Paul taught that Revelation 20:4 was a current reality

[Spiritual Israelite]

Yes, you did tell me that... It seemed quite insincere...

Are you somehow not aware that it's possible to love someone's soul without liking their personality or their actions? I love everyone. We're told to even love our enemies. So, I do. Do I like how everyone behaves or like everyone's personality? No. And neither do you.

Ah, yeah... I mean, if we met face to face, I'm sure we'd like each other. Really.

I don't think so. You come across to me as being quite arrogant and that would annoy me. I know you think the same of me. With that being the case, we could only be friends if we were each very different than how we currently perceive each other.

Well, God forbid you make it into something entirely different that what it was. Which is exactly what you did. But that seems to have been a recurring pattern of yours in this thread.

Yawn. I think it's best that we just not talk to each other anymore. You annoy me. I annoy you. Why continue this?

I will say, Spiritual Israelite, that I do agree with much of what you have posted before, and that you have a lot of very, very good things to say. Maybe it seems to me you get a little too... passionate... about it from time to time, but still, yes, you have a lot of very, very good things to say. This is at least somewhat of an olive branch (just in case you don't get that)...

Thanks. And I think that about you as well when it comes to eschatology. Though we disagree on a few things there as well. Not nearly as much as we do with soteriology, obviously.

No, you're not the only one. Agreed.

Glad to see that you're open minded and willingly chose to change your mind about that.

Edit: I see you went and edited your post after this. Arrogant and dishonest. Not a good combination, PinSeeker.

Hmmm...

Keep thinking about it.

Grace and peace to you.

To you as well. And to all people since God loves all people and wants them all to be saved (1 Timothy 2:3-6, Titus 2:11, 1 John 2:1-2, Acts 17:30, Romans 11:30-32, etc.).

 

[grafted branch]

Well, not to insult your intelligence in any way, but I think you're not getting what I'm saying, really. In the Bible, to be dead, Grafted Branch, does not mean to be non-existent or lacking in consciousness... does not imply in any way lack of existence or consciousness... either in this life or after. In other words, there are dead people walking around among us right now ~ which is not to say they are not living and breathing... (I'm kind of smiling in saying this, but it's no laughing matter) ~ and... well, what I just said, that even folks who have physically died are not dead in the sense of being non-existent or unconscious. Biblically speaking, death, or being dead, is a state of being, both in this life and after.

I think we are having a good conversation here, and no you’re not insulting my intelligence. Sometimes I have to be hit over the head a few times before I can see what others are trying to tell me.

As for the dead, yea I absolutely see that, I like to use Luke 9:60 let the dead bury their dead. I see the rest of the dead in Revelation 20:5 not living again until the thousand years are over being Israel blind in part.

So back to “coming as a thief”. We know Christ will come and if we say that “as a thief” is only on the spiritually dead, then the watching would also have to be spiritual also, right?

I mean unsaved people can watch for physical signs, if all of a sudden most of the Jews started claiming Jesus as their savior, there would be some unsaved people that might find it interesting and watch the situation.

If I try to put this all together can we say that all believers will spiritually watch and He will not come on them as a thief, while all unbelievers will not spiritually watch and He will come on them as a thief?

Or would it be that all believers will watch and He will not come on them as a thief, while unbelievers may or may not have Him come on them as a thief, it just depends on whether they watch or not?

It would not make any sense for Him to have said this to His immediate hearers if what He was saying was not applicable to or intended for them, right?

Yes, agreed

So, even though He hasn't returned yet ~ because, as you agreed, the fullness of the Gentiles has not been brought into Israel and the partial hardening now on Israel has not yet been removed, and thus not all Israel is saved yet (Romans 11:25-26) ~ what He said in Luke 12:40 is still, even now (in view of what I said above about being dead), relevant to His original hearers, even though long deceased. So really, I would say even the very passage you point out here is indicative of what you say you are not seeing.

Well I think the fullness of the Gentiles came in when all that was prophesied for them was done. Their fullness was referring to fulfillment not a total number of Gentiles to be saved.

So I see the fullness of the Gentiles being their prophesied act of the destruction of Jerusalem being fulfilled.

And I would also point out Jesus's parable in Luke 16:19-31... Even now long-deceased folks (like the rich man in Jesus's parable here) are expectant, really ~ in one way or the other, if you get my meaning, waiting... and watching... In this passage, we can and should understand the rich man to be dreading what he knows is coming; thus his desire to warn those who have not yet died. <shudder> That's a very frightening thing to say the least.

I did look at that story or parable (depending on how you look at it) and it implies that once someone is dead they are aware of the Bible and whether or not they are saved. But why would it matter if an unsaved dead person watched or not? What would it benefit an unsaved dead person to watch, they wouldn’t anticipate a better outcome if they did watch, right?

I understand you are leaning towards full preterism; I would encourage you not to do that...

I don’t think the old covenant was still valid after the cross like the full preterist say but maybe in the last year or so I have come to believe more and more that there was a 70AD coming and it did fulfill many things.

This might sound strange but I think there are many believers who have an adversity to fulfillment. They don’t want to give up the hope that they are going to be personally involved in certain prophecies being fulfilled.

 

[PinSeeker]

Anyone can speak to this, I guess...

Are you talking about saving faith being given to people and that God chooses who will have saving faith and who won't? If so, I don't believe that. I believe in man's responsibility, which is taught repeatedly in scripture.

So you see, @WPM, that what you supposed, namely that "he believes faith is a gift from God," is not true. Certainly I agree with you that "there is no Plan B... it is as clear a truth as one can find in the Bible." I'm not sure how anyone could still say what he's saying after I quoted the passages above, but he still does. That's okay, as far as I'm concerned, but still, in contradiction with Scripture itself. Now, you would think that some alternative explanation/interpretation to those passages would be given in rebuttal, but there was none given.

I believe man has no excuse to not have faith (Romans 1:18-32).

But Paul, @Spiritual Israelite, in Romans 1, is not talking about faith. He's saying that man has no excuse to not acknowledge the existence of God or to suppress the truth or to worship creation rather than the Creator, because what can be known about Him has been clearly seen by all. Again, I know you don't mean to be making this faith out to be a work of man or to make God's grace out to be something other than grace, but in effect, that's exactly what you are doing.

If a person can only have faith if God causes him or her to have faith, then a person who isn't given faith would have an excuse for not having faith.

You're missing the force of this, @Spiritual Israelite. Again, I am not ~ not ~ insulting your intelligence. Faith ~ the assurance (given by God) of things hoped for (we hope, but God assures), the conviction (by the Holy Spirit, Who convicts) of things not seen ~ is the vehicle through which we are born again of the Spirit. Faith is a gift of the Holy Spirit (again, Romans 12 and 1 Corinthians 12). Then ~ and only then , and this is our responsibility then kicking in ~ we are newly created by God for good works... God thereby causes us to be obedient and to be careful to follow His rules (Ezekiel 11, 36). This is our responsibility, to be obedient and to be careful to follow His rules... to glorify God.

Believing that God graciously and genuinely offers salvation to all people (Titus 2:11)...

Certainly. Calvinists certainly affirm this. And I have, many, many times.

while making them responsible to willingly choose to accept it or reject it does nothing to take away from His grace.

But grace cannot be dependent on anything else; otherwise, it is not grace... not unmerited favor.

Are you somehow not aware that it's possible to love someone's soul without liking their personality or their actions? I love everyone. We're told to even love our enemies. So, I do. Do I like how everyone behaves or like everyone's personality? No. And neither do you.

Accepted.

I don't think so.

Well, that's too bad. But, okay.

You come across to me as being quite arrogant and that would annoy me.

On this message board. I get that. And, like I said, right back atcha. But at least for me, I hope that wouldn't keep me from getting along with you and even liking you.

I think it's best that we just not talk to each other anymore.

Maybe so. Fine. You can stop any time you want...

You annoy me. I annoy you.

I'm not annoyed. Frustration is quite a different thing than annoyance.

Why continue this?

I'm certainly okay with stopping any time... Ohhhhh, I get it; you have to have the last word. Well... maybe me too. That kind of presents a problem, doesn't it?

And I think that about you as well when it comes to eschatology. Though we disagree on a few things there as well. Not nearly as much as we do with soteriology, obviously.

Right on. However... see above.

Glad to see that you're open minded and willingly chose to change your mind about that.

Well I am open-minded, certainly, but "change my mind" about... what?

Arrogant and dishonest. Not a good combination, PinSeeker.

I apologized for the arrogance. I think you have too, but I don't care.

I have not been dishonest. Now, who's accusing who of being a liar again...?

Keep thinking about it.

Oh, it was a tacit response. Think about it.

And to all people since God loves all people and wants them all to be saved (1 Timothy 2:3-6, Titus 2:11, 1 John 2:1-2, Acts 17:30, Romans 11:30-32, etc.).

Certainly. However, as I cited before, many are invited, but few are chosen (Jesus, Matthew 22:14)...

I did originally intend this to be mostly a direct address to @WPM ...

Grace and peace to you both.

 

[PinSeeker]

I think we are having a good conversation here, and no you’re not insulting my intelligence. Sometimes I have to be hit over the head a few times before I can see what others are trying to tell me.

Gotcha. Me, too.

As for the dead, yea I absolutely see that, I like to use Luke 9:60 let the dead bury their dead. I see the rest of the dead in Revelation 20:5 not living again until the thousand years are over being Israel blind in part.

Very well.

So back to “coming as a thief”. We know Christ will come and if we say that “as a thief” is only on the spiritually dead, then the watching would also have to be spiritual also, right?

His "coming as a thief" denotes His eventual coming as sudden and unexpected, and this applies to all. I feel like I've been very clear about that.

I mean unsaved people can watch for physical signs, if all of a sudden most of the Jews started claiming Jesus as their savior, there would be some unsaved people that might find it interesting and watch the situation.

If I try to put this all together can we say that all believers will spiritually watch and He will not come on them as a thief, while all unbelievers will not spiritually watch and He will come on them as a thief?

Or would it be that all believers will watch and He will not come on them as a thief, while unbelievers may or may not have Him come on them as a thief, it just depends on whether they watch or not?

Again, I think you're over-analyzing this.

Well I think the fullness of the Gentiles came in when all that was prophesied for them was done.

Hmmm... So you think it's already happened... If so, I disagree. But we may very well be very, very close to that point.

Their fullness was referring to fulfillment not a total number of Gentiles to be saved.

Disagree. Why do you believe that, GB? I mean, I think it very, very clear that Paul, from Romans 9 through Romans 11, is talking about a full number of folks who will eventually make up all of God's Israel. What exactly that number is we cannot know, but we can talk about the whole as a group, and that's exactly what Paul is doing.

So I see the fullness of the Gentiles being their prophesied act of the destruction of Jerusalem being fulfilled.

Hm. Well, okay. I mean, I'm not going to argue. I do disagree, though, obviously.

I did look at that story or parable (depending on how you look at it) and it implies that once someone is dead they are aware of the Bible and whether or not they are saved. But why would it matter if an unsaved dead person watched or not? What would it benefit an unsaved dead person to watch, they wouldn’t anticipate a better outcome if they did watch, right?

Yeah at that point, it's not really about "watching," except in the sense of knowing it's coming, where, formerly, they were just in denial ~ suppressing the truth, as Paul says in Romans 1, but even that implies a knowledge of the truth.

I don’t think the old covenant was still valid after the cross like the full preterist say...

I don't think this is exclusively a full preterist thing, GB. I would say it's still valid, but we ~ as believers ~ are no longer under it; we are no longer under the civil or ceremonial Law (the moral Law still applies), but under the law of Christ, as Paul puts it in Galatians 3. And this can be summed up in... well, as Jesus says:

"'You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.' This is the great and first commandment. And a second is like it: 'You shall love your neighbor as yourself.' On these two commandments depend all the Law and the Prophets." (Matthew 22:37-40)​

However, the Old Covenant is still in effect, and if anyone ~ anyone ~ can fulfill it perfectly, then they too will be saved. They would then justify themselves, and they would then merit salvation, and thus save themselves. But of course they cannot. All fall short of the glory of God. And the wages of sin is death. Therefore, the need for a Savior, which, thanks be to God... As Jesus says, "With man this is impossible, but with God, all things are possible."

but maybe in the last year or so I have come to believe more and more that there was a 70AD coming and it did fulfill many things.

Okay, well, I would say that there was a coming of sorts, but it was at Pentecost, the coming of the Holy Spirit. And in the Holy Spirit, Christ is with us even now, just as He said He would be in Matthew 28:20. But He has not yet returned physically. But He will...

This might sound strange but I think there are many believers who have an adversity to fulfillment. They don’t want to give up the hope that they are going to be personally involved in certain prophecies being fulfilled.

Okay. I mean... well, okay. I don't really see this as here or there, really, to be quite honest. But okay. But I would say we absolutely are involved in certain prophecies being fulfilled, first and foremost that ~ I'm assuming you're a Gentile as well as I ~ the fullness of the Gentiles will be brought into God's Israel. Or... here's basically the same thing:

• "...this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, declares the LORD: I will put my law within them, and I will write it on their hearts. And I will be their God, and they shall be my people" (Jeremiah 31:33)
• "Then I saw thrones, and seated on them were those to whom the authority to judge was committed. Also I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded for the testimony of Jesus and for the word of God, and those who had not worshiped the beast or its image and had not received its mark on their foreheads or their hands. They came to life and reigned with Christ for a thousand years. The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were ended. This is the first resurrection. Blessed and holy is the one who shares in the first resurrection! Over such the second death has no power, but they will be priests of God and of Christ, and they will reign with him for a thousand years" (Revelation 20:4-6).

Grace and peace to you.

 

[WPM]

What do you mean exactly? Are you talking about saving faith being given to people and that God chooses who will have saving faith and who won't? If so, I don't believe that. I believe in man's responsibility, which is taught repeatedly in scripture. I believe man has no excuse to not have faith (Romans 1:18-32). If a person can only have faith if God causes him or her to have faith, then a person who isn't given faith would have an excuse for not having faith.


What are "the doctrines of grace"? I believe my doctrine promotes God's grace at least as much as Calvinism does. Believing that God graciously and genuinely offers salvation to all people (Titus 2:11) while making them responsible to willingly choose to accept it or reject it does nothing to take away from His grace.

1. How can a corpse live?
2. How can a blind man see?
3. How can a deaf man hear?
4. How can an unregenerate man exercise "saving faith"?
5. Why did God choose Israel in the OT and not Egypt or the Persians?
6. Why did He choose Paul the apostle in the New Testament and not Pilate?
7. Why did He choose you and me today and not 99.9% of Afghans?

 

[WPM]

@WPM Can I ask you a question? I’m not looking to debate you or cause friction between you and other Amils, I’m just wondering where you stand on a particular issue.

The last few days I feel the Spirit leading me away from the Amil position and even deeper into the Preterist position.

I feel one of the core and strongest points for Amil is that Jesus is the resurrection and was resurrected first. I think that point is absolutely true.

My question is do you support the principle that there are instances where a word such as “resurrection” can have a unique meaning that doesn’t agree with any other instances of that word?

I believe there is physical resurrection and I believe there a spiritual resurrection. Both are found throughout the Word.

 

[grafted branch]

Disagree. Why do you believe that, GB? I mean, I think it very, very clear that Paul, from Romans 9 through Romans 11, is talking about a full number of folks who will eventually make up all of God's Israel. What exactly that number is we cannot know, but we can talk about the whole as a group, and that's exactly what Paul is doing.

The Jewish kingdom began at Sinai, when the Shekinah glory dwelt in the Tabernacle and later in Solomon's Temple. This was when the times of the Jews started, time was not based on how old the earth was but based on the reigns of the Jewish leaders at the time.

For example 1 Kings 16:8 In the twenty and sixth year of Asa king of Judah began Elah the son of Baasha to reign over Israel in Tirzah, two years.

Time is based on who is ruling which was an extension of the authority of God.

When the Babylonian captivity occurred the Shekinah glory departed the temple and the times of the Jews ended.

After the times of the Jews, Daniel gives us the images of the reigning Gentile powers on earth as animals, which one day would end. The times of the Gentiles started with Babylon and the last act that the Gentiles were prophesied to perform was the sacking of Jerusalem in Daniel 9:26, this happened in 70AD. We see the statements such as the fullness of the Gentiles or times of the Gentiles be fulfilled because the Gentiles didn’t fully complete all that they were prophesied to do when Romans was written. Luke 21:22 For these be the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled. The times of the Gentiles came in when the fullness or completion of all things prophesied for them occurred.

We have now come to mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels. Jesus is now reigning and the Shekinah glory is in New Jerusalem in Revelation 21.

It is interesting to note that the words IN THE YEAR OF OUR LORD is sometimes used when expressing a date, nobody says IN THE YEAR OF THE GENTILES.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

So you see, @WPM, that what you supposed, namely that "he believes faith is a gift from God," is not true. Certainly I agree with you that "there is no Plan B... it is as clear a truth as one can find in the Bible." I'm not sure how anyone could still say what he's saying after I quoted the passages above, but he still does.

Ah, yes. Your arrogance is never ending. How could anyone dare disagree with the Mighty PinSeeker! Didn't I tell you to get over yourself? You should be working on that by now.

That's okay, as far as I'm concerned, but still, in contradiction with Scripture itself. Now, you would think that some alternative explanation/interpretation to those passages would be given in rebuttal, but there was none given.

Are you for real or putting everyone on? I have given rebuttals for almost everything you have said, which has been a lot, and you have the gall to say this as if I try to avoid addressing your points? You have to be kidding me.

But Paul, @Spiritual Israelite, in Romans 1, is not talking about faith. He's saying that man has no excuse to not acknowledge the existence of God or to suppress the truth or to worship creation rather than the Creator, because what can be known about Him has been clearly seen by all.

LOL. How can someone worship God without faith? Your doctrine is go ingrained in you and you are so brainwashed, that you can't even think outside of your Calvinist box.

Notice, that Paul includes the gospel in what he is talking about in Romans 1.

Romans 1:16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek. 17 For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, The just shall live by faith. 18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness; 19 Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them. 20 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:

If you read this carefully, you should see that Paul is including the gospel of Christ as part of the truth that those people suppressed. He said they had no excuse for holding "the truth in unrighteousness" and that truth included knowledge of "his eternal power and Godhead". The Godhead includes Father, Son and Holy Spirit. This means they have no excuse for rejecting God as Father, Son and Holy Spirit. They have no excuse for holding the truth about God, including the gospel of Christ, which is the power of God unto salvation, in unrighteousness.

Again, I know you don't mean to be making this faith out to be a work of man or to make God's grace out to be something other than grace, but in effect, that's exactly what you are doing.

No, it is not and I have already explained why it's not. You are equating faith and works while Paul differentiated between the two. In Ephesians 2:8-10 Paul said that salvation is by grace and IS through faith but it is NOT through works. If faith is a work how can salvation be through faith and not works? That makes no sense. Just like James in James 2, Paul differentiated between faith and works. Why don't you?

You're missing the force of this, @Spiritual Israelite. Again, I am not ~ not ~ insulting your intelligence. Faith ~ the assurance (given by God) of things hoped for (we hope, but God assures), the conviction (by the Holy Spirit, Who convicts) of things not seen ~ is the vehicle through which we are born again of the Spirit. Faith is a gift of the Holy Spirit (again, Romans 12 and 1 Corinthians 12).

Saving faith is not a gift of the Holy Spirit. You are taking scripture out of context. When Paul wrote about the gifts of the Holy Spirit he made it clear that not everyone has all of the gifts. Some have the gift of prophecy, some the gift of healing, some the gift of teaching, some the gift faith (an extra measure of faith, not saving faith) and so on.

Then ~ and only then , and this is our responsibility then kicking in ~ we are newly created by God for good works... God thereby causes us to be obedient and to be careful to follow His rules (Ezekiel 11, 36). This is our responsibility, to be obedient and to be careful to follow His rules... to glorify God.

Can you not make up your mind about this? Does God cause us to be obedient or is it our responsibility? If God causes us to be obedient than it's His responsibility for us to be obedient, not ours.

Certainly. Calvinists certainly affirm this. And I have, many, many times.

This was what you said in response to me saying "Believing that God graciously and genuinely offers salvation to all people (Titus 2:11)...". If we were talking in person, I don't know how you could say this to me with a straight face. How can you think that God genuinely offers salvation to those who He did not predestine to salvation? Those who He made sure had no opportunity to be saved? That is complete nonsense.

Certainly. However, as I cited before, many are invited, but few are chosen (Jesus, Matthew 22:14)...

Invited to what exactly? Based on Titus 2:11, which says God offers salvation to all people, it has to be talking about being invited to salvation. Invited to join the kingdom of God. But, you make the offer, the invitation, disingenuous because you believe that God purposely makes it so that some people have no ability to even accept the offer/invitation.

I did originally intend this to be mostly a direct address to @WPM ...

It's a public forum and anyone can respond, of course. Private messaging is available here if you want to talk to him about something privately.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

1. How can a corpse live?
2. How can a blind man see?
3. How can a deaf man hear?
4. How can an unregenerate man exercise "saving faith"?
5. Why did God choose Israel in the OT and not Egypt or the Persians?
6. Why did He choose Paul the apostle in the New Testament and not Pilate?
7. Why did He choose you and me today and not 99.9% of Afghans?

Ha. How long have you known me? You know neither of us accept it when questions are answered with questions. Can you answer my questions first, please?

 

[PinSeeker]

The Jewish kingdom began at Sinai, when the Shekinah glory dwelt in the Tabernacle and later in Solomon's Temple. This was when the times of the Jews started, time was not based on how old the earth was but based on the reigns of the Jewish leaders at the time.

For example 1 Kings 16:8 In the twenty and sixth year of Asa king of Judah began Elah the son of Baasha to reign over Israel in Tirzah, two years.

Time is based on who is ruling which was an extension of the authority of God.

When the Babylonian captivity occurred the Shekinah glory departed the temple and the times of the Jews ended.

After the times of the Jews, Daniel gives us the images of the reigning Gentile powers on earth as animals, which one day would end. The times of the Gentiles started with Babylon and the last act that the Gentiles were prophesied to perform was the sacking of Jerusalem in Daniel 9:26, this happened in 70AD. We see the statements such as the fullness of the Gentiles or times of the Gentiles be fulfilled because the Gentiles didn’t fully complete all that they were prophesied to do when Romans was written. Luke 21:22 For these be the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled. The times of the Gentiles came in when the fullness or completion of all things prophesied for them occurred.

We have now come to mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels. Jesus is now reigning and the Shekinah glory is in New Jerusalem in Revelation 21.

It is interesting to note that the words IN THE YEAR OF OUR LORD is sometimes used when expressing a date, nobody says IN THE YEAR OF THE GENTILES.

Okay.

Grace and peace to you, Grafted Branch.

 

[WPM]

Ha. How long have you known me? You know neither of us accept it when questions are answered with questions. Can you answer my questions first, please?

A spiritual corpse can in no way respond to God, understand God, please God or offer Him anything meritorious. He needs God to come to him and breath life and strength into him.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

A spiritual corpse can in no way respond to God, understand God, please God or offer Him anything meritorious. He needs God to come to him and breath life and strength into him.

So, what about my questions then? I'm asking if you were talking about saving faith when you said faith is a gift of God (I assume so, but just wanted confirmation). And I'm asking you what are "the doctrines of grace"? Are you referring to TULIP (Calvinism) or something else? Once you answer these questions, then I will address what you said here.

 

[WPM]

So, what about my questions then? I'm asking if you were talking about saving faith when you said faith is a gift of God (I assume so, but just wanted confirmation). And I'm asking you what are "the doctrines of grace"? Are you referring to TULIP (Calvinism) or something else? Once you answer these questions, then I will address what you said here.

Yes and yes. I do not own the name Calvinist. I cannot put man's name to biblical truth.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

A spiritual corpse can in no way respond to God, understand God, please God or offer Him anything meritorious. He needs God to come to him and breath life and strength into him.

Where does scripture teach the concept of "a spiritual corpse"? Yes, I, of course, am familiar with passages like Ephesians 2:1-6 which talk about how people are dead in their sins before they are saved, but where does scripture refer to that as being "a spiritual corpse"? I think comparing being spiritually dead in sins should not be compared to being physically dead, as it seems like you may be doing (correct me if I'm wrong). Scripture never makes any such comparison.

Remember, Jesus came not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.

Matthew 9:11 And when the Pharisees saw it, they said unto his disciples, Why eateth your Master with publicans and sinners? 12 But when Jesus heard that, he said unto them, They that be whole need not a physician, but they that are sick. 13 But go ye and learn what that meaneth, I will have mercy, and not sacrifice: for I am not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.

In my view, people who are "dead in sins" are not dead in every way as I would think "a spiritual corpse" would be. Jesus called people who were dead in their sins to repentance and He considered them to be "sick". Not literally dead like "a spiritual corpse". Being dead in sins simply means that you are a sinner and are separated from God and therefore have His wrath on you. But, it also means that someone is spiritually sick and not spiritually dead in the way I think you are thinking of it.

A sick person is limited in what they can do, but they are capable of acknowledging that they are sick while asking for help and asking for someone to heal them. Similarly, a spiritually sick person who is separated from God because of their sin (dead in sins) is capable of acknowledging that they are a sinner in need of God's mercy and forgiveness. If that is a choice that God expects people to make using free will, then how exactly is that a case of offering Him anything meritorious? They are instead acknowledging to Him that they have nothing to offer to Him while asking Him for mercy and forgiveness. Like we see the tax collector doing in this parable:

Luke 18:9 To some who were confident of their own righteousness and looked down on everyone else, Jesus told this parable: 10 “Two men went up to the temple to pray, one a Pharisee and the other a tax collector. 11 The Pharisee stood by himself and prayed: ‘God, I thank you that I am not like other people—robbers, evildoers, adulterers—or even like this tax collector. 12 I fast twice a week and give a tenth of all I get.’ 13 “But the tax collector stood at a distance. He would not even look up to heaven, but beat his breast and said, ‘God, have mercy on me, a sinner.’ 14 “I tell you that this man, rather than the other, went home justified before God. For all those who exalt themselves will be humbled, and those who humble themselves will be exalted.”

Notice the Pharisee didn't brag about having faith, he bragged about his works. Scripture says that if salvation were by works, then man could boast of his own salvation (Ephesians 2:8-10, Romans 4:1-3, etc.) as if he saved himself, but it does not say that about salvation being by faith. In Romans 4:1-3 Paul said that Abraham was NOT justified by works but WAS justified by his faith.

What did the tax collector do, in contrast to what the Pharisee did? He humbled himself and asked God to have mercy on Him while admitting that he was a sinner. Why would you think that a person "dead in their sins" (separated from God), but also sick in need of a physician, can't humble themselves while asking God for mercy unless God basically does that for them? If someone uses free will to decide to acknowledge that they are a sinner who can't save themselves while asking God for mercy, where is the merit in that? How could someone like that take credit for their own salvation after acknowledging that they are a sinner who can't save themselves? They couldn't. But, that is what Calvinists (not trying to put this label on you, just speaking generally here) typically think non-Calvinists believe: that we teach that man can take credit for his own salvation. That is not true. Not with how I look at it, at least.

I think I probably should stop at this point or this will be too long. I'll just say one last thing for now. With all that said, I certainly do believe that we are saved by grace. I believe my view does not take anything away from God's grace because I view salvation as being a result of people acknowledging that they can't save themselves while instead putting their trust in Jesus Christ for their salvation and that is how someone accepts the offer of salvation that God makes to all people (Titus 2:11).

 

[WPM]

Where does scripture teach the concept of "a spiritual corpse"? Yes, I, of course, am familiar with passages like Ephesians 2:1-6 which talk about how people are dead in their sins before they are saved, but where does scripture refer to that as being "a spiritual corpse"? I think comparing being spiritually dead in sins should not be compared to being physically dead, as it seems like you may be doing (correct me if I'm wrong). Scripture never makes any such comparison.

Remember, Jesus came not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.

Matthew 9:11 And when the Pharisees saw it, they said unto his disciples, Why eateth your Master with publicans and sinners? 12 But when Jesus heard that, he said unto them, They that be whole need not a physician, but they that are sick. 13 But go ye and learn what that meaneth, I will have mercy, and not sacrifice: for I am not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.

In my view, people who are "dead in sins" are not dead in every way as I would think "a spiritual corpse" would be. Jesus called people who were dead in their sins to repentance and He considered them to be "sick". Not literally dead like "a spiritual corpse". Being dead in sins simply means that you are a sinner and are separated from God and therefore have His wrath on you. But, it also means that someone is spiritually sick and not spiritually dead in the way I think you are thinking of it.

A sick person is limited in what they can do, but they are capable of acknowledging that they are sick while asking for help and asking for someone to heal them. Similarly, a spiritually sick person who is separated from God because of their sin (dead in sins) is capable of acknowledging that they are a sinner in need of God's mercy and forgiveness. If that is a choice that God expects people to make using free will, then how exactly is that a case of offering Him anything meritorious? They are instead acknowledging to Him that they have nothing to offer to Him while asking Him for mercy and forgiveness. Like we see the tax collector doing in this parable:

I appreciate your thoughts.

I have not put a question mark over your beliefs or your belief in the grace of God. I simply articulated what I believe. Notwithstanding, I think you are wrong to change spiritual death to spiritual sickness. I totally disagree with that. I believe you are diluting the enormity of the said death in order to fit your view. Spiritual death is as real and more destructive than physical death.

Man is a rebel outside of Christ; He doesn’t understand the deep things of God and he does not have the ability to fulfill the high demands of God.

The day that Adam and Eve disobeyed God in the Garden of Eden they spiritually died. As a result, man was separated from God spiritually and physically. Adam and Eve were forced out of the Garden of Eden and left carrying their own guilt, shame and condemnation. They were separated from God, separated from the life of God, separated from communion with God.

As soon as Adam and Eve fell, they ran from God, hid from Him, and had no inclination or ability to reconcile with God. They could not come to him. He had to come to them. They were totally and utterly fallen. He had to help them. They could not help themselves. He made a blood sacrifice, allowing them to be forgiven, exercise faith in him and come into a personal relationship with Him.

Romans 3:10-12 explains why, saying, “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."

You seem to attribute qualities and capabilities to the old nature that Scripture doesn't. This text is pretty comprehensive and pretty damning on our natural man. The natural man has desires only for himself and not for the glory of God.

Man by nature will always run from God. He will never come to God. His nature is to rebel against God. When man goes over the natural line of outright rejection of God then he becomes reprobate. This is the end of every man natural. That is why he needs a supernatural intervention where Christ first opens his eyes. When he then sees his awful predicament then he repents and believes.

Do you remember when the prophet Ezekiel was facing a pretty hopeless sight of the valley of dry bones? The nation of Israel was spiritually dead. The prophet in Ezekiel 37:3-4 testified:

3 And he said unto me, Son of man, can these bones live? And I answered, O Lord GOD, thou knowest.
4 Again he said unto me, Prophesy upon these bones, and say unto them, O ye dry bones, hear the word of the LORD.
Eze 37:5 Thus saith the Lord GOD unto these bones; Behold, I will cause breath to enter into you, and ye shall live:
Eze 37:12 Therefore prophesy and say unto them, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, O my people, I will open your graves, and cause you to come up out of your graves, and bring you into the land of Israel.
Eze 37:13 And ye shall know that I am the LORD, when I have opened your graves, O my people, and brought you up out of your graves,
Eze 37:14 And shall put my spirit in you, and ye shall live, and I shall place you in your own land: then shall ye know that I the LORD have spoken it, and performed it, saith the LORD.

Resurrection power comes from the voice of God. When He speaks the dead respond.

Sinclair B. Ferguson put it well: “Our old status lies in His tomb. A new status is ours through His resurrection.”

Eph 2:1 And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins;
Eph 2:2 Wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience:
Eph 2:3 Among whom also we all had our conversation in times past in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind; and were by nature the children of wrath, even as others.
Eph 2:4 But God, who is rich in mercy, for his great love wherewith he loved us,
Eph 2:5 Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved)

Salvation involves us responding to the effectual call of God. That voice is a quickening voice – it brings life to the dead.

Mat 8:22 But Jesus said unto him, Follow me; and let the dead bury their dead.

We all know that naturally dead people cannot bury naturally dead people. Amen? Only spiritually dead people can very naturally dead people.

• Prior to salvation man is spiritually “blind” (Matthew 13:13, 15-16; 2 Corinthians 4:4).
• Prior to salvation man is spiritually “deaf” ((Psalm 58:4; Ezekiel 12:2; Matthew 13:13, 15-16).

 

[PinSeeker]

Ah, yes. Your arrogance is never ending. How could anyone dare disagree with the Mighty PinSeeker! Didn't I tell you to get over yourself? You should be working on that by now.

Returned to you in full, Spiritual Israelite. Every word.

Are you for real or putting everyone on? I have given rebuttals for almost everything you have said, which has been a lot, and you have the gall to say this as if I try to avoid addressing your points? You have to be kidding me.

The first thing that comes to mind is one of my most recent responses (Post 343, to be specific), which drew nothing but crickets. You had said that I "think that a person only believes if God gives them faith" (a little over halfway through that post), insinuating, obviously that "what I believe" is not true. In my response to that, I offered absolutely nothing but quotes from God's Word. Ephesians 2:8 ~ "For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God..." Hebrews 11:1, defining saving faith ~ "the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen." We do not assure or convict ourselves... Hebrews 12:2 ~ "Jesus (is) the founder and perfecter of our faith." Romans 12 ~ "(we) should not think of ourselves more highly than (we) ought to think, but... each according to the measure of faith that God has assigned." 1 Corinthians 12 ~ faith itself is a gift of the Holy Spirit, specifically "to another faith by the same Spirit,... All these are empowered by one and the same Spirit, who apportions to each one individually as he wills."

Again, believing saving faith to be manufactured in anyone by that person himself or herself (is) absolutely contrary to the Word of God.

Not a word from you in response. So no, I'm not kidding you at all.

LOL. How can someone worship God without faith?

You seem to be either unable or unwilling to distinguish between 'can't' and 'won't.' I'll put it this way: I agree that they cannot, if you mean 'can't' or 'cannot' in the sense that they will not. They will not go against their own heart, which is of their father the devil rather than of God. They're will is to do the will of their father the devil, in the very same sense that Jesus says that to the Jews in John 8:44, where He told them, "You are of your father the devil, and your will is to do your father’s desires."

Your doctrine is go ingrained in you and you are so brainwashed, that you can't even think outside of your Calvinist box.

Dismissed. I'm talking straight Scripture here, SI. If you can offer any other explanation of the Scriptures above, I'm all ears.

Notice, that Paul includes the gospel in what he is talking about in Romans 1.

That's funny, that's exactly what I'm trying to get you to do...

Romans 1:16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek. 17 For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, The just shall live by faith. 18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness; 19 Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them. 20 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:

If you read this carefully...

I have, many times...

He said they had no excuse for holding "the truth in unrighteousness"...

Which is to say, Spiritual Israelite, that their thinking regarding God's truth was that it is unrighteousness, rather than righteousness. Verse 18 is much clearer in the English Standard Version: "...the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth." The have, as Paul says, "exchanged the truth for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator" (Romans 1:25), thinking creation to be righteous rather than the Creator. And certainly, these are all willful actions. So yes, they have no excuse. Calvinism gives them some kind of excuse? No, absolutely not; such a supposition is absolutely ridiculous.

The good old (and that's the problem; old, as in antiquated English) King James Version. It's not wrong or "bad," but it can be hard to understand correctly sometimes because of how the English language is commonly used today, as opposed to medieval times.

No, it is not and I have already explained why it's not.

Well, further clarifying you portrayal of faith as a work of man. Yes, that's precisely the problem.

You are equating faith and works...

So differentiation, and saying that one (works) are the direct result of the other being given by God according to His grace (faith) is somehow equating them to you? Wow... What color are the skies in your world, SI?

...Paul differentiated between the two...

Yes he did. Absolutely. And I have followed suit, many times over now...

If faith is a work...

It's not; I'm so glad you agree; what I'm very clearly saying, Spiritual Israelite, is that by maintaining that faith is something man manufactures in himself, you (at least inadvertently make faith out to be a work. So what you're doing in that case, given that you agree that faith is not a work of man, is contradicting yourself.

James in James 2, Paul differentiated between faith and works.

Ah, no he didn't, he differentiated between a dead faith ~ which is evidenced as dead because it produces no good works ~ from a live faith ~ faith given by God, that does produce good works, even the fruit of the Spirit. James says:

"What good is it, my brothers, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can that faith save him? ...faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead. But someone will say, 'You have faith and I have works.' Show me your faith apart from your works, and I will show you my faith by my works... Do you want to be shown, you foolish person, that faith apart from works is useless? ... You see that faith was active along with (Abraham's) works, and faith was completed by (Abraham's) works... For as the body apart from the spirit is dead, so also faith apart from works is dead." (James 2:14-26)​

Saving faith is not a gift of the Holy Spirit.

Yet again ~ and this is Paul, inspired by God, not just me ~ "Now there are varieties of gifts, but the same Spirit; and there are varieties of service, but the same Lord; and there are varieties of activities, but it is the same God who empowers them all in everyone. To each is given the manifestation of the Spirit for the common good. For to one is given through the Spirit the utterance of wisdom, and to another the utterance of knowledge according to the same Spirit, to another faith by the same Spirit, to another gifts of healing by the one Spirit, to another the working of miracles, to another prophecy, to another the ability to distinguish between spirits, to another various kinds of tongues, to another the interpretation of tongues. All these are empowered by one and the same Spirit, who apportions to each one individually as he wills."

You are taking scripture out of context.

Absolutely not.

When Paul wrote about the gifts of the Holy Spirit he made it clear that not everyone has all of the gifts...

Ah, what he made clear was that though we have some degree all these gifts, we are not equally gifted in these various ways to the same degree. We are all different, and one or more of these gifts will be more dominant in us than others. This is why the gifts are for the common good; we all need each other; if anyone is weaker in any one of these things than others, then we can offer encouragement to each other and even help each other in the ways we are gifted., and thus build each other up in the Lord.

Some have the gift of...

Some are more gifted in certain areas than others. See above.

Continued below...

 

[PinSeeker]

Continued from above:

Can you not make up your mind about this?

Certainly. My mind is made up, obviously. Wait... I do have free will... Don't I...?

Does God cause us to be obedient or is it our responsibility?

Yes.

Again:

If God causes us to be obedient than it's His responsibility for us to be obedient, not ours.

No. Again, as Paul says in Romans 6:17, "...thanks be to God..." ~ not "thanks be to yourself" "...that you who were once slaves of sin have become obedient from the heart to the standard of teaching to which you were committed."

So.... Your entire post consists of raising the same misconceptions and objections over and over and over again, that have been answered several times. Although... you hadn't brought up James and dead faith before; thanks for giving me the chance to speak to that... But I mean that's the thing. I'm not actually saying you're lying or just mistaken, but it is a curious thing. But, at this point, no matter.

It's a public forum and anyone can respond, of course. Private messaging is available here if you want to talk to him about something privately.

Sure. Thanks.

Grace and peace to you.

 

[PinSeeker]

I do not own the name Calvinist. I cannot put man's name to biblical truth.

Right; no Calvinist does that. Sola Scriptura takes care of that, and sola Gratia... and, well, all of them:

Sola Scriptura (Scripture alone; God’s life-giving speech reveals to us His salvation and calls us to faith and repentance. Scripture alone is our our guide to walking with God)

Sola Fide (Faith alone; Without faith, it is impossible to please God; we live by faith in the Son of God who loved us and gave Himself for us).

Sola Gratia (Grace alone; If we are saved through faith, then we are saved not by works but by grace alone (Rom. 11:6). Grace is God’s generous disposition by which He lavishes us with good things that we do not deserve. Everything we receive from God is by grace. The grace of God is vested in Christ and He alone gives saving grace to those whom the Father pities in His mercy (Ps. 103:13). This is why the Paul’s letters begin, “Grace and peace to you from God the Father and from the Lord Jesus Christ.” Notably, ",,,our great God and Savior Jesus Christ... gave Himself for us to redeem us from all lawlessness and to purify for Himself a people for His own possession who are zealous for good works” (Titus 2:11-14).

Solus Christus (Christ alone; Christ is the main point of the Bible, and the whole Bible testifies to Him; without Christ, even God’s words cannot save us; no one comes to the Father apart from Christ; there is no fellowship with God apart from Christ, and we count all things loss compared to the excellence of the knowledge of Christ Jesus our Lord).

Soli Deo Gloria (Glory to God alone; We have fellowship with the Son in grace, with the Father in love, and with the Holy Spirit in strength and comfort (2 Cor. 13:14; Acts 9:31). Because we have nothing that we have not received (1 Cor. 4:7), we should do all things in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, giving thanks to God the Father through Him (Col. 3:17). We live by the Spirit and keep in step with the Spirit (Gal. 5:25). If we should live to God’s glory, then should we not listen to the Spirit speaking in His Word, receiving God’s grace through faith alone in Christ, all to God’s glory alone?)

So yes, absolutely.

Grace and peace to you both.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Returned to you in full, Spiritual Israelite. Every word.

I have chosen, using my free will, to finally not waste any more time on you after this post. And I mean it this time. I know we have both said we're done with this discussion multiple times, but this just can't go on any longer. I don't like the way you are (but love your soul). It's clear you feel the same way about me. And you think I misunderstand most of what you say and I think you misunderstand a lot of what I say. You immediately dismiss most of my arguments and when I expose the folly of some of your beliefs, you either resort to claiming I'm misrepresenting your beliefs or you resort to saying it's a mystery. I'd rather talk to someone who has more intellectual honesty than that. This is just not worth it.

The first thing that comes to mind is one of my most recent responses (Post 343, to be specific), which drew nothing but crickets.

Are you under the impression that you have responded to very single point that I have made in this long discussion that we've had? Trust me, you have not. Have you responded to a vast majority of my points? Yes, I would say you have. And I have responded to a vast majority of your points as well. But, you have the gall to complain about me not responding to one of the many (hundreds?) of points that you have made in this discussion. Unbelievable. I have shown my interpretation of Ephesians 2:8-10 and other passages that talk about faith several times in this discussion, so it's not as if I haven't addressed what you said in that post at all. I have in other places. So, excuse me for not repeating what I've already said several times before in that particular case.

You seem to be either unable or unwilling to distinguish between 'can't' and 'won't.'

Not true at all. Any other false accusations you'd like to make? You don't seem willing to acknowledge that in your doctrine the reason people won't is because they can't, as designed by God. And in your doctrine He inexplicably punishes people for doing things they won't do even though they can't do those things (repent and believe).

I'll put it this way: I agree that they cannot, if you mean 'can't' or 'cannot' in the sense that they will not.

LOL. No, that is not what I mean. And, I think you know that. You equating the terms "cannot" with "will not" says it all about how nonsensical your doctrine is.

They will not go against their own heart, which is of their father the devil rather than of God.

I agree. But, the question is, how do they get to that point where their hearts are that hardened? You think they are born that way which I have thoroughly refuted using Romans 1 and other scriptures. So, since they are not born that way, how do they become that way? How do they "become vain in their imaginations" and "become fools" who knew God, but then don't worship God? How do some of them exchange the truth for a lie and end up exchanging natural sexual relations (man woman) for unnatural ones (men with men, women with women)? They are not born that way. So, how do they become that way? I don't believe your doctrine has any answer for that, but mine does.

Which is to say, Spiritual Israelite, that their thinking regarding God's truth was that it is unrighteousness, rather than righteousness. Verse 18 is much clearer in the English Standard Version: "...the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth." The have, as Paul says, "exchanged the truth for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator" (Romans 1:25), thinking creation to be righteous rather than the Creator. And certainly, these are all willful actions. So yes, they have no excuse. Calvinism gives them some kind of excuse? No, absolutely not; such a supposition is absolutely ridiculous.

It's not ridiculous at all. You say "these are willful actions". Do you believe that those people could have willfully chosen to not suppress the truth instead? Based on things you have said, I would think your answer would be no. Isn't it your view that they were born with a natural inclination to suppress the truth and there is no way that they could have embraced the truth instead? If so, how could it be that they have no excuse in that case? Doesn't not having an excuse for suppressing the truth imply that they should and could have not suppressed the truth and embraced it instead?

Well, further clarifying you portrayal of faith as a work of man. Yes, that's precisely the problem.

This is why I believe your are dishonest at times. I have made it clear that faith is not the kind of work mentioned in passages like Ephesians 2:8-10. But, you are deceptively trying to make it look as if that is what I believe. I made it clear that Paul said that salvation is by grace and IS through faith, but is NOT by works. So, he differentiated between saving faith and works. Since he said salvation IS through faith, but NOT by works, then it can't be the case that saving faith is a work in the sense that Paul was talking about.

I've already explained this multiple times before, but you still try to falsely accuse me of believing that man is saved by works just because I believe that man is made responsible to humble himself before God, acknowledge that he is a sinner who can't save himself and put his trust in Jesus Christ for his salvation instead.

So differentiation, and saying that one (works) are the direct result of the other being given by God according to His grace (faith) is somehow equating them to you? Wow... What color are the skies in your world, SI?

If only you would see what I actually believe instead of what you imagine that I believe, you wouldn't be so confused. By the way, the skies in the world I live in have no color. They appear blue during the day and black at night, but have no color in reality. What color are they in your world? If you use the same kind of logic you use for your Calvinist beliefs, I would assume you think the sky is literally blue.

It's not; I'm so glad you agree; what I'm very clearly saying, Spiritual Israelite, is that by maintaining that faith is something man manufactures in himself, you (at least inadvertently make faith out to be a work. So what you're doing in that case, given that you agree that faith is not a work of man, is contradicting yourself.

I don't contradict myself. You just have poor reading comprehension at times. Clearly, I believe that man is responsible to put his faith in Christ willingly by choice. You can call that a work of man if you want, but it is NOT one of the kind of works that Paul references in passages like Ephesians 2:8-10 because he says there that salvation IS through faith, but is NOT through works. I'm not going to explain this to you anymore. If you want to just ignore what I actually believe and falsely represent it then that is your free will choice and I can't force you to make the choice to address my beliefs instead of your straw man's beliefs.

Okay, I'm done with this now. You can have the last word and make a trophy and/or a plaque for yourself that says "I got in the last word against Spiritual Israelite!". It will be a prized possession, I'm sure.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Right; no Calvinist does that. Sola Scriptura takes care of that, and sola Gratia... and, well, all of them:

Okay, I just had to respond to this post even though I'm otherwise done with our discussion because I want to show you something that you may be surprised by.

Sola Scriptura (Scripture alone; God’s life-giving speech reveals to us His salvation and calls us to faith and repentance. Scripture alone is our our guide to walking with God)

Agree.

Sola Fide (Faith alone; Without faith, it is impossible to please God; we live by faith in the Son of God who loved us and gave Himself for us).

Agree.

Sola Gratia (Grace alone; If we are saved through faith, then we are saved not by works but by grace alone (Rom. 11:6). Grace is God’s generous disposition by which He lavishes us with good things that we do not deserve. Everything we receive from God is by grace. The grace of God is vested in Christ and He alone gives saving grace to those whom the Father pities in His mercy (Ps. 103:13). This is why the Paul’s letters begin, “Grace and peace to you from God the Father and from the Lord Jesus Christ.” Notably, ",,,our great God and Savior Jesus Christ... gave Himself for us to redeem us from all lawlessness and to purify for Himself a people for His own possession who are zealous for good works” (Titus 2:11-14).

Agree.

Solus Christus (Christ alone; Christ is the main point of the Bible, and the whole Bible testifies to Him; without Christ, even God’s words cannot save us; no one comes to the Father apart from Christ; there is no fellowship with God apart from Christ, and we count all things loss compared to the excellence of the knowledge of Christ Jesus our Lord).

Agree.

Soli Deo Gloria (Glory to God alone; We have fellowship with the Son in grace, with the Father in love, and with the Holy Spirit in strength and comfort (2 Cor. 13:14; Acts 9:31). Because we have nothing that we have not received (1 Cor. 4:7), we should do all things in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, giving thanks to God the Father through Him (Col. 3:17). We live by the Spirit and keep in step with the Spirit (Gal. 5:25). If we should live to God’s glory, then should we not listen to the Spirit speaking in His Word, receiving God’s grace through faith alone in Christ, all to God’s glory alone?)

Agree.

So yes, absolutely.

Grace and peace to you both.

Are you surprised that I agree with all of the things that you mentioned above? Based on things you have said to me while misrepresenting my view, I would think you would be very surprised by this. If you are surprised, then it shows that you really don't even understand what I believe.