Arminianism, is a rationalistic perversion of true Calvinism. Whereas Arminianism destroys the sovereignty of God, hyper-Calvinism destroys the responsbility of man. The irony is that both Arminianism and hyper-Calvinism start from the same, erroneous rationalistic presupposition: Man's ability and responsibility are coextensive. That is, they must match up exactly or else it is irrational. If a man is to be held responsible for something, then he must have the ability to do it. On the other hand, if a man does not have the ability to perform it, he cannot be obligated to do it.

The Arminian looks at this premise and says, "Agreed! We know that all men are held responsbile to repent and believe [which is true, according to the Bible]; therefore we must conclude that all men have the ability in themselves to repent and believe [which is false, according to the Bible]." Thus, Arminians teach that unconverted people have within themselves the spiritual ability to repent and believe.

The hyper-Calvinist takes the same premise (that man's ability and responsibility are coextensive) and says, "Agreed! We know that, in and of themselves, all men are without spiritual ability to repent and believe [which is true, according to the Bible]; therefore we must conclude that unconverted people are not under obligation to repent and believe the gospel [which is false, according to the Bible]."

In contrast to both of these, the Calvinist looks at the premise and says, "Wrong! While it looks reasonable, it is not biblical. The Bible teaches both that fallen man is without spiritual ability and that he is obligated to repent and believe. Only by the powerful, regenerating work of the Holy Spirit is man given the ability to fulfuill his duty to repent and believe." And though this may seem unreasonable to rationalistic minds, there is no contradiction, and it is precisely the position the Bible teaches.”


**ALL are commanded to repent. The call is given to all mankind, not just the elect.

This verse from Jesus should settle it:

Mark 16:15: “And He said to them, ‘Go into all the world and preach the gospel TO EVERY CREATURE.’”

Matthew 22:14: “For many are called, but few are chosen.”

Isaiah 55:1: “Ho! Everyone who thirsts, come to the waters;”

dss

ADieL said...

dss,

I enjoyed the explanantion on the error of hyper-Calvinism and how it relates to Arminianism. Thank you.

Nevertheless, my question was more regarding what you would say to the hyper-Calvinist who says that man must do nothing to be saved but just wait to be regenerated. Or what would you say to the unconverted man who asks, "What must I do to be saved? Must I do anything to be saved or should I just wait for the effectual call?"

Thanks

dsstanfield said...

adiel,

I would think that anyone who asks this question:

"What must I do to be saved? Must I do anything to be saved or should I just wait for the effectual call?"

has already been called and perhaps quickened by the Holy Spirit.

What do you think?

ADieL said...

I disagree dss. The person could be asking the question just out of curiosity or because he wansts his "best life now" or to count the cost etc. The rich young ruler asked that question and upon hearing Jesus' answer went home sad because he had great possessions. So the truth is that we don know whether the person has been effectually called just because they are asking that question and even if they were, we would still have to answer it. So, how would you answer him/her?

approvedworkman said...

adiel is right on re: total depravity.

Romans 1 is speaking about "creation" therefore what can be known about God through the evidence of creation is; His eternal power and his divine nature,which is clearly seen since the beginning,(verse 20).
This is not the same as believing by faith, as Abraham did. The Lord had to reveal Himself as savior to those whom He had chosen, creation does not reveal the savior. He is not found "in" creation, but is found "outside" of it.

So men refused to acknowledge God/Creator,and worship the creation which includes themselves. It is apparent that somone made all the universe,,who is both God, (divine nature) and all powerful,(eternal power)
It doesn't say that God revealed EVERYTHING about Himself through the creation. Psalm 8 is the song of the believer looking at the creation.

Many use this quote from

Ecc3:
"11 He has made everything beautiful in its time. Also, he has put eternity into man’s heart,"

however they leave off the rest of the verse,

"yet so that he cannot find out what God has done from the beginning to the end."

Having knowledge of eternity does not save you, knowing God does, and only those to whom He has chosen is given the secret/friendship/covenant of the Lord. Psalm 25:14

Men do not want Yahweh nor His Son.

iggy,
My "pithy" misquote (not!)aside.
Jesus says many times "let he who has an ear,hear."

This is in line with Isaiah 6:8-10 and Acts 28:23-31.

Also :
Mark 4:
10And when he was alone, those around him with the twelve asked him about the parables. 11And he said to them, "To you has been given the secret of the kingdom of God, but for those outside everything is in parables, 12 so that
"they may indeed see but not perceive,
and may indeed hear but not understand,
lest they should turn and be forgiven."

Now I know that there are some who teach that Jesus is talking about parables and prophecy being given so that the hearers could make an "informed decision"(??!!)

However it is clear that if they see but not percieve, and hear but not understand then they can make only one decision, unbelief.

Now for some that is the partial hardening of Romans 9-10-11 which is still being debated on the tattoo post, and for others, it is eternal damnation.

So looking at the Lord "giving people over" to their lusts or their unbelief, not just in Romans 1, but also in 2 Thess 2:9-11. He is sealing their fate,(or He is saving them,compare 1 Cor 5:5 and 1 Timothy 1:20;See also Romans 11:5-14 and Isaiah 29:9-14).

It is plain to see though that they refused to believe to begin with, i.e. they are totally depraved.

The Word is all around them but they do not have an ear to hear.

Amos 8:
11"Behold, the days are coming," declares the Lord GOD,
"when I will send a famine on the land—
not a famine of bread, nor a thirst for water,
but of hearing the words of the LORD.
12 They shall wander from sea to sea,
and from north to east;
they shall run to and fro, to seek the word of the LORD,
but they shall not find it.

The famine is not a lack of the Word, it is a famine of the ability to hear it.

Mark 7:
32And they brought to him a man who was deaf and had a speech impediment, and they begged him to lay his hand on him. 33And taking him aside from the crowd privately, he put his fingers into his ears, and after spitting touched his tongue. 34And looking up to heaven, he sighed and said to him, "Ephphatha," that is, "Be opened." 35 And his ears were opened, his tongue was released, and he spoke plainly. 36And Jesus charged them to tell no one. But the more he charged them, the more zealously they proclaimed it. 37And they were astonished beyond measure, saying, "He has done all things well. He even makes the deaf hear and the mute speak."

Only Jesus can open the ears of unbelievers.
Only the sovereign grace of God saves.

So we are saved by grace, through faith and that not of ourselves, it is ALL the gift of God lest any man should boast.
That faith comes only by hearing and that hearing comes only by God sovereignly choosing.

Henry (Rick) Frueh said...

How does Arminianism destroy God's sovereignty? We believe God SOVEREIGNLY gave man a choice which of course was a subset of God's sovereignty which can never be abrogated.

So we don't "destroy" God's sovereingty, we see it differently. We see God's sovereingty as being powerful enough to give the gift of free will without touching one particle of His sovereignty. The question I would ask is, if God desired to give all men a free choice could He, or is He limited?

dsstanfield said...

adiel,

I see your point.

When I answered your question the first time, I was thinking of someone who when asks that question is willing to "sell all he has to buy the pearl of great price." This person would obviously be the elect.

The rich young ruler had not been quickened, or he would have been willing to sell all he had.

approvedworkman said...

BTW
Cornelius does not contradict God's sovereignty.

John 6:
37 All that the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never cast out. 38For I have come down from heaven, not to do my own will but the will of him who sent me. 39And this is the will of him who sent me, that I should lose nothing of all that he has given me, but raise it up on the last day. 40For this is the will of my Father, that everyone who looks on the Son and believes in him should have eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day."

and:
65And he said, "This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless it is granted him by the Father."

It was God's plan from the beginning that the Kingdom consist of both jew and gentile.
This is why Peter quoted Joel in Acts 2 that this is the time that the spirit is poured out on "all flesh".

If God had not given Peter the vision re: the gentiles and then told him to go to Cornelius, then the poor centurion might still be waiting in vain.

approvedworkman said...

How is allowing a man to choose damnation any different than predestinating such a thing?

God has complete foreknowledge, or else He is is not completely omniscient,which would call His being God into question.

Since He already knows who will say yes and who will say no, and does not intervene to cause those who say no to "turn around" what makes that different than predestination?

dsstanfield said...

henry (rick),

You asked this:

"The question I would ask is, if God desired to give all men a free choice could He, or is He limited?"

Of course God is not limited, otherwise He would not be God.

For me, the question is:

Can a man who is spiritually dead (Eph. 2:1-3) of his own ability be made alive spiritually? Or, will a fallen man ever choose good?

Fallen man is blind to the light of the Gospel (II Cor. 4:4) and cannot hear with understanding (Mark 4:11). Fallen man cannot possess in himself the necessary knowledge to be saved (I Cor. 2:14). Fallen man simply does not pursue righteousness (Romans 3:10 - 18).

Can the DEAD raise themselves? Can the BOUND free themselves? Can the BLIND give themselves sight, or the DEAF hearing? Can the SLAVES redeem themselves? Can the UNINSTRUCTABLE teach themselves? Can the NATURALLY SINFUL change themselves or even choose to change themselves?

Job 14:4 asks: Who can bring a clean thing out of an unclean? The answer is "no one!"

Ephesians 2:4-5: "But God, who is rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us, even when we were DEAD in trespasses, made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved)

iggy said...

workman,

"My "pithy" misquote (not!)aside.
Jesus says many times "let he who has an ear,hear.""


You did misquote the verse as you missed an important word...

You quoted saying:

"Faith comes by hearing and hearing by the Word,"

Yet, scripture states,

" 17. Consequently, faith comes from hearing the message, and the message is heard through the word of Christ."


Though we can say Jesus is the "Word" and agree I think that just saying it as you do know that some out there worship the Bible at the expense of the living Word Who is Jesus... it seems to be a misquote...

Romans chapter especially the verse you are stateing (verse 2o) means that since the beginning of creation man has been able to see... I mean finish the verse again...

"20. For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities--his eternal power and divine nature--have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse."


Man is without excuse NOW as it is still clearly seen by what has been made the eternal power and divine nature of God... You are taking this verse and making it fit a doctrine and not letting say what it says...

The purpose of Paul's writing this is to show that both Jew and Gentile are equal of God's wrath... Otherwise Paul would have just been talking about Adam... not all mankind...

This whole chapter is to set up what is to come in chapter 2...

"You, therefore, have no excuse, you who pass judgment on someone else, for at whatever point you judge the other, you are condemning yourself, because you who pass judgment do the same things."


You see the Jews in Rome did not fellowship with the Gentile and still considered them not equal... so as Paul is running through chapter one they are saying "go get them Paul!"

Then Paul lowers the boom of equality by saying... " Rom 2:11.For God does not show favoritism." and then further states, how a Jew is not one outwardly but inwardly...

Paul is showing the Jewish believers that the Gentile is their equal brother as they are both saved by Grace through faith...

TO make it mean as you are stating diminishes that impact...

The Jew saw himself as better as he kept the Law and had the Messiah... and Paul is stating that is not how salvation works.

Also to state that it was all pre Adamic means that there is an assumption that the Gentiles... who are part of the "so that men are without excuse." knew the story of Adam... I think many did but I think as even today, most of mankind does not... so it is a stretch to say that all men knew the story of the creation before the fall of Adam.

Also, note it was not the "let him who has ear to hear" that i was focused on... a simple question would have saved you a 20 minute writing session to defend yourself from what I was NOT talking about... LOL!

But, since you brought it up, I pray that as you re-read Romans 1 and 2 you have ears to hear.

Blessings,
iggy

iggy said...

Douglas,

I will read the things you have posted when I have some more time...

Yet, again, read the verse...

Rom 1 20-31

20. For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities--his eternal power and divine nature--have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.
21. For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened.
22. Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools
23. and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles.
24. Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another.
25. They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator--who is forever praised. Amen.
26. Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones.
27. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion.
28. Furthermore, since they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, he gave them over to a depraved mind, to do what ought not to be done.
29. They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice. They are gossips,
30. slanderers, God-haters, insolent, arrogant and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil; they disobey their parents;
31. they are senseless, faithless, heartless, ruthless."


Focus on versus 21 - 26

and also verse 28


It seems that we agree that man should know God... yet the issue is that if man if born "totally" depraved and as taught, cannot perceive spiritual things... then how can they be turned over to "a depraved mind".

You have man starting totally depraved, then getting turned over to "a depraved mind" and this makes no sense... how can one totally depraved get a
depraved mind" when they already have one?

It is a simple question and unless one understand the text as it is written... and not filter it through doctrines... the point that Paul is making will be missed.

Now again I will read the links you gave as I have time...

In my studied I do not have to fit doctrines in the text to please them, I see that Paul is doing and the point he is making... I see to add to it takes away from it.


Be Blessed,
iggy

Henry (Rick) Frueh said...

Since we are using illustrations, here i mine about total depravity that frames Romans one and what Andy suggested.

A man has fallen to the bottom of a pit that is 500 feet straight down. There are no footholds on the sides so climbing is impossible, and this man has no legs. But the man continues to try and escape.

But a man (Spirit) arives with a crane that has a 500 foot cable and a scoop on the end. The man peers over the edge of the pit and hollers "Do you know you are hopelessly trapped? (lost in sin)

The man hollers I didn't realize it until now (conviction).

The crane man says "I am the only one who can get you out, do you want me to get you out?"

THe trapped man says "Yes".

The crane is lowered and scoops the man up and brings him to the surface.

Could the trapped ever get out by himself? No.

Could the trapped man look up and hear the crane man's voice? Yes.

Did the trapped man do anything to help his escape? No.

Did the trapped man respond to the crane man's offer? Yes.

Who took the trapped man out and brought him to the top? The crane man.


Dpraved is having no way to even help be saved, no good works at all, but a God given ability to hear and respond to God's voice. The Holy Spirit has come to convict the world of their condition. God will call down to many, but few will respond.

iggy said...

Douglas,

I am not trying to be mean, but as I re-read your post, I see a lot of double speak and things that contradict the teachings of Calvin...

How can something be "totally" and not Totally at the same time...

How can man be unable to discern spiritual things, yet as scripture states, "For although they knew God,"?

It is that we do know God and the starting point is creation... and from there we understand and know and then make a choice in Whom to worship...

The issue is that though man can "see" this, he can not sustain it with in his fallen state. Man is a moral agent and according to the writings of Iraenius can choose. The issue though as brought out in Bonhoeffer's "Ethics" is that man is not equipped to sustain his knowledge in a physical form of worship without tainting it with evil... and that is why Jesus came... to set that to right.

Again, I will read the links at a later time, I am at work and am checking in during breaks... so I do not have all the time I desire right now.

blessings,
iggy

ADieL said...

Approvedworkman,

How would you answer the question that I asked dss:

What you would say to the hyper-Calvinist who says that man must do nothing to be saved but just wait to be regenerated. Or what would you say to the unconverted man who asks, "What must I do to be saved? Must I do anything to be saved or should I just wait for the effectual call?"

BTW, dss Im still awaiting your response! (no rush though)

approvedworkman said...

iggy
Once again you do not read what I wrote, you do not address the content of the comment. you simply state what you want my comments to say. I am well aware of Romans 1 and 2 and what it means. In fact if you want to go through the whole book I am up for it!
You are obnoxious and arrogant. So now whine about how you are suffering just like Jesus, or that you are the only one to use the Bible, so I am really critcizing the Bible.
My apologies here to DT, and all others who are in serious discussion here. This guy is like this all over the internet.
I am tired of his games.

Anonymous said...

Adiel- In response to your question, "What must I do to be saved," how about following the biblical response "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you will be saved."

Now how difficult was that?

We know that Christ's sheep hear His voice and will follow Him. We also know that all that the Father gives to Christ will come to Him.

So, I fail to see what the dilemma is?

Jason S

approvedworkman said...

adiel
In a very strict sense we do nothing to be saved.

When I read Acts 2:
"37Now when they heard this they were cut to the heart, and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, "Brothers, what shall we do?" 38And Peter said to them, "Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. 39For the promise is for you and for your children and for all who are far off, everyone whom the Lord our God calls to himself." 40And with many other words he bore witness and continued to exhort them, saying, "Save yourselves from this crooked generation." 41So those who received his word were baptized, and there were added that day about three thousand souls."

The words "cut to the heart",
or transfixed in some translations, carry the connotation that it is as if they were run through with a stake, which also pins them to the spot they are standing on. I believe that to be the moment of regeneration/conviction,, to which the response to their question is, "repent be baptized into the name of Jesus" and they then receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.
Our duty, or work, as it were is to preach the Word and the rest is up to the Lord.
I know that there have been hyper calvinists who believed that even preaching might interfere with God's election which is a self defeating argument.
When we hear the word,i.e. those that have ears to hear,respond affirmatively to the Lord and repent. I repent because I am saved, I am baptized because I am saved, I respond to what has already been done, and thenI go out and preach the Gospel to all men,since I have not a clue who will hear at any given time. Tuly that is the sole domain of God.

As for the unregenerate, I don't think that they would ask such questions until, like the 3000 in Acts, they hear the Gospel.

Henry (Rick) Frueh said...

BTW - it is good to again coverse with you Stanfield. I reiterate my admiration for your obvious love for our Lord.

ADieL said...

Jason S,

No dilemna on my end. If a sinner were to ask me, "What must I do to be saved?" I would tell him that he must repent and believe the Gospel! For some reason it seems as if it is really hard for some on this blog to say this which I find weird and troubling.

Approvedworkman,

Was the rich young ruler regenerate when he asked Jesus what he must do to inherit eternal life?

You see, I dont believe a person has to be regenerate to ask how to get to saved. He has to be regenerate to actually "repent and believe" but not to ask.

And also, for a person to be saved he MUST repent and believe. You said that for a person to repent and believe he must be saved. This doesnt make any sense. Maybe you meant that he must be regenerate in order to repent and believe in order to be saved?

andy said...

Hi thought Iggie's points were pretty valid to be honest..Hes just trying to clarify if total means totally...

It may be were completely misinformed about total depravity,it seems i was for one!!

My example was Cornelius,who though unsaved was considered devout and God heard his prayers..I was under the impression a depraved person couldn't pray (prayers that God hears) or be considered devout while depraved..

Other scripture to me imply a universal calling to all men,as does Romans 1..That would still mean Jesus does the calling first but its a corporate one!!

I'm not saying people can save themselves,just that they can be aware of their perilous position

Maybe tulip makes sense when its explained more clearly?? Lets all stay humble and try and learn something!!

andy said...

the humble bit was more to me haha..

I'm not a Calvinist but if the doctrine is God's,i want to know!!

ADieL said...

Andy,

I would encourage you (and everyone else) to give a listen to this:

http://www.monergism.com/thethreshold/articles/onsite/azurdia_grace.html

I found this free mp3 sermon series by Arturo G. Azurdia to be very englightening and helpful in investigating the Doctrines of Grace.

Henry (Rick) Frueh said...

Let me propose this. There are Scriptures that on their face seem contradictory. What does that tell you? That there are truths that are a mystery, hence we see through a glass darkly now.

Paul says "work out your own salvation with fear and trembling" and the very next verse he says "For it is God who will and to do..."

The election and the foreknowledge and the presdestination and the sovereignty and the calling and the chronolgy of the regeneration of a sinner are all totally of God and will only be understood in their fullness when we are changed into His image.

Rejoice, brethren, the best is yet to come!!

Which also means your best life is not now!

dsstanfield said...

adiel,

I agree with approved workman's post. I would like to ditto this:

"When we hear the word,i.e. those that have ears to hear,respond affirmatively to the Lord and repent. I repent because I am saved,"

The Holy Spirit gives the elect "ears to hear."

dss

andy said...

Exactly Henry !! I think the truths more likely "were all holding on to part of an elephant in the dark,and trying to discribe it" parable. andy

ADieL said...

dss,

I see what you are sayign and I disagree. I believe that we are saved aka justified when we repent and believe. I believe that a person is given "ears to hear" aka is regenerated and almost simultaneously repents and believes. Granted, the repentance and fait are a gift from God. But it is throug this God-given faith that we are saved, hence Ephesians 2:8, we are "saved by grace THROUGH faith". When we believe we are justified and not before. But again, I will agree, that only the regenerated believe and are saved. (I hope Im not sounding too confusing! Sorry!)

Anyway, you still kind of never answered my question. A sinner asks you, "DSS what must I do to be saved?" What is your answer to him/her?

dsstanfield said...

Hey adiel,

I guess it is the old chicken or the egg question.

Which comes first faith or regeneration?

You said: "almost simultaneously repents and believes."

I would say regeneration must precede faith. Faith itself is the fruit of regeneration, not the cause of it. You must be alive before you can believe.

DSS, what must I do to be saved?

Repent and Believe....

If that person has received the inward call of the Holy Spirit, true repentance and belief will occur.

ADieL said...

Dss said:

Repent and believe.

Thank you! You see! A sinner MUST do something to be saved. I knew it!

Now, we also know that God must first regenerate him, yet nevertheless, the sinner MUST repent and believe. If they are interested in an in-depth explanation of how regeneration and salvation occur I will explain to them that God must cause them to be born again before they will ever repent and believe (due to their total depravity). Otherwise, I just tell them:

Repent and believe the Gospel! Why? Because they MUST or else they will surely perish.

iggy said...

workman,

"You are obnoxious and arrogant. So now whine about how you are suffering just like Jesus, or that you are the only one to use the Bible, so I am really critcizing the Bible."

Funny I thought we were in agreement... but ok... then we disagree and I am whining... though I do not ember whining at all...

It seems that you do not want to discuss but cast accusations so I will stop discussion with you...

The "mocking" I was referring to was between myself and another person at another blog who is also posting here... we have since moved on from that (At least I hope) so it in no way was a reference to you! LOL! If you htought that I apologize for the misunderstanding.

Yet, from what we discussed you believe that the Jews are saved by grace through faith as the gentile and those that are saved now are the "remnant"... se may disagree on finer points yet as far as THIS discussion I thought we agreed... If I am wrong and you do not see the Jews saved today by Grace through Faith and that these jews are the "remnant" then please correct me.


Be Blessed,
iggy

iggy said...

Andy,

Thanks for your last comment... I am not trying to just stir the pot... I am asking the questions that keep me from accepting the Calvinist position...

I have been condemned by Calvinists for "not holding to the doctrines of grace" many times... and they reject that I am sincerely looking at it... yet to raise a question seems (to some) that I am mocking them or accusing then of being anti bible.... (whatever! as I do not remember stating that here or though I may state that certain ideas seem to run contrary to other teachings of scripture).

It seems that (again not all) Calvinists do not care if one is sincerely looking, only that they believe as they do and that (at least to me) shows a lack of Grace and Mercy that God has given to us... and that we are also to give away.

I do have Calvinist friends that discuss with me many of these things… and still I have not found a satisfactory answer that will line up with scripture as I am reading it.

Be Blessed,
Iggy

Henry (Rick) Frueh said...

Hey - if I weren't an Arminian, I would be a Calvinist.

dsstanfield said...

Adiel,

What about infants? They are unable to give a mental assent, and yet I would say that elect infants who die in infancy are saved. I would also say that God can regenerate a baby while still in the womb (John the Baptist) or while nursing on his mother's breast (David).

dss

iggy said...

Douglas,

I think you are missing what I am stating...

I have read the links and have read much deeper teachings on said topic and do not disagree that man is "dead in their sins"

Yet none of those explained how a "totally" depraved becomes more depraved... if one is "totally" anything they are immersed completely...

Man is immerse totally in the covenant of death as taught in Isaiah... and needs the Life of Christ to Live as a New Creation.

Also, if one is to take what you are saying, that one is totally depraved, yet then you are stating that they are not completely totally depraved....

"The doctrine of total depravity is not teaching about how evil mankind can be, and throughout history some have certainly been evil, total depravity is talking about the effects of the fall, the inability to make any right move towards God prior to regeneration. That the degenerate sinner can do no good that pleases God."

I do hold to the view that man can do nothing to please God... yet again, (as it has been explained to me) that the total depravity is one of natural heredity as the fallen state of Adam was passed on to his children by natural birth. I so not see that in scripture except for on reference of David in a Psalm where he states he was born wicked form birth....


I do not see man as born depraved but that he has the natural tendency (that never fails) to stir toward his worst nature, meaning that he believes he does not need God.

Again, it seems you are redefining the TULIP from what it teaches and are swerving more into the Arminian view... or that we in a sense agree and you are not a pure Calvinist though believe its teachings to be closest to explain your own... I also thought that until I read more on it and started to challenge it to see if it stood up to scripture.

I see that if man is not "Totally" depraved, then the rest of TULIP wanes... yet I see that man (as taught by Iraenius) has a free will to do good or evil. Yet, we need the Holy Spirit to do so. I am not sure I fully agree with him as I see that I cannot do anything to please God on my own and rest solely on the finished works of Jesus... He started His works in me and will finish His works in me or God is a liar...

Be Blessed,
iggy

iggy said...

dss,

"What about infants? They are unable to give a mental assent, and yet I would say that elect infants who die in infancy are saved. I would also say that God can regenerate a baby while still in the womb (John the Baptist) or while nursing on his mother's breast (David)."


this is why some of us who are not Calvinist can't get past the double speak...

A person is not born saved though he is Elect by the foreknowledge and predestined to be saved, yet Elect infants are saved... so then why not kill them all and let God sort them all out... ( I am not really suggesting that at all!)

Yet, these inconsistencies I see all over Calvinism... we are not saved before we come to Christ, we are saved before Creation... and person is born totally depraved and is going to hell yet a baby born elect goes to heaven...

We are totally depraved and with out the regeneration we cannot understand spiritual things as all, yet man can see by God's own creation (even atheists) that there is a God...

So, I still cannot see that this "system" makes sense if one has to jump here and there to explain it... I simply believe man is born with the knowledge of good and evil yet cannot (because he is not so equipped) walk in sustained righteousness that will please God as to do so one must be born of the Spirit... or immortal... as man is mortal he cannot walk in the divine understandings until he receives the "mind of Christ".

(I was accused of being a Gnostic over that last statement once... believe me there is a grave difference between what I am saying a Gnosticism.)

Be Blessed,
iggy

andy said...

Iggy i think what your saying is fine..DT as a great site and hes a very cool dude!

I think as long as were thinking hmmm i could be wrong lets find out,then its all good...

I'm not too proud to run to reform doctrine if its right..

(would i be using my free will to run to it haha only joking ;-)

dsstanfield said...

Iggy,

"and person is born totally depraved and is going to hell yet a baby born elect goes to heaven..."

I am not sure how this is inconsistent. If an elect infant were to die in infancy, he/she would be regenerated and saved by Christ through the Spirit, who works when, where and how He pleases. An elect infant would be conceived in sin and iniquity and totally depraved, until the time of regeneration.

This would be consistent with Calvinism, as salvation is the work of the Spirit.

David's son with Bathsheba died in infancy. Yet David in 2 Samuel 12:23 states that he is in heaven. Like David, the child was conceived in iniquity, but when the Spirit regenerated him (whether it be in the womb or those first few days after birth), he became a new creature. Obviously, this covenant child was elect.

I hope that clarifies...

dss

andy said...

As to children and election i'm going to post what i posted before by J Piper

I agree with J Piper when he says quote

"Romans 1:20 "Since the creation of the world God's invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse."

In other words: if a person did not have access to the revelation of God's glory - did not have the natural capacity to see it and understand it, then Paul implies they would have an excuse at the judgment.

end quote..

That basically is neither Calvinist or Arminianist doctrine,just common sense..

Henry (Rick) Frueh said...

ds - without New Testament teaching that narrative about David cannot stand on its own. It only records what David said, not that the baby was indeed in heaven.

It may be that babies or as you say elected babies go to heaven, but that knowledge is with the Godhead since there is no teaching on the subject. It may comfort some who have lost babies, but it still cannot be fully substantiated Scripturally.

After seeing your knowledge of Scripture, you surely know that an Old Testament narrative cannot be the basis of substantive New Testament truth when there is no teaching on the subject.

The passage does not even say the child is in heaven, it just accurately records what David said. The same is true in Acts 7 when Stephen says in verse four that Abraham left Haran after his fater Terah died. Look at Genesis 11:32 and we see that Terah died in Haran at 205 years old.

Now examine Genesis 11:26 and it records that Terah fathered Abraham at 75 years old. And Genesis 12:4 says that Abraham left Haran when he was 75 years old. So that means that when Abraham left Haran his father Terah was 150 years old.

What does that mean when Stephen says that Abraham left Haran AFTER his father Terah died when Genesis tells us he didn't? It means that Stephen got it wrong, but Luke recorded it correctly. And that is just one example how basing a doctrinalk teaching on a narrative is unwise.

iggy said...

dss,

I stated this:

"and person is born totally depraved and is going to hell yet a baby born elect goes to heaven..."


I have heard the argument that regeneration comes before salvation... I do not see that, I see humility comes before regeneration... and that act of God beginning His salvation starts regeneration... which is a process of called, "the renewing of the mind". One might still think in all the same ways after coming to Jesus... yet will grow in the Knowledge and Truth Jesus.

I have studied this out pretty intesively and I see that (setting aside that I see that the point missed by the Calvinist on predestination is that we are not mortal)

"And those he predestined, he also called; those he called, he also justified; those he justified, he also glorified."


God sent Jesus (my view of predestination in a summary) to call to those... In that God shows us our inability to save ourselves, we come to the Cross and are justified, (which continues throughout our walk) and then through regeneration we are also glorified...

Also, in Titus, 3:5,6.7

"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; 6. Which he shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour;
7. That being justified by his grace, we should be made heirs according to the hope of eternal life."



Once one actually notices the context of Titus 3:5-7 one should notice that one must be saved first to be regenerated… notice the first three words of the paragraph.



“He saved us.”

This is written to those who are already saved, not to those who need to get saved.
To say one must have a regenerate mind to receive the salvation gets things so out of whack… it is saying one must somehow get saved… before getting saved!

This is a teaching widely spread and is accepted. Yet, if one bothered to read the passage one might actually see the great salvation of our Great God!

We are saved by Grace…

By Faith…

Not of works…

It is Faith that is a gift… given to us that enables us to turn, we still must come to Christ and be regenerated as we must first receive the Holy Spirit to be regenerated by the Holy Spirit. If one has not yet been filled by the Holy Spirit then how can they be regenerated? Only after one come to Christ Jesus will they be regenerated and renewed by the Holy Spirit.

Note also these same people often teach of the wrath of God at the expense of God’s great grace… yet in the verses just before Titus 3:5-7 it is stated in verses 1 -4:

“Put them in mind to be subject to principalities and powers, to obey magistrates, to be ready to every good work, To speak evil of no man, to be no brawlers, but gentle, shewing all meekness unto all men. For we ourselves also were sometimes foolish, disobedient, deceived, serving divers lusts and pleasures, living in malice and envy, hateful, and hating one another. But after that the kindness and love of God our Saviour toward man appeared,”

We are to be ready to do good works… to speak evil of no man… and to live after the kindness and love of God our Saviour. It is God’s kindness that leads us to repentance… not His wrath nor regeneration.

We cannot be regenerated of our spirit if one has not yet received the Holy Spirit Who does the work or regeneration. That is why man must acknowledge his sin nature and turn to God for salvation. Until that takes place and pride is removed… only when man humbly bends his knee and cries out “O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death?” The God will now act upon the faith He gave for one to cry out for deliverance… only then will He deliver and give New Life… only then can man enter in through the Kindness of God’s Merciful Grace… only then will man be given the Spirit of Life that is the regeneration of our Spirit, only then by Grace do we then mover forward to conform to the Image of Jesus… only then do we be transformed by the renewing of our mind…

Henry (Rick) Frueh said...

Correction, Terah was 70 when he fathered Abraham not 75.

Mark said...

I find I believe that it is of God that a man is saved because the Bible says so.

John 6:44 "No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day."

Ephesians 1:4 "According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love:"

And we debate if we have any part in that. The divine accomplishment of salvation must be of God, we are placed "in Christ", we are "joint heirs", we are "complete in Him", we "posses every spiritual blessing", this and much more is accomplished of God for us the moment we believe.

But what about these words of our Lord Jesus in the parable of the marraige feast in Matthew 22:14? "For many are called, but few are chosen." If I understand the Calvinist who is a limited redemptionist this verse should read; "for some are called and that same some are all chosen". Then the Arminian who is an unlimited redemptionist it would read; "for all are called and some choose Him". These I am trying to portray as the extreme in opposite directions. So back to the correct rendering, Matthew 22:14 "For many are called, but few are chosen". The calling is an ivitation right? In the hearing of the gospel, the Holy spirit will illuminate to the heart of man truth, for God to testify a truth to the heart of man is not controling that man, simply testifying the truth of thier condition. Jesus in speaking of the work of the Holy Spirit says in John 16:8-11; "And when he is come, he will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment: Of sin, because they believe not on me; Of righteousness, because I go to my Father, and ye see me no more; Of judgment, because the prince of this world is judged."

So if many are called, (hear the gospel) the Holy Spirit testifies to them the truth of their condition and their need of a Saviour, then few will believe the witness of God and then since He alone knows the heart of man accepts that belief and places them in Christ. All a man can do is believe, Jesus repeated that over and over. To believe what God has said about His Son in His Word is all a man can do. The Bible tells us we must believe in the Son of God, God uses Scripture to tell us this truth about our need, thats why it is so important to use God's words not ours. Paul gives a good explanation of preaching the gospel and ends with Romans 10:17 "So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God."

But does the Bible tell us that God is responsible in our believing? Isn't God glorified when we believe what He has plainly told us? Why does Isaiah say this; Isaiah 1:18 "Come now, and let us reason together, saith the LORD: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool."? Why would He say let us reason together if He wasn't showing us something? We must believe (our responsability) that is not choosing, doing, any action on our part. So what is believing, a condition of our heart, our mind? It most certainly is not a work on my part. He tells us the truth, we either belive Him, or reject Him.

For clarity, believing is not simply in His existance, my intent in using the word believe is all that the gospel tells us of the work of Christ on our behalf.

This subject sure makes one think, at least it is obvious there are people out there who are in the Word.

dk said...

There doesn't seem to an end to these discussions. Can it be that our Lord does not want us to know the finer details about salvation, rather would like us to concentrate on the two major issues - Love your lord with all your... and love your neighbour as yourself? If there has not been any concensus amoung the Christians for the last 2000 years, I don't think we are going to see a conclusion in this blog.
In my opinion, if anyone thinks this (knowing the finer details of salvation) is the most important part of salvation, they may I suggest that person is gnostic, who depends on knowledge?

dk

dsstanfield said...

henry (rick),

"After seeing your knowledge of Scripture, you surely know that an Old Testament narrative cannot be the basis of substantive New Testament truth when there is no teaching on the subject."

ALL scripture is inspired...Not just the New Testament. If a law or principle is taught in the OT, it still stands unless the NT abrogates it.

If David said and the Holy Spirit recorded: "Can I bring him back again? I shall go to him, but he shall not return to me."

What are we to think? Where would David "go" to be with his dead child?

I will have to take some time to look up the Stephen/Terah thing. I think I understand the point you are making.

What would you do with the following verses:

Psalm 22:9 "But You are He who took Me out of the womb; You MADE me trust when I was on MY MOTHER'S BREAST."

How does an Arminian explain God causing David to trust while he was a nursing child. To a Calvinist, this makes perfect sense. David's appointed time of regeneration was while he was yet a babe.

D. Stanfield

By the way, Henry (rick), thanks for continuing our discussions!

Henry (Rick) Frueh said...

"How does an Arminian explain God causing David to trust while he was a nursing child."

We don't have to explain it, God is sovereign.(see - us too!). But no example in the Old Testament without a New Testament foundation can be used as church doctrine. Same thing in the New Testament narrative books that are profitable in principle etc..

That is why people lay anointed handkerchiefs today because they read that account in Acts. But with no teaching in the epistles it is not church doctrine. There are many such examples of wrongly dividing the Word.

Dead Theologians said...

Rick,

Do you place more emphasis on the epistles than you do the rest of scripture?

DT

Henry (Rick) Frueh said...

Of course not, but there are obvious differences in focus. The epistles by there very nature are teaching books written mostly to churches. You would agree that Leviticus or Esther provide principles for Christian living within a historical context, but they are different in focus and substance that I Corinthians.

Dead Theologians said...

Rick,

I have been preaching through Leviticus for the past few months. I hope this does not hurt your feelings. :))

DT

Henry (Rick) Frueh said...

What is your point? I have preached through every book and they all are inspried Scripture. What church doctrines that can be found in Leviticus that are not in the New Testament epistle?

Redemption, substitution, resurrection, Holy Spirit, Spiritual gifts, the rapture, justification, regeneration, election, Trinity, all these and more are revealed in the New Testament epistles. Are you saying that Leviticus is sufficient for these teachings?

I cannot understand your unwillingness to admit that certain books, equal with others, are not different in their teacing focus.

dsstanfield said...

henry (rick):

"But no example in the Old Testament without a New Testament foundation can be used as church doctrine."

My understanding is that once God speaks (as He did in the OT) He does not have to repeat Himself to validate it.

dss

Henry (Rick) Frueh said...

The church was a mystery, revealed bu the Spirit first to Paul and then to each individual believer. Which teachings in Leviticus are ecclesiaistical in nature?

iggy said...

DS


"How does an Arminian explain God causing David to trust while he was a nursing child."


This is in fact the point I am making about "totally" depraved being turned over to depravity.... ummm it makes no sense...

David was born innocent... as all men until they sin... which all men do! That is why the OT states Deut 24: 16. Fathers shall not be put to death for their children, nor children put to death for their fathers; each is to die for his own sin.


All have sinned... even David... and many "trusted" God and later fell away... in the OT... which is where then the difference of how the Holy Spirit filled in the OT and now in this time... we are now filled and sealed... not just filled... as we no longer will lose salvation as it is not dependant on our own works! (This is also what David and the OT "Saints" believed... that they must fall on the mercy and grace of God for forgiveness and that the Messiah would come and set all things right.

Now, I will state I am not "set in stone" on the "innocent" but it seems to flow better than David was saved as an infant...

You see again this stems out of the idea of Plato that man is immortal and also existed in the Father before the beginning... we did not... we are created beings... Jesus is stated as the ONLY IMMORTAL and we are to BECOME like Him.

To me predestination is about being "in Christ"... that God foreknow Jesus and those who would later be "in Christ" would be predestined to be conformed into His image. The restoration of mankind to the original vocation of "imago dei" through Jesus Christ.

God foreknew Jesus...

Now I am not saying that God does not know all things, but I think we are placing the teaching of predestination as in the bible in a different context that it was intended...

Be Blessed,
iggy

Henry (Rick) Frueh said...

Iggy - let's be honest, there are things that are hidden and to take one incident in the OT and expand it to blanket every baby is hermeneutically unsound.

I used to use that verse when I would conduct infant funerals, and it may be true that all infants go to heaven (if as ds suggests they are elected), but we cannot be dogmatic in the asence of Scriptural exposition.

So you, Iggy, sometimes formulate postulates that may or may not be true but this side of heaven are mysteries. We all must be careful not to verbally present what we have been taught and not what the Scriptures do or do not teach. I've often found it painful to separate the two.

Hey DT, how about a post on nationalism? Don't get me started!!

Henry (Rick) Frueh said...

And a Plato sighting?? Is that Dana Plato from TV??

"What choo talkin' 'bout, Iggy!"

dsstanfield said...

Henry (rick),

Was the church evident in the OT?

dss

dsstanfield said...

iggy,

This is in fact the point I am making about "totally" depraved being turned over to depravity.... ummm it makes no sense..."

Are you taking into consideration common grace?

Maybe it is the term with which you take issue. How about "totally depraved" according to spiritual things?

Henry (Rick) Frueh said...

Only in shadows but not recognizeable until the Holy Spirit came and the New Testament was given. Paul says it was a mystery that even Peter did not fully understand until Paul revealed the mystery.

The OT saints were Israel, they were not the church, the bdoy of Christ or else they would not have to be grafted back in.

dsstanfield said...

Henry (rick):

The OT saints were Israel, they were not the church..

It always seems to come back to hermeneutics and your ideas concerning the OT. I don't want to hijack this thread with a discussion of Dispensationalism again. We could move back to the other one.

In the NT (which you seem to prefer), we have the inspired writer, Luke, calling OT Israel the church (congregation).

Look at Acts 7:38:

"This is he who was in the congregation in the wilderness with the Angel who spoke to him on Mount Sinai, and with our fathers, the one who received the living oracles to give to us..."

Henry (Rick) Frueh said...

That was the church in the called out sense, not the Bride of Christ or the Body of Christ sense. The New Testament church is primarily Gentile, the Old Testament church is primarily Jewish.

If we were an extension of Israel we would not have to be grafted in while they were cut off. It is clear that Israel was never the Bride or Body of Christ.

dsstanfield said...

Henry (rick):

"The New Testament church is primarily Gentile"

What about Pentecost? I think that is where you would say the church was realized (correct me if I am misrepresenting you). The first three thousand converts were Jews...

Look at the following texts that show that Israel was the bride (or wife) of God:

Isaiah 54:4-5: "Do not be afraid; you will not suffer shame. Do not fear disgrace; you will not be humiliated. You will forget the shame of your youth and remember no more the reproach of your widowhood. FOR YOUR MAKER IS YOUR HUSBAND- the Lord Almighty is His name- the Holy One of Israel is your Redeemer; he is called God of all the earth.

Jeremiah 2:2: "Go and proclaim in the hearing of Jerusalem: 'I remember the devotion of your youth, how AS A BRIDE YOU LOVED ME and followed me through the desert, through a land not sown."

Ezekiel 16:1-3, 32: "The word of the Lord came to me: "Son of man, confront Jerusalem with her detestable practices and say, 'This is what the Sovereign Lord says to Jerusalem: Your ancestry and birth were in the land of the Cannaanites; your father was an Amorite and your mother a Hittite..."'YOU ADULTEROUS WIFE! You prefer strangers to YOUR OWN HUSBAND!"

Hosea 1:2: "When the Lord began to speak through Hosea, the Lord said to him 'Go, take TO YOURSELF AN ADULTEROUS WIFE AND CHILDREN OF UNFAITHFULNESS, BECAUSE THE LAND IS GUILTY OF THE VILEST ADULTERY IN DEPARTING FROM THE LORD.'"

Henry (Rick) Frueh said...

They were the bride of the Father. If you are believing that the bride of Chris and the body of Christ are the OT saints and the New Tesament saints then so be it. Your teaching does not reflect the teachings of most reformed and Calvinistic teachers to say nothing of Arminian theology.

Does your church have these teachings online or in written form?

dsstanfield said...

Henry (rick),

You are misinformed when you state:

"Your teaching does not reflect the teachings of most reformed and Calvinistic teachers"

Reformed Theology and Covenant Theology are one and the same. The Reformers and the Puritans were both Covenantal in their theology. For some good articles on it, you could go to the following sites:

www.apuritansmind.com,
www.monergism.com

For many scholarly refutations of Dispensationalism:

http://www.monergism.com/directory/search.php?action=search_links_simple&search_kind=and&phrase=dispensationalism&B1=Go

www.americanvision.org

Here are some sermons preached by a good friend of mine, Joe Morecraft. I do not attend the church where he is the pastor, but I am a member of another RPCUS church.

Hermeneutics:

http://www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=1505205447

http://www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=1505205538

dsstanfield said...

Henry (rick),

I forgot to include the following lectures on the History of the Reformation. Dr. Morecraft's lectures on church history are excellent...the best that I have ever heard.

http://www.sermonaudio.com/search.asp?sourceonly=true&currSection=sermonssource&keyword=chalcedonpresbyterian&subsetcat=series&subsetitem=History+of+the+Reformation

iggy said...

DS,

"Are you taking into consideration common grace?"

Can you show me the verse about "common Grace"?

I will show you verses about God's gracious and compassionate character through out the bible....

To me there is no "Common Grace" as the same grace is give to all... whether one accepts or rejects "Grace" as they come to the end of themselves and seek out God.

This "Common grace" forgets that it was through the same Jesus that all things were created... and that Jesus' character has never changed and Jesus was full of Grace and Truth at creation, preincarnation, incarnation, death ,burial resurrection ascension and even now as He sits on the Father's Throne.

This same God Who by Grace created all things through Jesus... (the garden was full of Grace and Mercy) is Just, and can "un-create" all things and we truthfully cannot say a thing against Him.

We are all under the Grace of God if one believes in the Trinity...

Otherwise I see that if we accept "common grace" we are saying that Jesus was not the same yesterday, today and forever (in all His character).

If Jesus has been always the same, the same Grace and Truth that He embodied has not changed from before creation and will not change even after the New Heaven and Earth are our home.

Blessings,
iggy

Dead Theologians said...

Rick,

You said "Hey DT, how about a post on nationalism?"

Do you have some ideas?

You also said "I forgot to include the following lectures on the History of the Reformation. Dr. Morecraft's lectures on church history are excellent...the best that I have ever heard."

There is no way you just said that.
Rick, do you know what you are saying? He is a "C." :)

DT

Henry (Rick) Frueh said...

DT - I didn't say that, ds said that. Let me e-mail you my idea about nationalism.

Dead Theologians said...

Rick,

You said "Hey DT, how about a post on nationalism? Don't get me started!!" at 11:15am

DT

dsstanfield said...

iggy,

I may not be making my point very clearly. Man is totally depraved when it comes to spiritual things. However, not all men are as wicked in their actions as they could be, because God restrains them. We aren't all Mansons, Hitlers, or Dahmers, but before salvation we all have the capability of being that. Does that make sense?

ADieL said...

Hey Dead Theologians,

What about a post on Rewards? Are we rewarded for our works whether they are of gold or diamonds or hay or stubble etc? Can a Christian lose their rewards? Can a Christian at one point produce works of gold and then later on in his walk his works start becoming hay therefore forfeiting the rewards for his previous works? How does this relate to Jesus' command for us to store our treasures in heaven where neither moth nor rust destroy or thieves break in to steal? Please do a post on this!

iggy said...

DSS,

I think the though we may come about the end result the same, I think we only differ in the details.

I have been under a lot of different teachings and had to go to the scripture to search out what what "truth" or not...

Actually that is what first drew me to the "emerging church" as there I found a lot of people who were doing the same thing...

If a person is does not look at what they believe and run it past scripture, I see they can fall into grave error. In fact much of the attack against "emerging" comes out of bad theology then a gross misrepresentation of and about emerging.

I have over and over asked people to show me anything where people like Brian McLaren states, "Being gay is OK and not a bad thing." which he is accused of many times... as well as the accusation he totally denies "hell" or is a "universalist".

There has not been one person that can produce a "quote" stating these things...

I have listened to hours and hours and have read most of his books... so I admit I have not read ALL he has written, yet still all I get is team pryos gross misrepresentation in form of posters... and when they are met with posters that more accurately show our view we are called "whiners"! LOL! I don't remember whining... in fact as I show some things that concern me about John MacArthur (who I am not a "hater" of as I am labeled) I am accused of "hating", not taking him in context, and distorting views... which I have only taken his direct "quotes"... in that I hear more "whining" from people like Frank Turk who never has read anything I have taught yet comes to my blog with an accusatory attitude tell me what an apostate i am! LOL!

I hope that someone at least can tell I take my faith very seriously and as i have found in the emerging church believe in the Bible as authoritative... (which I have been mocked over by people that support John MacArthur!)

Well I ranted on long enough...

Be Blessed,
iggy

LinkWithin

Blog Widget by LinkWithin