Mark

I will work backwards.

Kay,

I totally agree that God’s covenant’s have always been covenants of grace. God chose Abraham first. God chose Israel from amongst the nations. God chose those who were to be in the new covenant. You are right that our works flow out from our salvation. I’m not sure which i my comments made you believe i meant something else.

But isn’t it therefore intriguing that Cheryl believes that poeple must be God fearers BEFORE they can be saved. That doesn’t seem to fit with the pattern you outlined Kay. It seems to me that CHeryl thinks we must do something (or at least have a certain quality) before we are allowed to be saved. Maybe i haven’t understood properly- i dunno. BUt i guess it essentially changes the nature of evangelism doesn’t it- we need to make people fear God first!

Cheryl,

Just a quick point to help you understand what i mean. I am not saying that those who are born again do not receive salvation and eternal life. Being born again is part of the process of salvation. No one will be born again yet reject salvation. Anyone who is born again is given a new heart. their eyes are open, they accept Jesus as saviour and Lord. I think we would agree on that, and i equally agree with the passages you quoted from Peter- i’m not denying any of that.

The difference between us is you think people can accept the message of salvation while dead in sin. You base this on the fact that Jesus told the pharisee’s that they did ‘good’ things.

I do not think people can accept the message while dead in sins. They need the work of the Spirit to open their eyes to the message. Although the pharisee’s did ‘good’ things that has nothing to do with salvation. Any ‘good’ in this world is the common grace of God poured out on believers and non-believers, but this does not mean that they can seek or find God while still dead in sin. There nature is still corrupt.

From what i can tell you believe unregenrate man has the ability to seek God. I do not. I believe only regenerate man has the ability to seek God. This seems to be our difference. When regeneration occurs! (and perhaps what regeneration means)

Cheryl, i would love to talk more with you about Job and other OT saints. I think that is a very important point. Can you answer a few brief questions relating to Job- why was he righteous? Or what do you believe made God call him righteous? Was it because he feared God?

Finally one last question regarding this statement
“He was one of those who belonged to the Father and the Father promised those who fear Him, that He would bring them to the covenant.”

Are you saying that God bringing people to salvation or the new covenant is dependent upon them first fearing Him?

Kay,

Does not the Bible say that the only way we can call Jesus Lord is by the Spirit? We are totally depraved, sinful creatures, deserving of wrath and punishment UNTIL- God in his mercy makes us new. If i was still totally depraved i would not be able to do that- totally depraved people do not care nor seek for God-they reject Him. Regenerate, forgiven, justified people call Jesus Lord because they are a new creation, they are no longer dead in their sins.
Hope this helps.

Kay,

It seems you do not understand total depravity nor regeneration. Our depravity is a big concept and too detailed for me to explicitly cover in a small post. I suggest you read Calvin’s first two or three chapters in book 2 of the Institutes. Then once you actually understand was is depraved we can discuss further. Until you actually understand it, what i say will be useless.

You ought to be very careful how you wish to push free-will. Since this is not even a biblical concept we should be wary. Like i said earlier, the faith we have in Jesus is very much our decision and choice to make, yet without being regenerate will we never make it, therefore we need God to intervene to make us new.

Kay, may i ask you the same question i have asked Cheryl, but have yet to get a reply. How do you pray for non-christians? If it is not God who opens their eyes and soften their hearts what do you pray for? You see when we pray for people we don’t expect them to ‘choose’ on their own do we? We ask God to help them, yet when i write that here it seems radical to people. This is where people’s theology never matches with their Christian walk.

Cheryl has said that God will draw every single person to himself, so surely we don’t need to pray for that right? Cheryl thinks that saving faith is not the gift of God, so surely we don’t need to pray for God to give them that right? So what do we pray for? Really we are not expecting God to do anything in these people! They have prevenient grace- now it’s up to them right! Why bother praying at all? After all they are only the elect because God foreknew what they would choose- he didn’t play a part. I’ll leave that for you to answer. And please do read Calvin if you can, that way we will at least be somewhere closer to being able to communicate better.

Maybe also you can tell me why you are so confident in your faith. What gives you assurance

Greg,

I must admit that my Lutheran knowledge is lacking. I guess you still hold to Luther reclaiming justification by faith alone. Perhaps you still are a Lutheran underneath.

Can you explain why you reject the doctrine of Original Sin. You talked about the whole counsel of God’s word, which I think is great so we don’t just pull texts that we like which cause contradictions. Do you believe that people are born sinless? Or at least without a sin nature?

I’m assuming you quoted that verse at me. That’s a big call mate! I hope your willing to back up your doctrinal beliefs. I look forward to hearing your response and seeing how it is you can reject such a big doctrine and yet still hold to Luther’s revival of the true gospel. I’m particularly interesting since I’m the one here trying to defend the orthodox position of the Church, and yet I’m the one labelled a Pharisee. Please respond giving a clear outline of your beliefs and the verses you believe support it.

I’m wondering Cheryl if we should continue this feed via email since the posts are getting ridiculously long and hard to engage with every aspect. Let me know

Sorry this attaches to the end of the other post

I disagree. I know I am one of God’s elect because everyday I wake up trusting in Jesus as my Lord. I rely on God’s faithfulness not my own assurance that I will believe to the end. God has promised that he will never let go of his sheep and I trust this. If I trust only in my own faith then I would be scared of my assurance. God is the one we can trust, he is the faithful one and he has promised to hold me. He has promised that the Holy Spirit is a deposit guaranteeing my eternal salvation. Calvinism gives assurance because we rely on God not ourselves to perservere. Again you misrepresent Calvin. Where does your security lay Cheryl?

Cheryl,

The kingdom of God/Heaven is the same thing, but just expressed differently, so although the term ‘heaven’ is used it is still the kingdom of God. And please don’t give the impression that I don’t believe the kingdom is not future. I have said it is, but it has also begun in Jesus first visit to earth. That is why in Jesus parables he talks about things growing, the mustard see growing into a tree. This has begun already has it not? Or are all Jesus parables only references on heaven? When John the Baptist said that the kingdom of heaven is at hand, what did he mean in your view? Obviously you don’t believe he was talking about Jesus. Here is another example
Mar 1:15 and saying, “The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent and believe in the gospel.”
And another
Mar 4:26 And he said, “The kingdom of God is as if a man should scatter seed on the ground.
Notice it doesn’t say ‘will’ be like. This is present tense. Again…
Mar 4:30 And he said, “With what can we compare the kingdom of God, or what parable shall we use for it?
If the kingdom is ONLY future, it doesn’t make sense. Jesus is describing it then and there to his hearers. What about this one
Mar 9:1 And he said to them, “Truly, I say to you, there are some standing here who will not taste death until they see the kingdom of God after it has come with power.”
This doesn’t make sense if the kingdom hasn’t begun yet. There must be people out there 2000years old hey?
Col 1:13 He has delivered us from the domain of darkness and transferred us to the kingdom of his beloved Son,
Col 1:14 in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins.
We are in God’s kingdom when we are justified. It has already begun, although we wait for it’s completion.

You see Cheryl, the kingdom like I have said has begun, but not yet complete- the now/not yet tension. I understand your insistance to say it is future because you need to see it that way to understand John 3 and regeneration.

‘In fact the terms “unregenerate” and “born-again” are opposites. They cannot exist together.”

I agree. An ungenerate person is one who is dead in sin. A regenerate person is one who has been born again. Your still looking at born again as only salvation, and this is where I think you are wrong.

“I wonder why you didn’t quote these verses? Is it because they are so obvious about a future judgment and a future entering into the kingdom that they cannot even be twisted to be about the here and the now?”

Wow, that’s a bit harsh isn’t it. You call me a brother aswell but say I twist the scriptures. Don’t criticise me when you do the same thing. NB. I have said all along that the kingdom is also future-please read me correctly. I disagree that it is ONLY future and was not inaugurated when Christ came.

“In fact everything about the “kingdom of heaven” is so obviously in the future and not in operation on the earth.”

I agree that the kingdom is heavenly not on earth. Maybe that is why you misunderstand me. If you think I am saying God’s kingdom is the earth, this is not what I believe. Let me try to say it plainly. God’s kingdom was inaugurated when Christ came, and will be fulfilled at his second coming. Everything in the Bible points to Christ, so when he came, God’s kingdom began. God conquered over sin and death and Satan then- his kingdom began, BUT it is still yet to be completely fulfilled. We live in the period beween the inauguration and the complete fulfilment.

“Now Mark, I have carefully gone through this piece by piece to show that the action of God which is the verb salvation is the “gift”. The rest only explains how the action is gifted to us “by grace” and “through faith”.

Cheryl, I disagree with your exegesis. Logically we must say then that ‘grace’ is not even a gift then. Is this what you believe? Do you believe that God does not bestow a gift of grace upon us. Is it just an abstract idea of God’s? Col 2:13 also talks about us being dead in our sins and uncircumcised sinful nature? If we are by nature because of our sinful nature passed down from Adam, dead in sin, how on earth can we possibly have the ability to have faith in God. It simply doesn’t make sense. We needed God to do something to make us not-dead. Why does Paul in 2 Thess thank God that their faith is growing if it is not God’s work?
2Th 1:3 We ought always to give thanks to God for you, brothers, as is right, because your faith is growing abundantly, and the love of every one of you for one another is increasing.
Is it God who increases our faith or is it us? Answer that for me at least.

“Mark, you must be very busy, because you are not taking the time to carefully read what I have written. I didn’t say that the faith outlined in Ephesians 2 is not for every believer. Instead it is 1 Cor. 12:9 where the faith listed as a gift is not given to every believer.”
I’m not so sure you were so clear about that one. Look what you wrote…”Salvation is the gift of God and the vehicle is by grace through faith. The faith that is listed as God’s gift is not given to all of the saved just as not all have the same gifts.”

You were clearly talking about Eph 2:8 in your first sentence, so why should I have assumed you switched in your second sentence. So what you are now saying is that the faith in Eph 2:8 is different to the gift of faith in 1 Cor 12. Maybe it was you who were not so clear, rather than me misreading you? Fair comment?

“Who is claiming that our faith is “without the help of God”? It isn’t me. We are required to believe, but God is the one who draws us so it is never without the help of God. When you say things like this, I wonder why you do this? Have you accepted a false view of non-Calvinism from those who wish to separate from their brothers and sisters in Christ?”

Ok I think I am getting closer to understanding your view…maybe! So God ‘draws’ everybody (however that works) and this is how God helps? But when the decision needs to be made then it is solely up to the person…correct? God does not help that person actually believe, he just draws them in however you understand that.
No I don’t know anyone who wants to separate Calvinists from non-calvinists. I don’t think that is anyone’s intention in our churches. I simply want to know the truth. I want to know that if the act of saving faith is not something God gives to us, how can we say that we are therefore not adding something of our own to salvation? I’m yet to here a convincing statement on it. I can’t see how God draws every single person to himself when clearly not everyone knows about Christianity. I can’t see how as sinful people with a dead corrupt nature we can be expect people to accept Christ unless he opens their eyes to the message.

“This is illogical. You are defining faith as having nothing at all to do with us.”

No, not at all, but I think we are at least getting to the heart of the matter- how free-choice and God’s sovereignty work together. Faith is our action, it has to be since people who don’t believe are condemned. However faith is also something God grants to us aswell. Same as repentance in 2 Tim 2. God requires us to repent yet he is the very one who grants it. Look here is a clear example from Scripture that shows what I mean. Think about Joseph- who was responsible for him being sold into slavery in Egypt…his brothers clearly. Yet what does Joseph say.
Gen 45:8 So it was not you who sent me here, but God. He has made me a father to Pharaoh, and lord of all his house and ruler over all the land of Egypt.

This is the tension in the Bible. We are responsible for our actions, yet at the same time God is at work aswell. It is wrong to go one way or the other. You can’t deny that God is involved in our saving faith, yet you can’t deny that we are the ones who make the decision. This is the tension. We believe because it is very much our decision to believe, yet we believe because it is very much God’s action to make us believe. This is where people stumble because they can’t handle it. But like I pointed out with Romans 9- it is not human will or exertion, but’s God’s mercy which saves us.

“This is where you are wrong because it is not “saving faith” that is the cause for boasting. It is “salvation” that could be a cause for boasting if one worked for it. But since we already defined saving faith as not a work and since there is nothing that one can do to earn salvation, your comments are illogical.”

I don’t think you can separate all these things all the time Cheryl. You seem to want to completely separate salvation from faith all the time. Eph 2:8-9 I don’t think allows for that. Sure we can boast if we work for our salvation, but surely there is room for boasting if I believe and you don’t, if faith isn’t a gift. There is heaps of room for boasting. The person who chose, made a better decision, they were wiser, understood more etc etc. This I reject. The verses do not lend themselves to such seperation like you have done. Salvation, grace, faith are all gifts, so that we may never boast of anything of ourselves.

I think you had a cheap shot a Piper there Cheryl. Any of us are vulnerable to pride not just Calvinists. I’m sure if you or I are ever in a position like Piper or anyone like that we would struggle. It is a good thing that Piper has realised this, he takes sin seriously and I praise God for that. Being a Calvinist does not negate nor increase one’s possibility of being proud- this is something we all struggle with. Maybe it is something even both of us should look at within ourselves.
But I reject that reformed theology increases people’s pride. That is just a cheap shot. It is illogical. If I believe that God’s elect are purely chosen by God’s choice and mercy (Rom 9) how can I boast- it has nothing to do with me. If however I believe that I am God’s elect because he foreknew what I would choose then I do have room to boast. Being God’s elect was dependent on something I did, something I chose not purely on the mercy and grace of God. I know which one I’d rather be on.

“I have done that because God has proven Himself faithful.”
So you chose God because he was faithful? Did you know he was faithful when you were converted or is that something you grew to understand? I sure didn’t know God was this great faithful God when I was converted. What if you wake up tomorrow and no longer believe God is faithful? What is stopping this from happening? Your faith or God’s faithfulness to you? There is too much reliance on myself in your view Cheryl for me to accept. Doesn’t Jesus say even if he raised a dead person people wouldn’t believe. What constitutes enough evidence to show God is faithful?

“But for Calvinists you can boast that God loves you and doesn’t love a lot of others – at least not with saving love. I can’t say that for God was willing to have saving love for all because He sent Jesus to die for all. You can look around and say that in a crowd of unbelievers that God loved me more than He loved them. I am special to Him for whatever reason. While you may not know the reason why He chose you, the fact that He chose you and you are one of the elite elect chose out of all humanity makes you have lots to boast amongst those that God doesn’t love. Don’t you see how that could cause many like Piper to be prideful?”

I don’t believe that God loves me more than others- reformed theology doesn’t believe that. We believe the Bible. God loves the world (3:16), he doesn’t take pleasure in the death of the wicked (Eze 18). But God also chose to save some and not others according to his pleasure and his will. It has nothing to do with us or that he loves us more. You are misrepresenting reformed theology saying those sorts of things. Perhaps you should read Calvin! Please don’t also describe Calvinists as some sort of ‘elite’- this is unhelpful. If anything Calvinists affirm the total depravity of ALL people. We all deserve hell and punishment for our sin. I would never boast about being God’s elect because I know I have no place for doing that, I never deserved to be saved in the first place.

1. “The Bible says that repentance is “granted” and God grants repentance to anyone who will fear Him. It is always conditional and it is always dependent on the faithfulness of God to make sure that no one who fears God is left without salvation.”
   This is interesting since you didn’t even deal with the verse I quoted. Let’s look at it
   2Ti 2:24 And the Lord’s servant must not be quarrelsome but kind to everyone, able to teach, patiently enduring evil,
   2Ti 2:25 correcting his opponents with gentleness. God may perhaps grant them repentance leading to a knowledge of the truth,
   2Ti 2:26 and they may come to their senses and escape from the snare of the devil, after being captured by him to do his will.

I can’t see here that repentance is conditional to those who fear God. In fact isn’t Paul urging Timothy to pray for these men who are described as ‘opponents’ (not God fearers) so that they may come to a knowledge of the ‘truth’. Doesn’t Paul also describe them as captured by the devil and doing the devils will. These people that Pual says to ask God to grant repentance, definitely do not sound like they fear God.

“Mark, why have you been deceived to believe that saving faith is a work in some people when the Scriptures always set faith in opposition to works? Somebody has twisted your head around so that you do not even seen how you flip flop back and forth. “saving faith is a work” and “no, saving faith is not a work”. How could anyone accept Calvinism with this kind of inconsistency and illogical thinking?

You obviously have not understood me at all. Let’s try again. Saving faith is not a work ONLY because it is a gift of God. Once you remove the fact that it is a gift, it no longer is something from God, it is something from man therefore it becomes a work. I am saying the former, you the latter. Faith is opposed to works because it comes from God not man. IF it does not come from God it is from man. Your view( although you say you believe grace alone through faith alone) have made the ‘faith’ part into a man’s work because you deny it is something that God gives us. Do you see the difference. I have stated this several times now. Yes faith is a response, but even a response is a work (because it is something we do) UNLESS it is a gift of God. You are struggling to accept Calvinism because you don’t understand it. That’s why I keep recommending you read Calvin, not me, not any other ‘Calvinists’. Then see if what Calvin saids squares with the Bible.

“Frankly because of the teaching, it is absolutely impossible for anyone to say for sure if they are really one of the elect according to Calvinist doctrine. The only way that they will ever know for sure is if they persevere to the end. So until the day that they die or until the day that Christ comes, they can never really know for sure.”

Let me see if I understand your view.
1. Jesus draws every single person in the world to himself
2. But not everyone comes to the Father
3. Those who come to the Father are those who are seeking/fear God and therefore believe.

I have a problem with this. Even in my own experience this doesn’t work. When I was saved I did not have any interest in seeking or knowing God. I do believe I was drawn by God to where I heard the message, but I did not go there because I was looking to be saved. But yes I do believe I was born again before I was saved. I believe the Spirit opened my eyes to that message when I was saved, even though I had no intention of becoming a Christian. I was dead in sin, but the Spirit opened my eyes .This is how God works- he softens hearts, opens eyes. This is what i pray for God to do in other people’s lives so that they may accept Jesus. I do not pray that they will just seek a little bit harder than others.

To me this is how God and grace works. God doesn’t reward those who are seeking him more than those who are not. This view gives us room to boast. I got salvation because I was seeking type of idea. I can’t by that. It’s contrary to the bigger biblical picture. We are saved purely by the mercy and grace of God. But maybe this isn’t how you see it/ Let me know

Ok one last point since it regards universal language
1. John 12:32 (NASB)
32 “And I, if I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all men to Myself.”
Is there any reason why I should doubt Jesus? If He said that He will draw all men to Himself, then He certainly didn’t fail to do what He prophesied.

I don’t think you should doubt Jesus. But I don’t think taking universal language the way you do is correct. After all Romans 5 says that Jesus justified ‘all’ men. Should we take that to mean every single person. Now I know your not a universalist so I’m sure you don’t, therefore why do you take Jn 12 to mean every single person in the world? Not only that but how does Jesus draw all the people in the world who have never heard about Him. Why should we bother reaching the unreached if Jesus has already drawn them? See the problem? We need to be careful when the bible uses universal language and not just pick and choose to fit our theology. For example here is a good one.
Joh 1:10 He was in the world, and the world was made through him, yet the world did not know him.

Do you think John’s intention here is that every single person in the world did not recognize or know Jesus. Surely not because we know from the gospels that people did. This is the problem with basing a theology on universal terms- you come across so many contradictions.

Now also about Jn 12:32 look closely at verse 33
Joh 12:32 And I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all people to myself.”
Joh 12:33 He said this to show by what kind of death he was going to die.

If Jesus said this about his death, how can he draw every single person unless his intention was that his death brought atonement and salvation for every single person. This simply is not the case because not everyone is saved. I don’t believe this verse supports your argument at all. John is particularly a writer who uses universal language a lot, and many people bring contradictions into the text by adopting wrong conclusions on universal language.

After all we use universal language ‘all’ the time (that was a joke)

1. “No. Romans 1:18 doesn’t say that all men suppress the truth. But the passage says that those who deliberately suppress the truth, God gives them up. Here is a description of them:
   Romans 1:26–27 (NASB)
   26 For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural,
   27 and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error.
   Are you in this group? Were you given up to degrading passions and did you burn in your desire for other men? No? Then this passage is not about all people, but about those who purposely suppress the truth. I didn’t do that and likely you didn’t either.”

Why stop at verse 27 Cheryl…let’s keep going
Rom 1:28 And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a debased mind to do what ought not to be done.
Rom 1:29 They were filled with all manner of unrighteousness, evil, covetousness, malice. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, maliciousness. They are gossips,
Rom 1:30 slanderers, haters of God, insolent, haughty, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents,
Rom 1:31 foolish, faithless, heartless, ruthless.
Rom 1:32 Though they know God’s decree that those who practice such things deserve to die, they not only do them but give approval to those who practice them.

Surely you and I have both coveted, surely we have both been slanderers and gossips and boastful etc. This is the nature of humanity not just one specific group. Sexual sins are just one aspect of our fallen humanity. We are depraved creatures- totally. You are wrong to say this is just one specific group of people. Isaiah 53:6 sums it up nicely- we all like sheep have gone astray and turned to our own ways.

I can’t show you that Cornelius was born again- I don’t deny that. But not every conversion in the bible says ‘and they were born again before they believed’. We don’t always have every detail for every occasion. The problem is though to say that we don’t need to be born again contradicts Jn 3, and contradictions are not acceptable. You have swept it away be changing what born again means and what the kingdom is.

Now about being a child of God. I have agreed with you that we are children of God once we believe. However like I said Romans 8 and Eph 1 also talk about this being God’s choice or plan before the foundation of the world. So although we were enemies of God before believing, we were always planned to be children of God. Our union with Christ has been layed down from the beginning. Do you understand what I mean?

You still haven’t answered how you pray for your un christian friends- you dodged it. Also please explain your idea of God’s sovereignty? Do you believe God is sovereign in that he made himself vulnerable in creating the world like many do?

You said “No it is not. Being born again is a miraculous work that transforms and renews and brings God’s life to a heart that was separated from God and lost in sin. It is opening of the eyes. It is a transformation.”

Now the funny thing is I agree with this. We are lost in sin, we are dead. We are totally seperated from God. Therefore how do we accept the message of salvation. It is interesting that you say it is opening of the eyes. Look what I said just before you said ‘No it is not”
Being ‘born-again’ is God opening their eyes to the message of the cross.
Inconsistency??? You can’t say to me I’m wrong and then in your definition say the same thing. I’m confused. If you truly believe your description how then can people still accept the message of salvation without being born again? You keep saying that being born again before faith is unscriptural yet you have not dealt with Jn 3. Perhaps we should discuss that more?

Let me get something straight. You agree that Romans 14 is saying in the context of believers that everything not done in faith is sin? Yet you disagree that unbelievers (who have no faith in Christ) are not doing everything in sin. Here is my opinion for what it is worth. Everything any of us does is sin unless God gives us grace. It is only be grace that unbelievers do good things. It is only by grace that believers do good things- this is common grace to all of us. People can do good things (like the Pharisees) because God is gracious to them. However it is still not done in faith in God.

“God just hates kind unbelievers, right?”
I don’t believe God hates unbelievers. Ezekial 18:23 tells us that he does not take pleasure in the death of the wicked. But we must remember God is Holy. When we sin, we sin against a infinite Holy God. If we do not do things in faith then it is sin. This is why the fall of Adam and Eve was so disasterous.

1. “Now show me a verse that says that God will only allow some to seek Him and Him and most He will purposely stop them from seeking Him and purposely stop them from finding Him although He demands that they seek Him? Go ahead and show me where only some are enabled to seek God.”

I have agreed with you all along that we are all called to seek after God. But how can we as sinners. Again Romans 3 says none seeks after God. This is why we are held accountable. God demands that we seek him, but in our sinfulness we don’t. This is why Jesus words are so important.
Joh 6:65 And he said, “This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless it is granted him by the Father.”
Only when God grants it, can sinners come to Jesus. We cannot seek God by ourselves. Now do you believe that God has granted EVERYONE in this verse to come to Jesus?
Also think about why Jesus spoke in Parables
Mat 13:11 And he answered them, “To you it has been given to know the secrets of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it has not been given.
Mat 13:12 For to the one who has, more will be given, and he will have an abundance, but from the one who has not, even what he has will be taken away.
Mat 13:13 This is why I speak to them in parables, because seeing they do not see, and hearing they do not hear, nor do they understand.
Mat 13:14 Indeed, in their case the prophecy of Isaiah is fulfilled that says: “‘You will indeed hear but never understand, and you will indeed see but never perceive.
Mat 13:15 For this people’s heart has grown dull, and with their ears they can barely hear, and their eyes they have closed, lest they should see with their eyes and hear with their ears and understand with their heart and turn, and I would heal them.’
Mat 13:16 But blessed are your eyes, for they see, and your ears, for they hear.
Mat 13:17 For truly, I say to you, many prophets and righteous people longed to see what you see, and did not see it, and to hear what you hear, and did not hear it.

A few important things here. He spoke in parables so people WOULD NOT understand, lest they turn. Also many prophets and RIGHTEOUS people longed to hear the truth of Jesus but did not. Not everyone is giving the same grace by God to seek after him. I wait for your reply since the bible clearly answers your challenge.

‘You just contradicted yourself. You said that faith is not a work, then you said that our faith is a works based salvation. Either faith is a work or it is not.’

Here is my conviction because you seem confused. Saving faith is a gift therefore faith is not a work. When we deny that saving faith is a gift, then we make it into a work. See the difference? Faith becomes a work for those who reject it as a gift of God.

Semi-pelagianism was condemned, that is reality. It denied that our salvation was fully the work of God. It denied that faith, repentance etc are the gracious gifts of God. It maintained that we as fallen people still have the capacity (with a little bit of God’s help but not all) to come after and seek God. It is the same old problem that the church has faced. How free-will and God’s sovereignty go hand in hand. Maybe you can clearly outline how you see salvation works? Give me a clear step by step outline of how and when God works and how and when human free-will works. Perhaps then I will understand more your view.

“Scripture doesn’t say that faith is a gift of God to unbelievers. If so, please show me where it says this.”

Eph 2 says that we were dead in sin. BUT, God made us alive in Christ. How? By grace you have been saved through faith- AND THIS IS NOT FROM YOURSELVES, it is a GIFT of God.
Faith is a part of our salvation process- it is the very means by how we are saved. If grace is a gift given to unbelievers in this verse, how is faith not also given to unbelievers?

“What I have seen from reading these books is a God who has mercy on so few yet the Scriptures tell me that God is rich in mercy.’

I agree that God is rich in mercy- none of us deserve to be saved, we have all fallen short of the glory of God have we not? But still only a limited number of people are saved. Even you believe this because you are not a universalist. You can’t discredit Calvinists because they believe that a limited number are saved. Any evangelical believes that, reformed or not.

“And another thing I notice about the Scriptures is that God freely gives His lovingkindness toward those who fear Him.”

I agree!

“Should we say that those who “fear God” are doing a works based salvation? Should we say that God gives the “gift” of fear to some? No. Fearing God is faith in God and it is our response, not a gift reserved for an elite few.”

If we say that fearing God saves us and that it is in our own strength, then yes it is works based. But the scripture never saids that. David is a great example of all this. He was a God fearing man, he worshiped God, he loved God. Yet he continually asked that God would enable him to do this. See Psalm 119. Here is just a snipet
Psa 119:33 Teach me, O LORD, the way of your statutes; and I will keep it to the end.
Psa 119:34 Give me understanding, that I may keep your law and observe it with my whole heart.
Psa 119:35 Lead me in the path of your commandments, for I delight in it.
Psa 119:36 Incline my heart to your testimonies, and not to selfish gain!
Psa 119:37 Turn my eyes from looking at worthless things; and give me life in your ways.
Psa 119:38 Confirm to your servant your promise, that you may be feared.
Psa 119:39 Turn away the reproach that I dread, for your rules are good.
Psa 119:40 Behold, I long for your precepts; in your righteousness give me life!
David didn’t trust in his own fear or faith or ability. He knew all these things were the gift of God. He prayed to his Father that God may continue to bless him with those things. This is the reformed position in a nutshell. We look to God for everything, not trusting in our own strength, and we recognise that God grants things in his sovereign will to some and not others. But we dare never look to our own strength and ability nor should we think we know who God bestows his gifts too. That is for Him to know not for us to judge.

Anyway I need to take a break. I’l let you catch up before I comment again.

Cheryl,

It appears that we disagree on being born again. Let me just state what i think it is and what i think it isn’t.
Being born again is not being saved. Being born again is being made alive when we are dead in our sins, so that we may have faith and believe in Jesus and then be saved. Being born again happens before salvation not after. John 3 shows this like i said. It is the supernatural work of God opening our eyes when we are dead in sin to enable us to accept the message of salvation.

I’m glad you believe that God draws people to Himself. But i can’t understand how you believe God draws every single person to himself. You quoted Jn 6:37 which says that all the father gives to Jesus will come to him. Does the father give every single person to Jesus? or a limited number? You have already said you reject a doctrine of universalism so what is Jn 6 saying? What about Matt 11:27, when Jesus says no-one knows the Father except the Son and those whom the Son CHOOSES to reveal him. This is not for everybody. God only draws those whom he chooses to reveal his Son too.

Now about the kingdom of God- this amazes me since you say that the kingdom is only future. And you criticize me for not giving biblical references infering there is none. Well here we go…
John the baptist saids
Mat 3:2 “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.”
Now is he talking about heaven Cheryl?

Jesus after giving the parable of the sower saids to his disciples
Mat 13:18 “Hear then the parable of the sower:
Mat 13:19 When anyone hears the word of the kingdom and does not understand it, the evil one comes and snatches away what has been sown in his heart. This is what was sown along the path.
What is the word of the kingdom? Is it only something future?

Again Jesus saids
Mat 13:24 He put another parable before them, saying, “The kingdom of heaven may be compared to a man who sowed good seed in his field,

Again with the parable of the mustard seed
Mat 13:31 He put another parable before them, saying, “The kingdom of heaven is like a grain of mustard seed that a man took and sowed in his field.
Mat 13:32 It is the smallest of all seeds, but when it has grown it is larger than all the garden plants and becomes a tree, so that the birds of the air come and make nests in its branches.”
Mat 13:33 He told them another parable. “The kingdom of heaven is like leaven that a woman took and hid in three measures of flour, till it was all leavened.”

I could go on and on. Just look at Matt 13. The kingdom of Heaven (God) has come in Jesus, but is still waiting to be fully revealed at his second coming.
See Matt 18:23; 19:14, 23-24; 20:1
There are so many references to the kingdom of God that I simply cannot go through them all, but to say the kindom is only future is a big mistake. Therefore that is why Jn 3 is so clear that we need to be born again before we can even see or enter the kingdom. You have a wrong understanding of the kingdom and a wrong understanding of being born again.

Finally iwould just like to address the issue of faith.
I agree 100% that faith is not a work contrasted to works. We are saved by grace alone through faith alone to the glory of God alone. Now you asked me to show you where the bible says that faith is a work. Now this is just silly, because we both agree it isn’t. If I believed faith (as outlined) in the bible was a work we wouldn’t even have this conversation. What I believe is that those who say faith is not a gift of God are making saving faith into a work.
Now saving faith is a gift says Eph 2. It is a gracious gift of God, so that no one can boast. You have made a bold claim in saying that the faith outlined in Eph 2 is not for every believer and I have asked you to show me why, but you haven’t. Therefore to deny that saving faith is in itself not a gracious gift of God necessitates that it is something we do without the help of God. This therefore is a work since it comes from our doing and not God’s.
You cannot say that the faith that saves us is not a gift of God, unless you can prove biblically how this is not a work of man to earn salvation. If we say that it is our own faith (with no gift from God) then we have every reason to boast since we have chosen wisely when others have not. This I reject. I have done nothing greater than anybody- God has simply shown me grace in giving me his gift of salvation and faith. I have nothing to boast in of myself, I can only boast in God’s mercy. Now also since repentance is required for salvation and as 2 Tim 3 says even that is a gift of God, no-one can repent nor have faith unless God grants it to them otherwise they have room to boast of their own salvation.

Cheryl please show why the saving faith outlined in Eph 2 is not for every believer. Please explain how you can have faith (which is not a gift from God) and it not be a work. If it does not stem from God then it is something we do correct?

P.S

I’m wondering what you do with Psalm 51 Cheryl in relation to original sin, particularly verse 5.

Psa 51:1 To the choirmaster. A Psalm of David, when Nathan the prophet went to him, after he had gone in to Bathsheba. Have mercy on me, O God, according to your steadfast love; according to your abundant mercy blot out my transgressions.
Psa 51:2 Wash me thoroughly from my iniquity, and cleanse me from my sin!
Psa 51:3 For I know my transgressions, and my sin is ever before me.
Psa 51:4 Against you, you only, have I sinned and done what is evil in your sight, so that you may be justified in your words and blameless in your judgment.
Psa 51:5 Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, and in sin did my mother conceive me.

Cheryl,

I appreciate where you are coming from. But first of all i have never deemed myself a ‘calvinist’ because simply it puts me into a theological bucket i don’t want to be in. Nor have i said that you are from a differing theological tradition e.g Arminianism. I’m more interested in the Bible rather that which side we sit on.

I truly do believe that non-calvinists are Christians. Like i said, reformed theology is something i have studied and over time been thoroughly convinced of, but i would never have said that i wasn’t a Christian before then. We all grow in our understanding and walk with God over our life times. However i do have a problem with so called ‘scholars’ when they outright reject biblical authority and truth. We all need to be open to change, be teachable and to have a desire to know the truth. My problem lies when people sit on the fence and simply say it is a matter of hermeneutics as if we can’t search for the truth.

In my experience most Christians i know would not be labelled as calvinists, but i love and respect them as the family of God. My issue rises when the people who should know better (scholars) outright reject or re-interpret the bible and lead people astray. Most people on the pews wouldn’t even know the difference, but it’s the leaders who do. Sure we all agree that Jesus is the only way to the Father, but what we believe about faith will radically change our perceptions of everything else. We need to get the gospel right first before we can get anything else right. I have yet to be convinced how we are not adding to our salvation by saying faith is not a gift of God. SInce this is the core of our beliefs as protestants i think it is vitally important to discuss. You cannot simply say that faith is not a gift without explaining why therefore it is not a works based gospel. Like i said, Paul is very clear on false gospels so we should work very hard at making sure we get it right.

Division is not the ideal i agree, and i’m sorry you have suffered with your church, but you can’t therefore label all calvinists in the same basket with the same issues and motives. As someone who is openly expressing your views on a blog, you should be willing to be thoroughly challenged. You are teaching people whether that is your intention or not, and when i feel that you are wrong i will say so. When i feel the gospel is at stake i will say so. If that makes you uncomfortable, then there is nothing i can do. With what you have said i feel strongly that the core of the gospel is at stake. You say you believe in a non-works salvation, then please show me why and how.

Also please notice that the warnings about division in the church is becasue of false teaching. We are urged to be sound in our doctrine and guard it. We can’t succome to every single doctrine just to keep unity in our churches. There is only one gospel, one message of salvation and we ought to keep it, not be wishy washy about it.
Look forward to your answers to my questions.

one last note…

i really would like you to explain to me how you pray for non-believers. Do you believe it is God who opens their eyes and softens their hearts or not?

P.S I am only going to discuss these issues for as long as you want to Cheryl since i am fully aware of your earlier comments about it all. When you no longer wish to discuss it, that is fine, just let me know. I know we are a fair way from the original topic of this post.

Cheryl,

“Dead” is a metaphor.”

I don’t disagree that dead is a metaphor and that they can do all those things listed. Our focus though, is can people who are ‘dead IN SIN’ seek or come to God according to their own free will without the grace of God to draw them? No they can’t, because they need to be ‘born-again’!We are dead! We need to be made alive again and Ephesians saids that only God can do that, not us.

“Of course. Who is teaching that we ourselves can accomplish the miracle of re-birth? Who is teaching that we make ourselves alive? It isn’t me”

But you are saying that being re-born comes after our salvation which is done ONLY in OUR faith. Therefore you are saying we as humans do something BEFORE God makes us re-born. This is reject because it is making salvation based on our work of faith, not God’s gift of faith.

“My question – why do you do that?”

I have never said that you believe that the work of being re-born is not a work of God. Where my problem lies is that you think that faith is not a gift of God for all believers. Therefore when people accept Christ, it is their faith not God’s gift of faith that saves them. This is works salvation. Perhaps you can clear it all up. Is faith something we add to salvation in that it is not a gift of God, or is the faith that saves us a gift of God? Which do you believe? Being re-born is a side issue really. I have no doubt you believe it is God’s work, but that is because you seem to be saying it happens after faith. I believe it happens before faith and John 3 teaches that. Is the faith that justifies us God’s gift or is it our own free-will? This I want to know?

Here lies the problem- you say
“The “gift” is salvation which is completely a work of God”

I agree that salvation is the complete work of God. But how is it that we are saved? Like you said- through faith, yet you are not including ‘faith’ in the complete work of salvation, namely this ‘gift’. Therefore you are not seeing salvation as the complete work of God, because the very means by which we are saved (faith) is not a work of God but man. You confirm your mishap by saying

“I am on solid grounds exegetically and the “gift” is not “faith” but the action verb “salvation” of which action only God can be source of.”

So it appears that you are giving lip service to the complete salvation of God, yet are actually denying it by saying the very means by which we are saved is not a work of God. Salvation is not a complete work of God by what you have said. Sure you believe God saves people but only if they add to it by their faith. Can you also address whether repentance is our own work or is it something God grants? These are vital questions because this is at the heart of the gospel.

“If every single person is like this, then God lied because God said that Job is not like that. Are you really going to make God into a liar or will you admit that Paul isn’t using the quote from Psalms out of context and in a whole different meaning than the author of Psalms meant”

How long will you misinterpret the Bible Cheryl? You are pulling chickens out of hats to come to the conclusion that Romans 3 is not talking about Original Sin. The problem with your understanding is that you think people can be rightous apart from the work of God. This is the core of the issue. You think Noah, Abraham, Job are righteous people because in their own free-will they seek and worship God. If Noah was ‘righteous’ according to your definition why did he get drunk? If Abraham was righteous in his own free-will why did he lie and deceive people? If Job was righteous because of what he did why did God rebuke him at the end of the book. After all Paul says that if we break just 1 law we break all the law. How can these men be ‘righteous’ when they are sinful? I don’t think you understand what the old testament means when someone is righteous at all! It is faith which justifies us- declares us righteous. It was faith which made these men be called ‘righteous’. Now faith is either a gift of God or it is a work of man. It has to be the former otherwise we preach a works based gospel. This is simple fact. Unless faith is a gift that God bestows on us it is something we add to our salvation. How can you skirt around that massive issue.

“What I don’t understand if why you want to make us incapable of seeking God when God shows very clearly that unregenerate people can and must seek Him. Why do you do this?

I don’t want to say anything except what the bible teaches. It teaches that we are incapable of saving ourselves by seeking God or having our own free-will faith. I agree that we are called to seek God but we are sinful, we live in darkness, we love the darkness, we suppress the truth, and therefore we are judged for it. It is only in God’s mercy that he opens the eyes of his sheep to the message of salvation in order to save them.

By the way I don’t think Paul twisted scripture at all. He expanded on the nature of our depravity to the Romans. Abraham, Noah and Job were ungodly men because they were children of wrath as descendents of Adam, yet they were declared righteous by faith- they were not perfect people. You also have to remember that the Old Testament looked forward to the coming of Jesus. Jesus himself applied many scriptures to himself away from the original context, but I’m sure you don’t accuse him of twisting scripture. You are inconsistent Cheryl with your concerns and comments.

Greg and Cheryl,

I am amazed that you think that the nature of sin is a non essential in our scriptures. It affects everything- what we understand about God, grace, salvation. I’m sure this is clear by the conversation we have been having. What we understand as salvation is adversely affected when we don’t understand the nature of sin. I disagree with both of you. This whole political correctness stuff is culture not bible- it is postmodernity. Paul is very clear in Galations 1 that anyone who preaches a different gospel will be eternally condemned. Let’s start taking the bible a bit more seriously and the warnings in it. This is at the heart of an essential in the Christian gospel

Cheryl,

I’m quite astonished really. What makes Noah righteous? His own free-will? No I don’t think so. Was it not his faith?
Heb 11:7 By faith Noah, being warned by God concerning events as yet unseen, in reverent fear constructed an ark for the saving of his household. By this he condemned the world and became an heir of the righteousness that comes by faith.

You see, it was his faith that made him righteous. And like Eph 2 says faith is a gift. By the way you have not dealt with why the faith in Eph 2 is only for some believers. Gen 6:5 can be taken to mean everyone-it should. We are all by nature corrupt and evil. It is only faith in God which makes us righteous. This whole idea that humanity are essentially good people is non-sense. We are sinful and we have a Holy God who does not tolerate sin.

“Um, where does the Bible say that we need a new heart in order to seek after God?”

Here is one passage
Eze 11:19 And I will give them one heart, and a new spirit I will put within them. I will remove the heart of stone from their flesh and give them a heart of flesh,
Eze 11:20 that they may walk in my statutes and keep my rules and obey them. And they shall be my people, and I will be their God.

This is at the heart of the new covenant. A new spiritual heart enables us to obey God.

I can’t see your point in referencing Deut because it actually proves my point. In Deut 10 God calls on the people to circumcise their hearts, but they can’t by themselves.They don’t actually do it. Deut 30 (if you actually looked at the context) is a prophetic word about what is going to happen after the exile. It will be God who does the circumcision of the heart. This is the new covenant. See Jer 31:31ff also. So you have just proven my point. We can’t give ourselves a heart of flesh, only God can and only God does with the new covenant.

“There is nothing at all in the Scriptures that I have seen that says God must give us a new heart before we can seek Him.”

Look more at the context of Deut as a whole. Look at the failure of the Jews to keep the covenant in their own strength. Look at Jeremiah 31, Ezekial 11, and also Ezekial 36.
Eze 36:24 I will take you from the nations and gather you from all the countries and bring you into your own land.
Eze 36:25 I will sprinkle clean water on you, and you shall be clean from all your uncleannesses, and from all your idols I will cleanse you.
Eze 36:26 And I will give you a new heart, and a new spirit I will put within you. And I will remove the heart of stone from your flesh and give you a heart of flesh.
Eze 36:27 And I will put my Spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes and be careful to obey my rules.

This is another prophecy of the New Covenant. God gives a new heart of flesh. God gives his Spirit so that we can obey God’s statutes. This was the problem with the Jews, they did not have a heart of flesh. They did not have the outpouring of the Spirit to enable them to keep covenant. We do only because God acts first.

“Where does the Bible say that Cornelius was born again before he heard the gospel?”

You can’t keep copping out and saying everything is human tradition Cheryl, it’s hardly convincing. Now about Cornelius, did God do something before he accepted the message of salvation from Peter? Did he have a vision, did he see an angel of God? Did he not experience all this before he heard the gospel. Yes he did. This is God working before the message of Jesus was even preached. This is the issue. Does God intervene in people’s lives before they hear the message so that they may believe. According to Acts 10 yes, aswell as the rest of the New Testament. Although the words ‘born again’ are not used here by Luke does not mean that God did not work in Cornelius before he accepted the message.

The kingdom of God is twofold Cheryl. It came in Jesus, but it is still yet to come until the final consummation. This is the now/not yet tension. I would have thought you would have learnt that in your studies. So we enter the kingdom of God when we are saved into Jesus name, but we are still waiting to enter it entirely when we go to eternity. You have not dealt with John 3 at all. John 3 is clear that we are to be born again BEFORE we see or enter the kingdom of heaven. How can this be if it is after salvation?

“First of all, not every heart is stone. Those who harden their hearts against God’s call will eventually turn their heart to stone, but not all harden their hearts. Many will respond with gladness to His call.”

So what is Ezekial 36:26 referencing then if not everybody? I’m afraid you are going to have to deal with the fact that God hardens hearts aswell.
Rom 9:18 So then he (God) has mercy on whomever he wills, and he hardens whomever he wills.

I agree that many will respond with gladness, but I reject that they do this on their own without God opening their eyes to the message.

“It would be a cruel act for God to command men everywhere to seek Him if He was the One deliberately stopping them from seeking Him.”

Unfortunately Cheryl I hear this a lot. And the reason people say it is because they want God to fit into their picture of what God is. The Bible though is radically different. Romans 9 is clear on God’s election and calling. Paul even expects an objection like the one you just stated. What is his answer?
Rom 9:13 As it is written, “Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.”
Rom 9:14 What shall we say then? Is there injustice on God’s part? By no means!
Rom 9:15 For he says to Moses, “I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.”
Rom 9:16 So then it depends not on human will or exertion, but on God, who has mercy.
Rom 9:17 For the Scripture says to Pharaoh, “For this very purpose I have raised you up, that I might show my power in you, and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth.”
Rom 9:18 So then he has mercy on whomever he wills, and he hardens whomever he wills.
Rom 9:19 You will say to me then, “Why does he still find fault? For who can resist his will?”
Rom 9:20 But who are you, O man, to answer back to God? Will what is molded say to its molder, “Why have you made me like this?”
Rom 9:21 Has the potter no right over the clay, to make out of the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for dishonorable use?

There are a few very important points here. Our salvation DOES NOT depend on human will or exertion, BUT on God’s mercy alone. God hardens whom he wants and has mercy on whom he wants. When people object to this (like you Cheryl), Paul’s answer is simple, who are you to talk back to God. We have no right to say what is just and unjust, we are the clay and God is the potter.
So maybe you do therefore think God is cruel. That is for you to work out, but you can’t keep trying to fit God only into your own box of what love and mercy are. I challenge you to think that one through a little more. And please don’t attempt to say that Romans 9 is not saying what it seems to be saying. Exegetically it is, and those scholars who attempt to change it’s meaning simply look ridiculous.

By the way can you differentiate between ‘seeking God’ and ‘coming to God since you seem to make that an important distinction.

“God cannot be found unless He allows Himself to be found. God has given the promise that He will be found under several circumstances. One circumstance is that the person seeks for God with their whole heart.”

How can an ungenerate person seek God with their whole heart when their heart is corrupt? I don’t think they can. Genesis 6:5 is very clear on the condition of the human heart.
Gen 6:5 The LORD saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every intention of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.

Our heart by nature is corrupt, it is stone. This is the importance of the new covenant. It is God who gives us a new heart according to Jeremiah. We need a new heart to seek after God. Our new heart isn’t given to us after we seek God. The human heart is evil and does not seek God. The spiritual heart on the otherhand will. That is why we need to be re-born (a new heart) before we can accept the message of salvation. That is why we need to be born again BEFORE we can see the kingdom of God
Joh 3:3 Jesus answered him, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God.”
Seeing the kingdom is to be saved, therefore being born again is before we are saved, before faith not after. Jesus again repeats himself that we CANNOT enter the kingdom of God (be saved) unless we are born of the Spirit and water.
Joh 3:5 Jesus answered, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.

Your fighting against the Bible by stating that we can seek God when our heart is stone and not re-born. Being born again is something that happens before faith not after. The bible is clear on that. PLease show verses stating otherwise.

By the way let me be clear that i do not think that non-calvinists are not Christians. I myself was not always convinced of reformed theology but i would never have said i wasn’t saved. Nor do i think that others are not saved.
I simply believe that as i have grown in my walk we God he has been gracious to open my eyes to new hard truths of the bible even when they seem unfair.

I will however always protest when i think the gospel is at stake, and i believe it is at stake when we deny that faith is a gift of God for all believers. A works based salvation is contrary to scripture and i know Cheryl agrees. This is a false teaching on justification by faith and must be said so.

We must be willing to always seek to honour God and not ourselves and to always be faithful to scripture even when it seems hard. Hope this helps you understand my stance.

Cheryl,

I understand that you believe in a sin nature from Adam and Greg does not, but the logical conclusion of what you are saying leads to the same path. You say we have the ability as unregenerate people to come to God. You say that we have the ability as unregenerate people to not sin. If this is true, then theoretically we could be sinless. If I am able to avoid sinful behaviour because of my free-will, this should apply to all sin, therefore theoretically I could avoid sin even though I have a sin nature. This then leads to the problem you pointed out with Greg that we then no longer need a saviour. I can’t see how you can worm your way out of that one. Either we will by nature always sin or we won’t, and we can keep God’s commandments. The view you are presenting doesn’t make sense.

You used the example of an adulterer. Problem is Jesus up’d the anti. Anyone who looks lustfully is committing adultery. Are you willing to say that we can fulfil this requirement by ourselves, without the intervening of the Holy Spirit.

I agree that God gave us the abililty to make choices. God calls on us to follow him. The problem is that after the fall our nature was corrupted by sin. We by nature reject God by sinning from the moment we are born. I’m sure you can see Cheryl after having children, that we as parents have to teach our children how to be good. They will by nature be evil. You don’t teach a toddler how to lie, he/she will do it automatically. Thus our ‘free-will’ is totally corrupted. We will always choose sin over God In our natures. This is why we need a saviour, we can’t do it by ourselves.

I would like to know how you think that ‘dead people’ can respond to God. According to the passage we were all dead people. We were all people under wrath- every single person. BUT, verse 4 says it was GOD who made us alive, not us. What you have said is completely contradictory to Eph 2, and it strips the glory from God. Only God can make us alive, we have no ability by ourselves.
It is also interesting that you think the ‘faith’ in Eph 2 is not a gift for every believer. Then I guess you would also like to be consistent and say that the salvation that is by grace through faith (which is what the verse is about) is not for every Christian. You can’t have it both ways Cheryl. I’m afraid you have dug yourself into a hole with this one.

Romans 3 is a quote from the psalms that is true. But to come to the conclusion that you have is misguided. We should ask the question- how is Paul using it here? What is the context? The verses before the quote give the answer.
Rom 3:9 What then? Are we Jews any better off? No, not at all. For we have already charged that all, both Jews and Greeks, are under sin,…

It doesn’t seem like Paul is talking only about those who do not seek God does it Cheryl? No, Paul clearly states that all are like this, Jew and Gentile, even himself. I’m afraid Paul’s intention here, (noting that the first 3 chapters of Romans are dealing with everyone, Jew and Gentile) is that he is using this quote to support his view that every single person is like this. No one seeks God by themselves as dead in sin. I can’t understand why you would want to water our sinful nature down when the bible is so graphic about it. You can’t just dismiss the context of Romans 3 and Paul’s intention of using this quote to support his argument, as irrelevant and only rely on the Old Testament context. Paul is clearly using it here with another purpose.

Your other old testament quotes do nothing to support your view of unregenerate man seeking God. The first one is a dubious translation, the NIV makes is a hypothetical by using ‘if’, that is “But if from there you seek the Lord”,
In the 2 Chronicles verse, you forgot to mention the verse before which show God intervening through the Prophet Azariah. So the same principle applies, God has to work first before we can respond.
Another point to note is that the Bible never talks about our own free-will, as if we can accept God by ourselves especially in the verses you quoted. These passages are silent on why the people turned to God, but we have other clear passage which show us why people do turn, namely, because God intervenes. Does Jesus not say that no-one can come to the Father unless the Father draws him? We are better understanding the silent passages from the clear passages, not assuming free-will into them.

John 3- Cheryl, what is the kingdom of God, if not a relationship with him? What does Jesus mean by being born again? I would like to know your opinion? When are we born of the Spirit (verse 5)? You must believe that the Spirit of God does not enter our life until we respond in faith right?

So if we can circumcise our own heart by our own repentance, why did we need the new covenant. Didn’t at least some of the Jews repent Cheryl? I think you are greatly misinformed. The whole purpose of the new covenant was that God would give us a new heart (Jer 31:31). The Jews broke God’s covenant because they had a heart of stone. In the New Covenant God promises to give us a new heart by his spirit internally. He promises to right his laws on our hearts through the Spirit. This is of such great importance. Your view makes the new covenant un-necessary. In our own strength we are nothing and can do nothing to save ourselves. Again I must protest that you are stealing the glory from God in HIS work. It is not our own doing.

By the way Cheryl, repentance is also a gift of God not our own strength
2Ti 2:25 correcting his opponents with gentleness. God may perhaps grant them repentance leading to a knowledge of the truth,
Who grants repentance here Cheryl, clearly God. Repentance and faith are gifts of God to his sheep, so that no-one can boast.

You said “Faith in God and receiving Jesus comes before we become children of God.”
Really Cheryl, I don’t think Romans 8 says this
Rom 8:29 For those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, in order that he might be the firstborn among many brothers.
Rom 8:30 And those whom he predestined he also called, and those whom he called he also justified, and those whom he justified he also glorified.

We were predestined to be conformed to Jesus image before we are justified according to these verses. And since faith is the requirement for justification we must conclude that no-where does faith precede God’s ordained plan. We were God’s children CHOSEN before the world was created according to Eph 1:4. If only you realised Cheryl, that you were God’s chosen child before you even knew about Him.
It is true that John 1 says we become God’s child after we trust in Jesus. I believe that, but I also believe that bible clearly teaches that this was God’s plan for my life before the world was even created.

You said “The Bible never says that we are again first and then we are able to have faith.”

I’m interested to know how you pray for your unsaved friends Cheryl. Do you pray for God to open their eyes or to soften their hearts? Or do you not even ask God to help and just believe that their own free-will is good enough? I sure hope you do the former and not the latter! You see everyone believes in the sovereignty of God when they pray and ask God to intervene, even if you deny it when you speak to me. Being ‘born-again’ is God opening their eyes to the message of the cross. We in sin are dead people according to Eph 2 therefore we need to be re-born and made alive, and like i said ealier, EPh 2 tells us that it is God who makes us alive not oursleves. Being born again definitely comes before faith. It is the work of the spirit in unregenerate man so that he can accept the message of salvation.

Roman 14- I agree with the context, but the verse still says what it says. Everything not done in faith is sin, whether you’re a believer or unbeliever. The reason being that everything is to be done for the glory of God. IF it is not done in faith in God how can it give glory to God, it simply can’t. I can’t see why you would deny this biblical verse. Do you believe that you can do things that are not in faith in Christ and it not be sin?

You said “As I said before, our free-will is not completely free. However God has chosen to give us the freedom to seek God as He requires this from all of us.”

Where does it say this in the bible? God demands that we follow him and no other, but I haven’t seen anywhere where the bible says we have the ‘freedom to seek God’. Aren’t we as fallen people living in the darkness, suppressing the truth, until God opens our eyes? Please show me verses talking about our freedom to seek God and our free-will in doing this?

“If we “work” even 1% for our salvation then it is a works based salvation. However faith is not a work.”

I agree that faith is not a work, it is because it is a gift of God so that none can boast. If faith is something we do without God, then it is a work of ours because it doesn’t stem from God, therefore you have works based salvation. This is the problem with your view. You can’t skirt around the issue. You need to do better at convincing me that you are not promoting a works based salvation. Like I said Pelagianism (Augustine) and semi-pelagianism (reformers) were both condemned. How is your view not semi-pelagianism Cheryl? Unless we accept that every single piece of our salvation is from God, it will always be works based. That is simple truth.
I do pray that God will reveal that to you, in the same way he did to me a few years ago. It totally changed my understanding of the grace of God. He is so merciful.

Cheryl,

I can’t see how your view is any different to Greg’s really. You say we are born with a sinful nature, yet you say that we have the ability to not sin. For example you said.

“So the difference is that the sin nature causes us to have the internal inclination towards sin yet we are still able to make choices regarding what we will do with our sinful feelings. If we give in to the feelings that are already within, sin becomes our master and it becomes harder to fight just as practiced sin makes us a slave to sin.”

What makes us able to make those choices? Free-will? IF you say free will then your view is identitical to Greg’s since he also believes that we have the ability to do good or keep God’s requirements by our own free-will.

Problem is this contradicts with scripture. Eph 2 says we are dead in sin. Romans 3 outlines the nature of sin. No-one seeks God, nor does any do good. John 3 says that we need to be re-born before we can come to God. Many old testament prophecies of the new covenant talk of a ‘new heart’ that is needed becasue our heart is corrupt.

Point is- until the Spirit gives us a new heart and opens our eyes we will never be able to act in faith in Christ. And Romans 14 says everything not done in faith is sin. So even those ‘good’ works are sin since they are not done in faith. Our free-will is corrupt since the fall. We will always choose sin over God, unless the Spirit intervenes in our lives.

If faith is not itself a gift, can you explain therefore how then we are not adding to our salvation? EVen if God does 99% and we do the last 1% it is still works based salvation. THis is what Augustine and the reformers have been fighting against throughout all of Church history, yet people still wish to promote this false teaching.

Cheryl,

May i suggest that you at least read Calvin, because it is very clear when you make sweeping statements about ‘calvinist’ or ‘calvinism’ that what you are understanding is not actually what he taught.

For example you gave the indication that Calvin taught that we are punished for Adam’s sin, because of perhaps what someone may have said.

But if you read the reference i gave you, maybe it will help you actually understand the reformed position on original sin. Calvin did teach that every single person is tainted with a sinful nature from birth- that everypart of us is infested by sin. But he also clearly taught that each man is responsible for his own sins, not another’s.

I just think if you at least read Calvin, then you will be in a far better position to judge on ‘Calvinism’ regarding original sin.

More later on the incarnation aswell.
Have a good break

Cheryl,

Have you read Calvin on the issue of original sin? Particularly Book 2 chapter 1 of his Institutes?

Cheryl,

I appreciate your comments regarding Gen 3:15. Let me just say one final thing in case you missed it. I do agree with you that looking bcak at this verse in our position, we can see the prophetic nature of it. I’m just trying to look at the verse exegetically, that’s all- i think this is perhaps where we differ slightly.

However i’m not sure i’m ready to accept that the nail through the heel is fulfillment of Gen 3:15. That’s a bit too allegorical for me. You may be right, but i’d hold to that one loosely.

Thanks

Anonymous,

I can’t really understand what your point is. Can you re-state a little clearer your position?

You said this “Otherwise, you end up with a God who is either overly concerned about defending His honor or a God who cannot forgive an offense without payment – a God without mercy and grace.”

Now regarding your last statement that God cannot forgive an offense without a payment. I fear you don’t understand the biblical position on the sacrifice necessary before God’s forgiveness. Are you saying that God can forgive our sins without a sacrifice? Can you elaborate?

I find it intriguing that those who reject the orthodox position think that orthodoxy presents a God without mercy and grace. Until we understand our sin properly we can never understand God’s mercy and grace properly. The fact is we all deserve to go to hell. It is only because of God’s mercy that he saves anyone. This whole notion that we are theoretically ‘good’ people is simply flawed. Let’s start judging our goodness in relation to a Holy God who can not tolerate sin, then we might begin to grasp the right perpective. This is why the gospel is so amazing that God would send his son to be a propitiation for us. The judgement we deserved fell on Jesus, so that we may be adopted and declared justified in God’s sight. This is the gospel. Anything else is simply false teaching.

Cheryl,
thanks for the info.
But i think my point still stands regardless of how you translate the word. You can’t say that the woman’s seed (in the context) is victorious over the serpents-so whether you translate it crush, strike, bruise etc you must do the same for both. This is why the NIV is un helpful. It saids the serpent’s seed will ‘strike’ but the woman’s seed would ‘crush’. This gives the indication that the verse is saying one is victorious, but again i don’t think exegetically it holds. Whatever the translation is should be the same. Therefore that is why i think in the context the point is broken relationships not victory over another. The serpent will bruise his heel and he will bruise his head.
I guess the other point could be whether the ‘head’ incicates something significantly more than the ‘heel’. That i suppose is open for speculation.

Greg,

I agree with Cheryl that the verse you quoted does not support a rejection of original sin. Perhaps in the discussion of what is ‘good’ or good works, Romans 14 might help.

Romans 14:23b “For whatever does not proceed from faith is sin.”

So what constitutes as good? Only those things done in faith. So if a non believer cares for another (but it is not done in faith in Jesus Christ) it is sin. This is harsh but true. This is the nature of our rebellion to God. Nothing we do is good unless it is done in faith in Jesus. And no one can have faith unless God grants it to them.

Until we understand the depth of our depravity and sin we will never understand the grace and mercy of God. We ALL fall short says Romans, no-one is good, not even one. This is where Augustine and the reformers got it right!

a rejection of original sin, makes a mockery of the atoning work of Christ and the depravity of our rebellion.

Now regarding Gen 3:15

I dont think you have fully understood what i said. I did say that you can gain from other passages that Jesus conquered over Satan. I did say that Christians read Jesus back into Gen 3:15 or at least interpret it this way.
My point though was simply that exegetically, reading the verse in it’s original language, context etc it is not about one ‘crushing’ the other. The actual language used is each bruising each other. This is simply pure exegetical fact.

That said, i do not disagree that we as Christians like Calvin can understand this as the first prophecy of the messiah. But this is reading it in our position in salvation history. I agree with Calvin and you that this could be a prophecy, but exegetically the verse is not dealing with Eve’s seed ‘crushing’ the serpents.
Have i explained this well enough?

Now regarding the incarnation.

I agree that i don’t understand the incarnation, and that is my point. None of us can!

However to come to the conclusion as you have done that Jesus was theoretically able to sin i must reject. I totally understand why you feel that this reduces his humanity but i think you have thrown the baby out with the bath water.
How can you say that Jesus being fully God could have sinned? Are you saying he left his ‘godness’ in heaven during his time on earth. I find it very hard not to see your view as heretical. This is the mystery of the incarnation, how one man Jesus Christ, can be fully human tempted in everyway, yet at the same time fully God unable to sin. Like i have said, it is a very difficult thing to understand yet explain. The fact that he had no father, therefore he had no sin nature, therefore Eve had no sin nature is too long a bow for me. THere is nothing in the bible to indicate this