toml
Junior Member
Posts: 53
|
Post by toml on Aug 15, 2022 0:16:15 GMT -8
For the record you did not address a single verse Your questions were neither serious or relevant to the scriptures presented which show faith precedes regeneration " For the record"? For the record, I did address the verses as a whole. The record shows that to be the case. Neither I nor anyone else has to address the verses singularly if they have all collectively been abused by ignoring prevailing presuppositional conditions objectively present in the Bible. The record shows this is the case. Not a single verse quoted actually states, " Regeneration precedes faith". The record shows that to be so. Instead, every single verse quoted was asserted inferrentially to mean something that isn't actually anywhere stated. The record shows that to be the case. My questions are serious and relevant, and I explained how and why they are serious and relevant. The record shows that to be so. The questions were not answered. The record shows this to be so. The questions were not answered because of a personal believe they are not serious or relevant in spite of the record showing they are objectively valid and relevant. Nothing stopped you from answering the question but you. The record shows this to be the case. I did not stop this exchange. I brought something valid, relevant, and uncommon to bear upon the op and it is being ignored. That is what the record shows. Just answer the questions asked. T he issue was the order of faith and regeneration. To that end multiple verses were produced showing faith precedes being spiritually made alive and precedes being made a child of God. Regeneration is what makes one spiritually alive and makes one a child of God. You willy nilly have just ignored that fact as well as the fact all theologies affirm being made spiritually alive is regeneration
examples At the present time it is used in a far more restricted sense, to denote the divine act by which the sinner is endowed with new spiritual life, and by which the principle of that new life is first called into action. Sometimes it is employed in an even more limited sense, as a designation of the implanting of the new life in the soul, apart from the first manifestations of this life. In this sense of the word regeneration may be defined as that act of God by which the principle of the new life is implanted in man, and the governing disposition of the soul is made holy.
Berkoff Manual of christian doctrineDEFINITION OF REGENERATION
The word regeneration (Gk. paliggenesia) appears only twice in the New Testament. Once it is used eschatologically, “of the renewing of the world in the time of the Messiah” (Matt. 19:28),36 the second usage is “of the rebirth of a redeemed person” (Titus 3:5).37 Regeneration should be distinguished from conversion.
Conversion refers to the response of the human being to God’s offer of salvation and approach to man. Regeneration is the other side of conversion. It is God’s doing. In regeneration the soul is passive; in conversion, it is active. Regeneration may be defined as the communication of divine life to the soul … as the impartation of a new nature … or heart … and the production of a new creation.38
Succinctly stated, to regenerate means “to impart life.” Regeneration is the act whereby God imparts life to the one who believes.
Moody Handbook of TheologyREGENERATION § 1. Usage of the Word The subjective change wrought in the soul by the grace of God, is variously designated in Scripture. It is called a new birth, a resurrection, a new life, a new creature, Charles Hodge, Systematic Theology, vol. 3 (Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 1997), 3. Regeneration What does it mean to be born again? EXPLANATION AND SCRIPTURAL BASIS We may define regeneration as follows: Regeneration is a secret act of God in which he imparts new spiritual life to us. This is sometimes called “being born again” (using language from John 3:3–8). Grudem's systematic theology Now regarding the verses I posted previously Of those verses you addressed not a one. You made a statement about the covenant peoples of God as though that had some bearing. you ignored the fact being the covenant people of God the jews were not guaranteed salvation or regeneration just as you ignored the bibles examples of pagan non believing member of gentile nations being saved and regenerated. Nothing you stated previously or above does anything at all to address those verses.
You do not get to demand those verses be ignored. you do not get to disregard the definition of regeneration as the impartation of spiritual life and you certainly do not get he demand the direction the op should take
i reiterate you did nothing at all to actually address those verses
|
|
alive
New Member
Posts: 17
|
Post by alive on Sept 2, 2022 3:58:52 GMT -8
Morning Josh…will you address Eph. 2:11-18 or so, in the context of this conversation?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 2, 2022 5:40:40 GMT -8
Ezekiel 18:30-32“Therefore, you Israelites, I will judge each of you according to your own ways, declares the Sovereign LORD. Repent! Turn away from all your offenses; then sin will not be your downfall. Rid yourselves of all the offenses you have committed, and get a new heart and a new spirit. Why will you die, people of Israel? For I take no pleasure in the death of anyone, declares the Sovereign LORD. Repent and live!Notice what comes first 1- Repent , turn away from sin 2- the after you repent you get a new heart/spirit ( calvinism- regeneration, new life) 3- repent then you live, have life- ie new heart, spirit. Several things were left out. The most important condition relevant to soteriology is the fact Ezekiel's audience were already living in a covenant relationship with God. These aren't atheists living outside of a covenant relationship. Here in Ezekiel God is speaking to those He chose before they even knew they were being chosen, and they were chosen without being asked or invited. They weren't given an option - any choice - until long after they'd been brought into that covenant relationship that was initiated and sustained solely by God. None of them were asked to repent until AFTER that covenant relationship had been well established. Christological salvation is a covenant relationship. Regeneration precedes faith. The basic fault of this op is that it treated people who already believed in God's existence, people who already hoped for a Messiah, people who already acknowledged the existence of sin, and people who were already living in a covenant relationship with their Creator....... as if they are atheists. In other words, the op argues a false equivalence fallacy. When you find Ezekiel speaking to a bunch of atheists out of the blue and in a manner where His appearance is not forcefully persuasive then you might have grounds for faith before regeneration but even then I'd question whether this faith was mere intellectual assent or an entirely new circumcised heart of flesh. For future reference: It is ALWAYS and EVERYWHERE inappropriate to take passages written be a covenant person, to covenant people, ABOUT covenant people and treat the passage as if it applies to non-covenant people. Context is critical to a sound soteriology. |
|
|
|
Post by civic on Sept 2, 2022 5:46:02 GMT -8
Ezekiel 18:30-32“Therefore, you Israelites, I will judge each of you according to your own ways, declares the Sovereign LORD. Repent! Turn away from all your offenses; then sin will not be your downfall. Rid yourselves of all the offenses you have committed, and get a new heart and a new spirit. Why will you die, people of Israel? For I take no pleasure in the death of anyone, declares the Sovereign LORD. Repent and live!Notice what comes first 1- Repent , turn away from sin 2- the after you repent you get a new heart/spirit ( calvinism- regeneration, new life) 3- repent then you live, have life- ie new heart, spirit. Several things were left out. The most important condition relevant to soteriology is the fact Ezekiel's audience were already living in a covenant relationship with God. These aren't atheists living outside of a covenant relationship. Here in Ezekiel God is speaking to those He chose before they even knew they were being chosen, and they were chosen without being asked or invited. They weren't given an option - any choice - until long after they'd been brought into that covenant relationship that was initiated and sustained solely by God. None of them were asked to repent until AFTER that covenant relationship had been well established. Christological salvation is a covenant relationship. Regeneration precedes faith. The basic fault of this op is that it treated people who already believed in God's existence, people who already hoped for a Messiah, people who already acknowledged the existence of sin, and people who were already living in a covenant relationship with their Creator....... as if they are atheists. In other words, the op argues a false equivalence fallacy. When you find Ezekiel speaking to a bunch of atheists out of the blue and in a manner where His appearance is not forcefully persuasive then you might have grounds for faith before regeneration but even then I'd question whether this faith was mere intellectual assent or an entirely new circumcised heart of flesh. For future reference: It is ALWAYS and EVERYWHERE inappropriate to take passages written be a covenant person, to covenant people, ABOUT covenant people and treat the passage as if it applies to non-covenant people. Context is critical to a sound soteriology. Did God in the OT give the Jews a new heart and spirit in them or was that a NT fulfillment at Pentecost ? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 2, 2022 6:26:31 GMT -8
John has the same order in in his opening of the gospel and in his purpose statement for writing his gospel. John 1:12-13“Yet to all who did receive him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God— children born not of natural descent, nor of human decision or a husband’s will, but born of God. Same order as above receive, believe, call on Him then the new birth follows. See also John 5:24;40
Hmmm.... You just said "receive" comes first. That would mean regeneration (the receiving of God inside you) comes first. Do you think John is speaking about the receiving of information? Do you think John is talking about works of the flesh, the mere cognitive receipt of information pertaining God, the Messiah, and salvation from sin? What in that passage would lead you to that interpretation?  The verse explicitly states this right to sonship has NOTHING to do with natural descent, human decision, or a husband's will. It explicitly couches the right to become a child of Godin God's will, not the human's. Notice also that John does not specific the new birth. What he specifies is the RIGHT to become children, not that they actually are God's children. Furthermore, John could well be writing of a set of correlates, not a sequence of causal conditions. John does not say "receiving causes belief" or "believing causes a new birth." ALL of that is stuff being read into the text it does not actually state. Not only are a sequence and a causality being assumed but we should understand there are many things not mentioned; the verse is not exhaustive. Maybe regeneration isn't synonymous with "receive" and it has been left out of John's comment in its entirety. Perhaps the biggest problem, however, is the fact this verse is being proof-texted. It has been removed from its contexts and made to say something the whole of scripture doesn't support. In other words, this op is playing very fast and loose with God's word. Just as the Ezekiel text is written/spoken to a covenant people, so too is John's gospel. We wouldn't ordinarily say this about any of the gospels, especially since they were written so far after Calvary, but John's gospel is unique in this way. John is the most Jewish of the Gospel and epistolary writers. His Revelation contains more than 340 Old Testament references. We KNOW John was directing his gospel specifically to Jews because He quote the Jewish Philosopher Philo in his preamble and does so specifically to refute the Hellenism that had permeated Judaism during the intertestamental period. Throughout John's gospel he's quite harsh with the Jews. His constant Jewish referencing, his repudiation of Hellenistic Judaism, his contempt as a Jew for old-school Judaism would have been lost on first century pagans - especially atheists. John is writing as a Christian, a Jewish convert to Christianity, about Jews who were people living in a God-initiated covenant relationship they weren't asked to join beforehand. There was no cognitive receipt of information prior to joining the covenant. Their belief was immaterial, but the fact remains they were already people who believed in Giod, believed in a coming Messiah, and believed in sin. They were not atheists. But most significant to the argument this op attempts is this: There isn't a single example in the entirety of scripture of an atheist ever receivng the God in whom he does not believe for a salvation he doesn't believe is necessary, from something called "sin" he doesn't believe exists. The reason this is important is because the interpretation given in this op is one that exists without a single precedent in the entirety of scripture. Conversely, in every single example in which a person does receive, believe, and get saved there is ALWAYS God working in that individual's life for the very purpose of their salvation. In many of the examples the scriptures explicitly assign causality to God but not a single explicitly assigns any causality to the sinner's flesh. " Sinner's flesh" ? Yep. Remember: This op argues faith precedes regeneration. That necessarily means all this unregenerate sinner has is his flesh. He does not have the Spirit by which he might know, understand, or believe the things of the Spirit. All he has is his flesh AND it is sinful flesh because he since he's not yet regenerate, he's still living in the sinful state. So the very essence of the synergist soteriology is that sinfully fleshly belief is necessary for salvation  . So..... Even if we were to read this passage as written and assign it sequence and cause, we'd have to admit receipt comes first and the receipt is not tied to fleshly sinful intellect or human will but the will of God. Regeneration precedes faith. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 2, 2022 6:32:16 GMT -8
...............................When you find Ezekiel speaking to a bunch of atheists out of the blue and in a manner where His appearance is not forcefully persuasive then you might have grounds for faith before regeneration but even then I'd question whether this faith was mere intellectual assent or an entirely new circumcised heart of flesh. For future reference: It is ALWAYS and EVERYWHERE inappropriate to take passages written be a covenant person, to covenant people, ABOUT covenant people and treat the passage as if it applies to non-covenant people. Context is critical to a sound soteriology. Did God in the OT give the Jews a new heart and spirit in them or was that a NT fulfillment at Pentecost? Neither. The question itself indicates either an unintended mistake or a lack of understanding salvation, but it's also not a question directly related to this op or my op reply. I was simply remarking about my likely incredulity atheists can evidence the salvific heart through fleshly thought and will. Is an off-topic digression from this op desired? How about we stick to the verses cited in this op and not move away from them until they have been thoroughly addressed? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 2, 2022 6:42:36 GMT -8
John 20:31“But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name. Once again the order is consistent with the OT- belief/repentance precedes life. No, once again things are being read into the text that aren't actually stated. Once again I point out two very relevant and undeniable facts of context. John was writing to Jews. John was writing to Jews already living in a God-initiated covenant relationships the Jews weren't asked to join. We read this gospel 2000 years later and think it was written to everyone but that's incorrect. Even if John's intended audience was everyone living in his era the vast overwhelming majority of them were people who believed in some god. They weren't atheists. A belief in God and a belief in the possibility of a (works based) better life on the other side of the grave was commonplace in John's day. Therefore, the "believe" of which John speaks must be some other belief. It can't be a belief in God because they already did that and were not saved. It can't be a belief in a Messiah because they already did that, too. It can't be a belief in sin and the need for some kind of redress of sin because they already believed that, too. In other words, John was telling already believing people to believe, and to believe in a somehow different manner that he does not specify. But notice something else because John 20:31 is interpreted to mean, " belief/repentance precedes life," but there is no mention of repentance in verse 31. So...... while in this specific case I cannot say regeneration is evidenced, neither can anyone else. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 2, 2022 7:11:31 GMT -8
Romans 10:8-13But what does it say? “The word is near you; it is in your mouth and in your heart,” that is, the message concerning faith that we proclaim: 9 If you declare with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. 10 For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you profess your faith and are saved. 11 As Scripture says, “Anyone who believes in him will never be put to shame.” 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.” Again above we see its hearing the gospel, believing the message , confessing then calling upon the Lord results in salvation.
Acts tells us the same order in Acts 11:18- "So then, God has granted even the Gentiles repentance unto life.” Repent precedes life.
Paul confirms the order in Ephesians below as well. Hearing and believing precedes the Holy Spirit that we were sealed with not before belief. Here again the author is writing to people already living in a covenant relationship with God. The chief difference between the previously quoted verses and this Romans 10 passage is that Paul is writing those already living in the Christ-covenant relationship, and there's not a single word about their pre-saved state. Paul is in fact referencing the Old Testament and applying it salvifically to the new covenant in Christ. Let me also observe before I get too far in appraising the op's use of this text there are no sequential or causal relationships explicitly established between regeneration and belief in this passage. The op has assumed them, not proven them. It has ignored the fact the audience is already saved, assumed a causal relationship where none is stated, and ignored some important details indicating contradictory liberties were taken with the text. Notice Paul uses the phrase " the message concerning faith." What does he say about this " message concerning faith"? He plainly, explicitly states it was already in their mouth and heart. It is near them, but the nearness is not external; IT IS INTERNAL!!!!! Regeneration precedes faith. The angel is in the details. Notice in verse 9 he is telling his already-saved readers they will be saved. What could that mean for the already-saved to be saved in the future? What it CANNOT possibly mean is they are atheists being saved from sin for the first time. That would be gross and egregious misreading of the text. To whom is Paul writing? He tells us at the opening of his letter. He is writing explicitly to those who are loved by God and called to be saints. They are not non-believers. So verse 9 must be read to say when an already-believing saved person declares with his moutn, :Jesus is Lord," he or she must believe it in his heart and God will raise him from the dead. This is about the pending resurrection, not conversion. These are already regenerate believers to whom and about whom Paul is writing. As it pertains to this audience...... ...regeneration precedes faith. In verse 10 Paul says it is with the heart (not the mind) that a person believes. Are we to read Paul to say the heart of stone can believe salvifically? Are we to read Paul to say the redeemed heart can believe salvifically? How about the circumcised heart? Might that be the heart to which Paul is appealing? Or maybe Paul is referencing the heart of flesh God gives the person He saves. We'd need other scripture to help us better understand Paul's use of "heart" instead of "mind" and this op does not do that. What we do know is there is no prior basis in the whole of scripture for the sinful heart of stone to believe, especially not in any person who denies the existence of God, the existence of a Messiah, the existence of sin, and their need for release from the latter. Such a thing simply does not exist in the Bible so it must be excluded as a possible rendering of the Romans text. If we assume the promised heart of flesh is the heart to which Paul is referring, then that heart is a gift from God and it is NOT predicated upon belief, according to Ezekiel. Ezekiel 36:22-28 22...This is what the Lord GOD says: “It is not for your sake, house of Israel, that I am about to act, but for My holy name, which you have profaned among the nations where you went. 23And I will vindicate the holiness of My great name which has been profaned among the nations, which you have profaned among them. Then the nations will know that I am the LORD,” declares the Lord GOD, “when I show Myself holy among you in their sight. 24For I will take you from the nations, and gather you from all the lands; and I will bring you into your own land. 25Then I will sprinkle clean water on you, and you will be clean; I will cleanse you from all your filthiness and from all your idols. 26Moreover, I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit within you; and I will remove the heart of stone from your flesh and give you a heart of flesh. 27And I will put My Spirit within you and bring it about that you walk in My statutes, and are careful and follow My ordinances. 28And you will live in the land that I gave to your forefathers; so you will be My people, and I will be your God. If that is Paul's reference then regeneration precedes faith and ALL of it is gifted by God apart from the sinner's fleshly volition. Look at all God does in that text. I won't dive into the New Testament commentary on this passage but every bit of it is found in the New Testament. It is ALL God doing X, God doing Y, God doing it all and none of it dependent upon anything other than the covenant relationship God established with them without asking any of them. The Ezekiel generation hadn't even been born when this was decided. Notice God does this in spite of the fact they had profaned His name. If this is atext Paul is referencing then..... Regeneration precedes faith. |
|
|
|
Post by civic on Sept 2, 2022 7:27:36 GMT -8
I will check in later have to take my wife to a doctors appt.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 2, 2022 8:15:28 GMT -8
Ephesians 1:13“And you also were included in Christ when you heard the message of truth, the gospel of your salvation. When you believed, you were marked in him with a seal, the promised Holy Spirit James and Peter have the same exact order in James 1:18 , 1 Peter 1:23.
See how scripture is consistent when you do not read your doctrine into it but read it objectively, without bias ? conclusion: as we read in these SALVIFIC passages there is a consistent order. 1- hearing the word, the gospel 2- believing the gospel 3- receiving the gospel 4- calling upon the Lord 5- confessing Jesus is Lord 6- resulting in the new birth, born of God, salvation, eternal life The Biblical Order Salutis Summary of The Biblical order- notice where new life, regeneration is on the list from Scripture. 1- the preaching of the gospel- Rom 10 2- the hearing of the gospel- Rom 10 3- belief in the gospel- John 1:12 4- receiving the gospel- John 1:12 5- repentance Luke 5:32 6- the new birth that results in #7 7- salvation, eternal life- John 1:13 8- Justification- Rom 8:30 9- Sanctification- Rom 8 10- Glorification Rom 8:30 hope this helps !!! Who is the "you" in this passage? Isn't the "you" the saints in Rome? Isn't it already regenerate and redeemed believers, and NOT non-believers? Definitely not atheists. I'm not sure how much I need to comment on this particular selection and I'm a little perplexed this passage was selected to prove this op's position because the opening words of the first verse quoted plainly state they'd already been included in Christ when they heard the word. Regeneration precedes hearing. The order of this text is Inclusion with Christ, hearing, belief, marking/sealing with the Holy Spirit. Why did is included in Christ left out of this list? It's plainly there in the text for all to see. Why doesn't the list of this op reading as follows: 1- inclusion in Christ2- hearing the word, the gospel 3- believing the gospel 4- receiving the gospel 5- calling upon the Lord 6- confessing Jesus is Lord 7- resulting in the new birth, born of God, salvation, eternal life That is the order clearly stated in the text! I'm not going to waste my time on the second list because it's just dross. There's no mention of calling or choosing, no mention of grace, no mention of the many places scripture tells us knowledge is a gift from God, hearing is a gift from God, understanding is a gift from God. No mention of predestination, adoption, or any number of other things that accompany our salvation. It is a woefully incomplete list. A list so selective and so incomplete that it speaks of wanton bias. It would take a separate thread of many posts to address all the problems inherent in that second list. I've addressed all the scriptures cited in this op. I have shown how they don't actually state " regeneration follows faith," that interpretation is in all cases a matter of inferential reading that neglects specifics of the texts themselves, and there are either an alternative reading possible or information in the text itself that precludes the inferential reading of " regeneration follows faith." The chief flaw is the failure to consider whole scripture and the context of the covenant relationship that exists in every single one of those passages. In closing, I will also offer this observation: everything in this op is sinner-centric, not God-centric. Notice I did not say, "human-centric." I did not say human-centric because the problem of sin is not simply human-centric; it is sinfully-human-centric. God is not saving humans who know nothing of sin. Every single individual God saves is someone who is dead in sin. Every single one of them is dead in transgression, lacking in righteousness, and faithless. They are lacking in faith and faithfulness. The two are not the same. According to Ephesians 2, BOTH grace AND faith are gifts of God and not of ourselves. Therefore, every Christian should read every mention of "faith" in the Bible as something gifted in some way to some degree by God and God alone. The sinful human, the sin-enslaved and sinfully-dead human does not have the Spirit of God. That means every single choice that individual might ever make is always and only, solely, a choice of sinful flesh. Every thought, no matter how moral, true, or correct, is solely a thought of the flesh and NEVER a thought of the Spirit. The same applies to every act of the sinner. God gives the Spirit. He gives the Spirit by grace. So let's jump ahead because we all know what's going to follow. Some folks are going to resort to ad hominem. They'll all be reported and then ignored. The other group of synergists will appeal to things like God reserving some of His poer or submitting Himself to the human's choice but 1) it;s not merely a human's choice, it is a sinner's choice to which they are saying God submitted or withheld Himself, and 2) there is no such scripture. That position, like the one asserted in this op is always and everywhere solely one of inference. In other words, the synergist position is always and only a position solely of inference and never something explicitly stated in scripture. Furthermore, as we've seen in this thread the inferences aren't exegetic inferences; they are eisegetic inferences. They aren't inferences built on things explicitly stated. They are inferences built on other inferences. They seem reasonable because of our ordinary human experience but the Bible is not a book of psychology. It is not human-centric. The Bible, from beginning to end is first and foremost about God and the work He has done through His Son Jesus, not humans, and most definitely about any salvific merit of a sinful human. Salvation is Christ-centric, not sin-centric. On every single occasion where the sinner's will, belief, choice, or act is asserted as a predicate to becoming saved that is sin-centrism. Sin is the thing from which we are being saved! God is not asking anyone to will or act from their sinful self to be saved from their sinful self. The only thing we bring to our salvation is the sin from which we are being saved. This will all boil down to a single simply truth. Either an example of an atheist choosing the God in whom he does not believe can be provided or it can't. Either I (and the lurkers  ) can be provided just one single explicit example of scripture attributing the sinner's volition as a causal predicate, or not. I cannot provide a scripture that explicitly states, "regeneration precedes faith," any more than the synergist can provide an explicit statement, "regeneration follows faith," but I can provide a pile of scripture where scripture does explicitly attribute direct causality by God to a person's salvation. I can establish an explicit pattern of explicitly stated divine causality in our conversion from life to death and the process of salvation. I can also provide a list of scripture explicitly assigning the matter of belief to those already regenerate and saved (one much longer than those already established in my replies to this op). The saints in the epistolary are repeatedly to told to believe, to have faith, to be faithful, and to do all three in order to be saved. Unsaved people are told to do this, too, BUT ALL OF THEM ARE PEOPLE WHO ALREADY BELIEVE GOD EXISTS! There are very few atheists in the Bible. The Bible calls them fools. Any soteriology that does not apply to atheists has an unacceptable hole in it. It is incomplete and thereby incorrect. (my apologies for the length) |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 2, 2022 8:19:55 GMT -8
Ephesians 1:13“And you also were included in Christ when you heard the message of truth, the gospel of your salvation. When you believed, you were marked in him with a seal, the promised Holy Spirit James and Peter have the same exact order in James 1:18 , 1 Peter 1:23.
See how scripture is consistent when you do not read your doctrine into it but read it objectively, without bias ?!! See how inconsistent due to its bias it is to leaves out the fact those hearing the message of truth were included in Christ when they heard? The synergist reads that clause to say their hearing is what made them included but that's not what the text actually states. What the text actually states is their inclusion and their hearing were co-occurring. They were also included when they heard. The moment the synergist predicates belief on hearing he must also predicate inclusion in order to be consistent. This op completely ignores the inclusion. |
|
|
|
Post by rockson on Sept 2, 2022 12:20:19 GMT -8
So what? So they were chosen but they always had the capacity to disobey and not be saved. Your argument is they were of a chosen nation therefore they had a guarantee. Are you going to say in Numbers 16:31 where God had the Earth open up and swallow up Korah and the 250 others that they all made heaven their home and were saved? You almost make it seem what the Jews thought that their physical descendancy guaranteed them something. I shouldn't even have to quote the scripture here in which Jesus said NO way! It seems if they were chosen in the way that you teach it that means they don't have an option of going to hell. What they were chosen for as a nation was to fulfill a certain destiny or service but even with that they weren't forced to. At one point God wanted to destroy the whole nation and Moses interceded and God yielded to Moses prayers. If they were chosen in such a way as you think God would never have expressed an inclination to do this...why? Because well....THEY WERE CHOSEN...so they must not have had any choice to disobey. They did however.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 2, 2022 18:20:08 GMT -8
So what? So they were chosen but they always had the capacity to disobey and not be saved. Your argument is they were of a chosen nation therefore they had a guarantee. No, that's not my argument. Read it again. |
|
|
|
Post by TibiasDad on Sept 3, 2022 18:12:32 GMT -8
Ezekiel 18:30-32“Therefore, you Israelites, I will judge each of you according to your own ways, declares the Sovereign LORD. Repent! Turn away from all your offenses; then sin will not be your downfall. Rid yourselves of all the offenses you have committed, and get a new heart and a new spirit. Why will you die, people of Israel? For I take no pleasure in the death of anyone, declares the Sovereign LORD. Repent and live!Notice what comes first 1- Repent , turn away from sin 2- the after you repent you get a new heart/spirit ( calvinism- regeneration, new life) 3- repent then you live, have life- ie new heart, spirit. Several things were left out. The most important condition relevant to soteriology is the fact Ezekiel's audience were already living in a covenant relationship with God. These aren't atheists living outside of a covenant relationship. Here in Ezekiel God is speaking to those He chose before they even knew they were being chosen, and they were chosen without being asked or invited. They weren't given an option - any choice - until long after they'd been brought into that covenant relationship that was initiated and sustained solely by God. None of them were asked to repent until AFTER that covenant relationship had been well established. Christological salvation is a covenant relationship. Regeneration precedes faith. The covenant is a national/corporate covenant not an individual covenant. Even in the NT, is is with "spiritual Israel", and those who believe in what God says are given the right to be a part of that covenant nation. The group of individuals that are sinning individually need to repent individually to be included individually in the corporate covenant. Secondly, the covenant is conditional! God keeps his promises to those who believe. These aren't atheists living outside of a covenant relationship.It doesn't matter whether it is an atheist or one who is simply disobedient! They are not believing, and thus, not behaving as believers. Again, to be in covenant you must be believing. They weren't given an option - any choice - until long after they'd been brought into that covenant relationship that was initiated and sustained solely by God.
Again, those who do not believe are not ever given the blessings of the covenant! Those who were delivered from Egypt were part of the covenant, but only those who believed, Joshua and Caleb, made it to the promise land. Doug |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 4, 2022 5:40:18 GMT -8
Several things were left out. The most important condition relevant to soteriology is the fact Ezekiel's audience were already living in a covenant relationship with God. These aren't atheists living outside of a covenant relationship. Here in Ezekiel God is speaking to those He chose before they even knew they were being chosen, and they were chosen without being asked or invited. They weren't given an option - any choice - until long after they'd been brought into that covenant relationship that was initiated and sustained solely by God. None of them were asked to repent until AFTER that covenant relationship had been well established. Christological salvation is a covenant relationship. Regeneration precedes faith. The covenant is a national/corporate covenant not an individual covenant. Doug Tell that to Noah and Abraham. The Joshua text used to defend this op was a nationally applicable covenant but that was because the covenant promise made to the individual Abraham was being realized. But your point is also irrelevant to mine. The covenants are initiated by God. The covenants are initiated by God without anyone knowing what he was doing until He'd dine it. The covenants were initiated by God leading to His choosing the individual or the nation without telling them or asking them beforehand. Their being asked - which is what this op tried to leverage - did not occur until after the covenant had been initiated and established, until after they (the individual or the group) been brought into the covenant without being asked, until after they'd learned the covenant was established. Your comments do not address any of that. When God explained His covenant He did so in incremental manner and the new revelation tells us all those covenants were about Christ and the covenant we have by grace through faith in him. God told Abraham he would bear a seed become the father of many nations (not one), and the New Testament makes it clear the seed is singular and the seed is Jesus (Gal. 3:16-29) and the nations are converts to Christ both Jewish and Gentile. Long before He spoke through Joshua, God told His audience He would make them a priestly kingdom, a nation of priests (Ex. 19:6). He did not ask them; He told them. The New Testament tells us the regenerate convert is the royal priesthood member of God's holy nation (1 Pet. 2:9; Rev. 5:10). Neither the earlier post defending this op, nor the one to which I now reply, addresses any of that. The overarching point is this: when using the Old Testament to develop, assert, or defend soteriology use the Old Testament in its entirety, not selected portions used selectively for eisegetic purpose. When the whole of the New Testament is used, it is easily observed to assert a monergistic soteriology, not a synergistic one. The only synergy in the OT comes after the covenant(s) is established. Joshua 24 is an example of that fact. And the fact of whole scripture is this: Jesus would have come even if God saved only one person. |
|
The verse explicitly states this right to sonship has NOTHING to do with natural descent, human decision, or a husband's will. It explicitly couches the right to become a child of Godin God's will, not the human's. 
. 
) can be provided just one single explicit example of scripture attributing the sinner's volition as a causal predicate, or not. I cannot provide a scripture that explicitly states, "regeneration precedes faith," any more than the synergist can provide an explicit statement, "regeneration follows faith," but I can provide a pile of scripture where scripture does explicitly attribute direct causality by God to a person's salvation. I can establish an explicit pattern of explicitly stated divine causality in our conversion from life to death and the process of salvation. I can also provide a list of scripture explicitly assigning the matter of belief to those already regenerate and saved (one much longer than those already established in my replies to this op). The saints in the epistolary are repeatedly to told to believe, to have faith, to be faithful, and to do all three in order to be saved. Unsaved people are told to do this, too, BUT ALL OF THEM ARE PEOPLE WHO ALREADY BELIEVE GOD EXISTS! There are very few atheists in the Bible. The Bible calls them fools. 
