C
Cling2Cross
Guest
You are taking my words (and God’s words) out of context and refuting it with scriptures without regard to the rest of of the context. I cannot possibly answer your post.
- Status
M
mikeledes
Guest
The point of my use of Cornelius was to establish the point - which you apparently agree with - that drawing and regeneration are not identical concepts. That drawing leads to repentance and regeneration. As you have asserted, the fact that Cornelius sought God clearly indicates that God was at work in him because man cannot seek God apart from His grace.With regard to Cornelius…
When someone is saved - we do not say that they are zapped in an instant. This is not the case. We know that general revelation through the creation (which was created by God’s spoken word - i.e. let there be light) shows us that there is a Creator and God. This is given in Romans 1 very explicitly…
Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them. For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: (Romans 1:19-20 KJV)
God “shewed”it unto Cornelius and he responded…by seeking the one true God. Not a god that he made up in his mind…he was seeking after the one true God through what revelation that he had…It was the goodness of God that was leading him to repentance.
Or despisest thou the riches of his goodness and forbearance and longsuffering; not knowing that the goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance? (Romans 2:4 KJV)
This is the type of drawing that God causes in a person. Why do we know that this was a special work that God was doing in Cornelius’ life? Because, we are told that there is no one that seeks after God (in truth)…
As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one: There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God. They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one. (Romans 3:10-12 KJV)
Therefore, any seeking of the truth - the One True God is completely of God. Many people are responding to general revelation but not in truth - they are sewing fig leaves and not looking for the coats of skins - seeking to clothe themselves with their own righteousness through manmade religion and pride…so any other seeking after another god is not of THE God.
So, this drawing does take place prior to repentance and regeneration…
To be continued…
God Bless,
Michael
M
mikeledes
Guest
These verses prove two things:
- That those who are predestined to glory (i.e. the elect) will
come to Christ. - That no one can come to Christ unless the Father draws Him.
**John 6:37 (Not cast out)
First, in John 6:37, Jesus does say: “All that the Father gives me will come to me; and him who comes to me I will not cast out.”
True. I don’t doubt that for a moment. If you come to Jesus, he won’t cast you out. But that doesn’t mean you can’t leave. In fact, you can. In order to understand this, we need to know a little bit about the Greek of this passage. I recently found a good summary of the translation issue. It said:
“Throughout this passage an important truth is presented that again might be missed by many English translations. When Jesus describes the one who comes to him and who believes in him [3:16, 5:24, 6:35, 37, 40, 47, etc.], he uses the present tense to describe this coming, believing, or, in other passages, hearing or seeing. The present tense refers to a continuous, on-going action. The Greek contrasts this kind of action against the aorist tense, which is a point action, a single action in time that is not on-going. . . . The wonderful promises that are provided by Christ are not for those who do not truly and continuously believe. The faith that saves is a living faith, a faith that always looks to Christ as Lord and Savior.” (White, 10-11).
That summary was offered by my opponent tonight, Mr. James White, in his little book, Drawn By the Father: A Summary of John 3:35-45.
So by my opponent’s own admission, “The wonderful promises that are provided by Christ are not for those who do not . . . continuously believe.” What this text says is that anyone who continuously comes to Jesus will not be cast out by Jesus. That’s absolutely true. What my opponent needs is a passage which says that anyone who is ever a true Christian will always come to Jesus and never stop coming. But this passage doesn’t say anything like that.**
**John 6:40 (Raise up)
Next Jesus says: “For this is the will of my Father, that every one who sees the Son and believes in him should have eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day.”
True. But the key verbs in this verse are present tense, so what it actually says is: “For this continues to be the will of my Father—that everyone who continues to see the Son and who continues to believe in him should continue to have eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.” My opponent gets no support here.
John 6:44 (Draws him)
Finally Jesus says: “No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him; and I will raise him up at the last day.”
Again, absolutely true. But again the Greek word for “can” is present tense and the Greek word for “come” is inceptive second aorist, meaning to begin to continually come. And the Greek for “draw” is inceptive first aorist, indicating the Father beginning and continuing to draw him.
So what the passage says is: “No one can come and keep coming to me unless the Father who sent me draws and keeps drawing him, and I will raise him up at the last day.”
That is absolutely true. If the Father keeps drawing you, you will keep coming. But it doesn’t say anything about the Father not drawing some people only for a time.**
This is from:
ewtn.com/library/ANSWERS/LOSS.htm
Besides, the Bible also states:
John 12:32
**32"And I, if I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all men to Myself." **
1 Timothy 4:10
**10For it is for this we labor and strive, because we have fixed our hope on the living God, who is the Savior of all men, especially of believers. **
And did God truly mean what He said when He said:
Ezekiel 18:23
**23"Do I have any pleasure in the death of the wicked," declares the Lord GOD, "rather than that he should turn from his ways and live? **
knowing that only He can cause them to "turn from his ways and live? That man is incapable of turning to God apart from His grace? That’s like me saying, “I take no pleasure in seeing you in pain and would prefer for you to be pain free”, but then withhold the treatment - or at least withold the opportunity to accept or reject the treatment - that can end the pain? How genuine is my sentiment.
To be continued…
God bless,
Michael
M
mikeledes
Guest
Or how do you explain the following verse:
Isaiah 5:1-4
**Now let me sing to my Well-beloved
A song of my Beloved regarding His vineyard:
God Bless,
Michael
Isaiah 5:1-4
**Now let me sing to my Well-beloved
A song of my Beloved regarding His vineyard:
Code:
My Well-beloved has a vineyard
On a very fruitful hill.
2 He dug it up and cleared out its stones,
And planted it with the choicest vine.
He built a tower in its midst,
And also made a winepress in it;
So He expected it to bring forth good grapes,
But it brought forth wild grapes.
3 “ And now, O inhabitants of Jerusalem and men of Judah,
Judge, please, between Me and My vineyard.
4 What more could have been done to My vineyard
That I have not done in it?
Why then, when I expected it to bring forth good grapes,
Did it bring forth wild grapes? **Michael
M
mikeledes
Guest
Or how about the verse guanophore quoted earlier?
Luke 7:29-30
30 but the Pharisees and the lawyers rejected the purpose of God for themselves
If the Pharisees were of the non-elect, than what “purpose of God for themsleves” did they reject? If God’s purpose for them was for them never to genuinely believe, then how can their unbelief be a rejection of that purpose? Woudln’t their unbelief actually be an acceptance and thus confirmationof God’s purpose for themselves, namely, unbelief and eternal damnation?
God Bless,
Michael
Luke 7:29-30
30 but the Pharisees and the lawyers rejected the purpose of God for themselves
If the Pharisees were of the non-elect, than what “purpose of God for themsleves” did they reject? If God’s purpose for them was for them never to genuinely believe, then how can their unbelief be a rejection of that purpose? Woudln’t their unbelief actually be an acceptance and thus confirmationof God’s purpose for themselves, namely, unbelief and eternal damnation?
God Bless,
Michael
G
guanophore
Guest
Do you then deny that Jesus is Lord of all? Is He only Lord of those who belong to Him in faith?
Do you deny that God wants all men to be saved?
Do you believe God created some people for the purpose of damnation?
P
Philthy
Guest
Im not sure who you are speaking for when you say “we”, but the majority of Protestants I have interacted with on this forum are of the opinion that salvation is instantaneous, permanent and complete at the time one comes to faith in Christ. Sanctification may be progressive, but salvation, in their view, is instaneous, like being “zapped.” I dont syat this as a point to debate, it is merely a fact that the “zapped” view predominates.
That is not an accurate conclusion. While it is true that without God it is impossible, it is also true that without choosing to respond to God’s initiative through the exercise of the will, it wont happen either. The difference is that it cant happen apart from Gods drawing, but it also might not happen DESPITE Gods calling because the call is rejected. God sets before us good and evil and gives us a choice (cf Deut 30:19-20).
Yeah, this was Mikeledes’ point…glad to see we agree on that!
So out of curiousity then, would you say that someone like Ted Haggerty, who fell into mortal sin (drugs, extramarital sex, homosexuality) was, in reality, not a “born again” believer?
P
Philthy
Guest
M
mikeledes
Guest
What I find interesting is that we now have two Calvinists saying two different things. One says that drawing = regeneration and that no one can seek God unless they have been regenerated first, while the other one says drawing precedes regeneration.
God Bless,
Michael
N
Nick_Jones
Guest
I asked:
It is apparent that you worship a god who only offers the POSSIBILITY of salvation. How is this belief any different than giving all the credit for salvation to the goodness of those who, by their own “full acceptance and cooperation” are saved?
N
Nick_Jones
Guest
All of us reject the purpose of God for ourselves every time we sin. Yet our sin still accomplishes God’s purpose. This might seem like a huge contradiction to you, but ultimately, God’s will cannot be frustrated by the will of any individual. In the end, all things work out for Him, and for His glory.
M
mikeledes
Guest
Let me reiterate the Catholic teaching regarding prevenient grace and the gift of faith:
**In the refutation of Semipelagianism, in so far as the necessity of actual grace is concerned, it will not be amiss to follow an adult through all the stage on the way to salvation, from the state of unbelief and mortal sin to the state of grace and a happy death. With regard, first, to the period of unbelief, the Second Synod of Orange (can. v) decreed that prevenient grace is absolutely necessary to the infidel not only for faith itself, but also for the very beginning of faith. By the “beginning of faith”, it intended to designate all the good aspirations and motions to believe which precede faith properly so called, as early dawn precedes sunrise. Consequently, the whole preparation for the faith is made under the influence of grace, e.g. the instruction of persons to be converted. The accuracy of this view is confirmed by the Bible. According to the assurance of the Saviour, external preaching is useless if the invisible influence of grace (the being drawn by the Father) does not set in to effect the gradual “coming” to Christ (John, vi, 44). Were faith rooted in mere nature, were it based on mere natural inclination to believe or on natural merit, nature could legitimately glory in its own achievement of the work of salvation in its entirety, from faith to justification–nay, to beatific vision itself.And still Paul (I Cor., iv, 7; Eph., ii 8 sq.) abominates nothing so much as the “glorying” of nature. **
God is First cause and man’s will is the secondary cause. The efficaciousness of any gift of God involves the free cooperation of the will, but ultimately does not depend on the human will. God has the FIRST (i.e. prevenient grace) and FINAL (i.e.gift of final persverance) say on salvation. Therefore, if a gift is efficacious in one person and not the other, it is not because one deserved it more than the other.
A Catholic has a moral assurance that they are saved.
God Bless,
Michael
N
Nick_Jones
Guest
Hi Michael,
It isn’t clear to me exactly why you bring this passage to our attention. Are you trying to tell us that this is proving that God can be surprised by the rejection of His people? Or do you think it means that our “free” will can ultimately frustrate God’s will, so that God is not able to save everyone who He wants to save?
M
mikeledes
Guest
Hi Nick!
Neither. God can neither be “surprised” nor “frustrated” because both of these terms would suggest that He is not omniscient or He is not omipotent. The point of all of God’s work in His vineyard was to produce good grapes. That was not the result. God states:Isaiah 5:4
**4 What more could have been done to My vineyard
That I have not done in it?
Why then, when I expected it to bring forth good grapes,
Did it bring forth wild grapes? **
Which means that His work was sufficient to produce the grapes He wanted (i.e. expected). And He got wild grapes. Why?
The point of using the passage is that it has been argued or implied that God’s initiatives must be efficacious.
God Bless,
Michael
N
Nick_Jones
Guest
Well, ISTM that if the entire creation is all about God’s purposes and God’s glory, then His greatest work of all, the salvation of His sheep, must be something that most clearly reveals His good workmanship–we are saved ONLY by His goodness, not any goodness of our own.Hi Nick!
Isaiah 5:4
4 What more could have been done to My vineyard
That I have not done in it?
Why then, when I expected it to bring forth good grapes,
Did it bring forth wild grapes?
Which means that His work was sufficient to produce the grapes He wanted (i.e. expected). And He got wild grapes. Why?
The point of using the passage is that it has been argued or implied that God’s initiatives must be efficacious.
God Bless,
Michael
So, to answer your question, the passage above demonstrates that even under the most ideal conditions (such as the garden of Eden) the final result is still rebellion and sin. Only God’s special grace can make and keep a person righteous. God goes to the most extreme lengths to make the elect righteous.
M
mgrfin
Guest
When asked, Jesus never said what we had to do to be saved was ‘be good’.
He asked us for charity: love of God, first, above all things, and love of our neighbor, as our selves.
Goodness is a fruit of the Holy Spirit. It ranks right up there with ‘begnity’. Charity is the Queen of virtues, the only one remaining in heaven.
peace
O
Odell
Guest
If God had it His way he would save everyone
This is good and acceptable in the sight of **God our Savior,
who desires ALL men to be saved **and to come to the knowledge of the truth.
1 Timothy 2:3-4
The Lord is not slow about His promise, as some count slowness,
but is patient toward you, **not wishing for any to perish **
but for all to come to repentance.
2 Peter 3:9
God did not want Adam and Eve to sin he told them not to. But they had free will. Just as we do.
There Free will did not frustrait Gods will because at the same time God wants us to freely choose him
If you was married you would understand this. Would you force your wife to love you or choose you? Of course not you may want her to be with you but you would not force her to because that would not be love at all.
God made us to be with him and that is our goal. He died for every man not just some people.
M
mikeledes
Guest
True. Man is not saved by his own goodness. That is why the Catholic Church teaches that complete predestination (grace to glory) is prior to any foreseen merits and that the gift of final perseverance (i.e. perseverance to the end) cannot be merited.
Yes. Ideal external conditions will still produce sin and rebellion because the internal condition of fallen man remains the same. If there is no internal divine influence, then sin and rebellion is the inevitable result. However, what was the intended end of God’s work in His vineyard?
Isaiah 5:1-2
**My Well-beloved has a vineyard
On a very fruitful hill.
2 He dug it up and cleared out its stones,
And planted it with the choicest vine.
He built a tower in its midst,
And also made a winepress in it;
So He expected it to bring forth good grapes,
But it brought forth wild grapes. **
The intended end of His work was good grapes, which symbolize righteous conduct that is pleasing to Him (Isaiah 5:7). However, we know fallen man - apart from grace - cannot please God:
Romans 8:7
** 7 Because the carnal mind is enmity against God; for it is not subject to the law of God, nor indeed can be. 8 So then, those who are in the flesh cannot please God.**
It requires divine intervention. Now if the end of God’s work in His vineyard was “good grapes”, His work cannot be merely external, merely creating the ideal external conditions. Like I said earlier, you can place fallen man in the ideal external conditions and he will still rebel because nothing was done internally. Purely external conditions will not produce the righteous conduct that pleases God. Now let’s look at what God asks again in Isaiah 5:4:
4** What more could have been done to My vineyard
That I have not done in it?
Why then, when I expected it to bring forth good grapes,
Did it bring forth wild grapes? **
God clearly indicates that His work was sufficient to produce the “good grapes” He wanted. He specficially asks what more could He have done that He did not do? Well, if He did not internally influence man to produce these grapes, then there was in fact something He did not do. Actually, it is this internal divine influence that is the most essential element. You can live in the worst external conditions - in Sodom and Gommorah - and still receive the grace of God, be made righteous by His grace, and be righteous in conduct. So the “work” that He did must not only refer to mere external conditions, but also an internal influence in their hearts (i.e. grace). And yet - despite the fact that God did the work to produce the grapes, this work was inefficacious in producing it’s end. My point? That not all of God’s initiatives in man (i.e. prevenient grace) is necessarily efficacious.
God Bless,
Michael
M
mikeledes
Guest
Nick, I have to go and I will not be online for the next three days. 
I hope that you and your family - and all of the participants in this thread - have a very blessed weekend.
God Bless,
Michael
I hope that you and your family - and all of the participants in this thread - have a very blessed weekend. God Bless,
Michael
G
guanophore
Guest
Because full acceptance and cooperation does not imply innate goodness or “merit”. It is God who draws. Those who respond to the call are elected.
Phil 2:12-13
"…work out your own salvation with fear and trembling; 13 for God is at work in you, both to will and to work for his good pleasure.
Salvation is worked out in the believer as the believer allows God’s spirit to will and to work within.
Notice “work out your own” is in the imperative mode. This is a directive, something that the person must will and do. One cannot save oneself, so it can only happen by yielding oneself to the grace of God, who is the author and finisher of our faith.
I sure can’t argue with that! However, the context of the passage is having faith in the Gospel message.
No, this is faulty reasoning. God is able to make good come out of our errors, and write straight with crooked lines, but it is not the sin that accomlishes the purpose, but HIs grace that is much more powerful than our sins.
God is not glorified by the disobedience of those He created for fellowship. He desires to glorify Himself in our lives by having us bear good fruit, and be good witnesses of His holiness. True, we cannot, by our rebellion, subtract from His glory, but we can sure prevent Him from being glorified in our lives by our rebellion.
- Status