Results 1 - 6 of 6
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | LEFT BEHIND? | Bible general Archive 1 | EdB | 60056 | ||
John I know I'm going to hate myself for this but... I have said it before and I will say it again, the wonder and miracle of salvation is still a mystery to me. I have seen people sit under the most convicting/salvation oriented message and walk out as if nothing happened. Then I have seen those same people hear a message on "This is the day the Lord has made and I will rejoice and be glad in it." And they instantly give their hearts to the Lord. Your question: Now I know that many Christians believe that the term "foreknew" means that God, knowing the future, knows who will choose Christ and who will not. But this interpretation is in direct opposition to 1 Cor 2:14 cited above. Is it not? 1 Cor. 2:14 But a natural man does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually appraised. No John it does not. I believe God gives each man and woman this opportunity or spiritual awareness at least once in his or her life. I think what that person then does at that moment determines whether they then accept Jesus as Lord and Savior or not. As I said this is all a mystery to me. I know you believe some are elected or predestined to salvation but then one also has to believe there are those born that are elected or predestined to damnation. I’m trying to be very careful here, but that to human understanding presents God as less than just. EdB |
||||||
2 | LEFT BEHIND? | Bible general Archive 1 | John Reformed | 60065 | ||
May the Good Lord bless you Ed, You wrote: "No John it does not. I believe God gives each man and woman this opportunity or spiritual awareness at least once in his or her life. I think what that person then does at that moment determines whether they then accept Jesus as Lord and Savior or not. As I said this is all a mystery to me." The problem is, and I know you agree, there is no teaching in Scripture that will support the idea that carnal people experience moments of spiritual understanding whereby they may take advantage of, or reject, Jesus as Lord and Saviour. Your statement above is scripturaly unsupportable. 1 Cor 2: 14 as well as many other verses teach just the opposite. A few verses later Paul says: 1 Cor 1:18 "For the word of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God." Notice the tense of the verbs perish and save. They indicate that there are those who are in the process of "perishing" and others who are in the process of being "saved". I understand the difficulty that those who disagree (as I did at one time) have with the doctrine of Election. They feel it makes God to appear unjust. But that is not the case. We all fell in Adam, did we not? We are all equally guilty and deserving of eternal damnation. Would it have been unjust for God to save none? No! It would have been just. Is it then unjust for Him to extend mercy to some and not others? Afterall, He is King and judge over all and is free to do as He wishes (See Romans 9). He is the Potter and we are the clay. In His wisdom He has permitted the reprobate to continue to do what they want, which is to sin and rebel against Him. He does not force them to sin, it is the nature of fallen man to be wicked. Others He mercifully chose for Himself and paid a tremendous price for their salvation. Remember, God owed none of us anything. The mystery of election is why did God save anyone, especiallly me! Brother Ed, can you offer any scripture to support your contention that their is no contradiction between 1 Cor 2:14 and Rom 8:29,30 if one adheres to "freewillism"? John |
||||||
3 | LEFT BEHIND? | Bible general Archive 1 | Morant61 | 60075 | ||
Greetings John! Do you mind if I take a stab at your last question? 1 Cor. 2:14 does not specify how one receives the Spirit of God. It simply states the fact that those who do not have the Spirit of God cannot and will not understand God's wisdom. Those to whom Paul was writing also did not understand the wisdom of God until they received the Holy Spirit (v. 12). So, I would make the case that 1 Cor. 2:14 is not saying that an unregenerate person cannot be convicted or brought to repentance by the Holy Spirit, but that while they are unregenerate they cannot understand the Wisdom of God. Sidenote: The best view I have heard on Rom. 8:29 is that the term 'foreknown' refers to the nation of Israel. This term is only used twice in all of Scripture. Both times it is found in Romans and the second occurance is clearly a reference to Israel (Rom. 11:2). Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
4 | LEFT BEHIND? | Bible general Archive 1 | John Reformed | 60081 | ||
Hi Tim, I have a problem with your conclusion of 1 Cor 2:14. Paul is telling the saints at Corinth that the natural man (the one who has the spirit of the world) cannot understand or appraise spiritual things. The saints can because they have the mind of Christ. Your Conclusion was: "So, I would make the case that 1 Cor. 2:14 is not saying that an unregenerate person cannot be convicted or brought to repentance by the Holy Spirit, but that while they are unregenerate they cannot understand the Wisdom of God". In a salvific sense, to have the Spirit of God is to be regenerate! To have been born again...A new creature possesing the mind of Christ. This is why I contend that the act of regeneration is the work of the Spirit alone. Until one recieves the Spirit one cannot and willnot understand spiritual things. To say that regeneration depends upon the free will of the man is to say that some men are better or smarter or more spiritual than other men. Does God find faith in some but not in others? Of course not all are equally destitute of things pertaining unto salvation. Salvation is of the Lord! As to your side note: It seems to me to be an unwarrented imposition of one's tradition upon what is a plain teaching. I cannot accept your view on it. Rom 11:2 is not speaking of the nation of Israel but to the 7,000 men who have not bowed the knee to Baal. Those who He foreknew, His Elect. Your Brother, John |
||||||
5 | LEFT BEHIND? | Bible general Archive 1 | Morant61 | 60087 | ||
Greetings John! Allow me to touch upon both passages! 1) 1 Cor. 2:14: I think this is a good example of where you are hearing something that the other camp is not actually saying. Arminians do not believe that regeneration depends upon the will of man. Arminians believe that atonement was made for all men on the cross. Thus, it is a finished act. The only role that man's will has to play in salvation is whether or not to accept or reject the gift of salvation. I realize we will probably never see this passage the same, I just wanted to point out that it does not say that those who do not have the Spirit of God can never have the Spirit of God. It only says that those who do not have the Spirit cannot understand God's wisdom. The Corinthians were in the same position prior to their reception of the Holy Spirit, but that changed when they received the Spirit of God. Note also that v. 12 says that they had received the Spirit of God. 'Received' is active in voice, not passive. So, if prior to receiving the Holy Spirit, one cannot 'respond' to God's grace. How did the Corinthians receive God's Spirit? If unconditional election were true, one would expect this passage to say that they were 'given' or passively 'received' the Spirit, not that they actively 'received' the Spirit. The result of their receiving the Holy Spirit (v. 12) was that they could understand the wisdom of God, but they had to receive the Spirit first. 2) Rom. 11:2 I do not to correct a point in my previous post. The word 'foreknow' is only used twice in Paul's writings, but five times in all. Sorry! :-) It is obviously your right to not agree with my position my friend. :-) However, I would hesitate to call it an 'unwarrented imposition'. Let's look at the flow of the passage. a) Rom. 10:21 is speaking of the nation of Israel. They are described as "disobedient and obstinate people" in contrast to the Gentiles who had accepted the message. b) Rom. 11:1 immediately asks, "Did God reject His people"? Which people had just been mentioned? Israel. c) Rom. 11:1 answers Paul's question by pointing out that he himself is an Israelite. d) Rom. 11:2 refers to "His people" again. Which people? The same as mentioned in 10:21 and 11:1 - Israel. e) Rom. 11:2-6 then goes on to illustrate from Elijah's time that there was always a remnant of believers even when most had turned their backs on God. So too now, there is a remnant of grace. f) Rom. 11:7-10 then addresses the question of the status of those (the bulk of Israel) who had not obtained grace. They have been hardened and are contrasted with the elect. g) Rom. 11:11-12 then makes the case that they have been hardened that the Gentiles might be saved. h) However, Rom. 11:13-32 goes on to make the case that those who have been hardened can be grafted in again, if they do not continue in their unbelief. So, has God rejected Israel (His people whom He has foreknown)? From the context of the passage, the answer is no. So, I would not call this an 'unwarrented imposition', since the only people mentioned in the context prior to v. 2 is the nation of Israel! ;-) Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
6 | LEFT BEHIND? | Bible general Archive 1 | John Reformed | 60096 | ||
Dear Tim, "Arminians do not believe that regeneration depends upon the will of man. Arminians believe that atonement was made for all men on the cross. Thus, it is a finished act. The only role that man's will has to play in salvation is whether or not to accept or reject the gift of salvation." This appears to me to be a difference without a distinction. You say that the only role that man plays is acceptence or rejection of the gift of salvation. It is my understanding that Arminians believe that acceptence preceeds regeneration. If this is true, how then is regeneration not dependent on the will of man! The atonement makes regeneration possible. No atonement...no salvation, therefore no regeneration. Your 2nd point was: "I just wanted to point out that it does not say that those who do not have the Spirit of God can never have the Spirit of God. It only says that those who do not have the Spirit cannot understand God's wisdom." You are arguing a point I never made. My point is that unless the Holy Spirit regenerates a person, that person will not be able to appraise spiritual things. That being the case he will view the gospel as foolishness. It does not mean that they can never have the Spirit, only that until they do they will not understand or recieve spiritual things! You wrote: 'Received' is active in voice, not passive. Well. one can recieve a blow to the head without any activity on his part, can't he? You concluded with: "So, if prior to receiving the Holy Spirit, one cannot 'respond' to God's grace. How did the Corinthians receive God's Spirit? " I do not believe that regeneration requires any act on mans part prior to it's manifestation. As I stated elsewhere on this thread: Regeneration is the sole work of God. Man's response follows as he experieces the gifts of repentance and faith which accompany his new birth. This arguement would also make your final paragraph on the topic mute. Tim, I do enjoy discussing the Word with you and even though we do not see eye to eye, for me it's always a learning experience. I hope to address Romans in a later post. Your Brother John |
||||||