Regeneration before or after saving faith

[Paul Christensen]

The above is an unfortunate misunderstanding of biblical truths, the nature of the fall, God's decrees &c. Man doesn't choose his own future, that is more akin to The Secret, Eastern Mysticism and New Age teachings.

Perhaps you need to understand the difference between fatalism and God Sovereignly decreeing and by his providence accomplishing his purpose and counsel. Fatalism is an impersonal force. God's purpose and counsel is not impersonal.

If man is not given the freedom to choose his own future, then he is deprived of free choice, and is then no longer responsible for his actions. That means that when he stands before God in the judgment, he can quite rightly say, "I am not guilty, because you forced me to do all the things I did through your heavenly decree of predestination". This would mean that God could not legally judge him guilty of sin because he did not have the free choice not to sin.

We have the law of the land. We are told that if we are law-abiding, we will leave peaceable lives without undue interference from the police (let's not go down the wrong track of police "brutality"). But if we break the law, there are consequences. We have free choice whether we want to be law-abiding, or engage in criminal activities. The government and the police don't make those decisions for us, and having the law does not force us to be law-abiding. A legal defence against a criminal act is if it is done under duress, such as having a gun pointed at your head. In this case personal choice is suspended and the person is under the power of the guy holding the gun.

So, God has provided the Bible as His communication to us to show us His will for our lives. We can decide to follow what it says, or choose to ignore it and live the way we want. In this, we are deciding our own future. But there are consequences: fornication brings the risk of STDs, crime results in prison, domestic violence results in broken marriages, etc. Then there is the ultimate consequence: the judgment throne of God where we all have to account for the way we have chosen to live our lives.

If we did not freely choose Christ to be our Saviour, we would be doing it under duress and we would be serving God through fear and compulsion, and not through free love and praise to Him for His mercy and grace. And those who reject Christ through decree of God cannot be held responsible for their actions because they were not given the opportunity to freely choose.

 

[Preacher4Truth]

I am not saying that Calvin or Arminius were right...

Enough of the above diatribe lets get to the real point which you willfully skipped over. OK?

You stated Calvin never taught certain things but his "followers" do teach these things he allegedly never taught in his Institutes. I showed he did teach these things, even in his Institutes, with quotes that prove it.

Not sure what you're going on about in the above. It's much ado about nothing.

Instead of all that why not stay on track and topic and simply admit that you were wrong?

You've denied one of his major teachings that are very well known teachings of his. This fact makes it extremely doubtful you've ever read him at all. In fact it is impossible you've read him and missed this!

 

[Candidus]

Arminius teaches a works based gospel does he not?

From your vast experience of firsthand reading of the writings of Arminius, can you show us where?

 

[Paul Christensen]

From your vast experience of firsthand reading of the writings of Arminius, can you show us where?

The best of British luck on that! I'm not sure you know what you are asking of the poor guy. Arminius wrote three volumes of his works, each being 450 pages in 17th Century language. You can download them as PDF files and wade through them yourself if you are that concerned.

 

[Renniks]

So, these evil atrocities happen, God could have stopped them, but didn’t. They serve no purpose and God just sets back and watches.

You guys are borderline deists.

There's a big difference that you seem unable to understand between God determining everything and allowing it. If I choose to allow harm to occur to my child, because it's the best case scenario wherein my child will still be able to freely love me, that's far different than me causing the evil that he has to endure. How can God be grieved over evil that he determined would happen? And remember that the determination in your system precedes God having knowledge. In your theology, he only knows because he first ordains evil to happen.

 

[Renniks]

Look, I can’t help it you trust your free will more than you do God. But keep plodding on. Keep working your way to heaven.

That's a non answer.

 

[Renniks]

It’s not fatalism. You guys say that He didn’t ordain these things. Yet, in your schema, God didn’t ordain them, so they serve Him no purpose whatsoever. Yet, He allows these atrocities to occur, having no purpose to serve.

You guys are closet deists. Deism teaches a god made all we see, set it in motion, and now sets back and watches things unfold. That’s what you guys are averring. Sadly, you can’t see this. Good bye. Our convo is over.

Lol, don't go away mad. Surely you thicker skin than that. God works good out of the evil that happens for those who love him. He's not sitting back doing nothing, he's actively working in ways we cannot and are not supposed to fully understand. But we know he doesn't decree evil, as that would be against his character unless you have a god far different than the Biblical one.

 

[Paul Christensen]

Look, I can’t help it you trust your free will more than you do God. But keep plodding on. Keep working your way to heaven.

It's not a matter of trusting our free will at all. I trust in what God has said in His Word, through Moses, the prophets, Jesus, Paul, Peter, James, John, the Apostle to the Hebrews, and Jude. I freely will to do that.

In fact I don't trust in myself at all, because as Paul said in 2 Corinthians 1: "We have the sentence of death in ourselves that we should not trust in ourselves but in God who raises the dead."

 

[Renniks]

It is saying that none can resist what he is doing

It is saying that none can resist what he is doing: showing mercy to some, and not to others, so the complainer is upset saying "How can God still find fault, we can do nothing to resist what He is doing! He has mercy only on some! That is unfair!! Since he doesn't have mercy on some, and leaves them there, how can he still fault them?!!! Its unfair!!!"

No, it's saying that Israel has no right to complain about God using them to bring the gospel to the gentiles, even using their rebellion. The Objector is confused when he claims no one can resist God's will, and he's saying the same thing as we see in Romans, Chapter three, in essence "If I do evil that God uses for good, why does God still blame me for my rebellion?" In fact, it's very ironic, when he was doing just that with his statement, still resisting God's will. Calvinists say exactly the same, that God's will is always done.

 

[Renniks]

@Renniks I'm enjoying dialog with you but at the same time you only respond to portions of my posts and duck the balance where you've been refuted. Come on, man up. OK? 1 Corinthians 16:13?

Answer the entire refutation I offer without pulling parts out of context.

I've answered your posts in their entirety. I don't hide from any of it. You know in your heart you've been refuted and truth has been brought to you. I know you know this brother.

I count you as a brother in Christ because you profess him.

What part do you want answered? I don't see where you've refuted anything. You do the normal pulling out a few scraps of verses without context, I've replied to multiple times on both forums. I often only reply to what I think is the main issue, because I'm usually on my phone and I'm not off work like most folks.

 

[Renniks]

Again you cut my posts out of context. God didn't cause everyone's evil, but he certainly allowed it. That us where there is "allowing" in Calvinism.

This is just plain dishonest, and/or talking out of both sides of the mouth. Yeah, I know, Piper does it all the time, too. When it's something good, you all want to say he ordained it, if it's something bad, you want to say he allowed it. Man up and own up to the fact that in your system, God's decrees ultimately cause everything. Quit bobbing and weaving around the cold determinism of consistent Calvinism.

 

[Anthony D'Arienzo]

2Therefore, my beloved, just as you have always obeyed, not only in my presence, but now even more in my absence, continue to work out your salvation with fear and trembling. 13For it is God who works in you to will and to act on behalf of His good pleasure. 14Do everything without complaining or arguing,…

See the problem with picking out scraps of verses and building a theology off scraps? You never really get the whole picture that way. There are conditions you have to meet before God will work in you.

It does not seem that you understand the very verses you are quoting.

 

[Renniks]

It does not seem that you understand the very verses you are quoting.

Another non answer.

 

[Eternally Grateful]

From your vast experience of firsthand reading of the writings of Arminius, can you show us where?

Let’s just say I have yet to meet a confessed Arminian who does not. I would think his followers would follow his teachings correct?

I am neither calvin or Arminian, I just know what I see their followers say

can you sow me otherwise?

 

[Eternally Grateful]

The best of British luck on that! I'm not sure you know what you are asking of the poor guy. Arminius wrote three volumes of his works, each being 450 pages in 17th Century language. You can download them as PDF files and wade through them yourself if you are that concerned.

I am not concerned. One of the greatest travesties I have seen in christian chat is the arminian vs calvin debate

 

[Paul Christensen]

I am not concerned. One of the greatest travesties I have seen in christian chat is the arminian vs calvin debate

Yes. It did give rise to a major division in the Protestant church. No doubt about it.

 

[Preacher4Truth]

2Therefore, my beloved, just as you have always obeyed, not only in my presence, but now even more in my absence, continue to work out your salvation with fear and trembling. 13For it is God who works in you to will and to act on behalf of His good pleasure. 14Do everything without complaining or arguing,…

See the problem with picking out scraps of verses and building a theology off scraps? You never really get the whole picture that way. There are conditions you have to meet before God will work in you.

Nope. Why? Those texts are for the converted and do not apply to the unconverted.

The only condition humans need to meet before God works in them is to be his elect upon whom he exercises mercy.

That you take the above text to mean some condition man must meet before God can save him shows you don't understand the gospel at all, and that you believe God saved you because of what you did. That is a works gospel.

Since you do not understand these basic truths, totally failing to apply 2 Timothy 2:15, showing you lack rudimentary biblical knowledge, why then are you in a forum teaching and arguing theology at all???

 

[Paul Christensen]

The only condition humans need to meet before God works in them is to be his elect upon whom he exercises mercy.

The problem with this statement for one has to be elected before God can exercise mercy, is that a person can believe the gospel, receive Christ as Saviour and yet not be elected. This means that the promises about believing that Jesus is the Son of God and that He rose from the dead are unreliable because according to unconditional election, no one who chooses to receive Christ as Saviour can really know whether they are elected or not. So, in the case of the RCC where no one can have the assurance of salvation until the judgment, it is the same with election, because no one can know whether they are elected until the final judgment. So even if a person stands before Christ and says, "I believed your promise and took you at your word for my salvation", Jesus could very well say, "Sorry, you are not one of the elect so, in spite of you believing my promise in the Bible, you are not saved."

Do you see the problem with your comment about election? How will you explain this difficulty where it seems that Jesus can promise salvation to everyone, but not all who believe the promise will actually be saved in the end because they are not part of the elect.

 

[Renniks]

Let’s just say I have yet to meet a confessed Arminian who does not. I would think his followers would follow his teachings correct?

I am neither calvin or Arminian, I just know what I see their followers say

can you sow me otherwise?

What do you mean by him teaching works?

 

[Renniks]

Nope. Why? Those texts are for the converted and do not apply to the unconverted.

The only condition humans need to meet before God works in them is to be his elect upon whom he exercises mercy.

That you take the above text to mean some condition man must meet before God can save him shows you don't understand the gospel at all, and that you believe God saved you because of what you did. That is a works gospel.

Since you do not understand these basic truths, totally failing to apply 2 Timothy 2:15, showing you lack rudimentary biblical knowledge, why then are you in a forum teaching and arguing theology at all???

How many verses do you need telling you that belief precedes salvation? That is " rudimentary biblical knowledge" yet you all can't even get that straight.