Thanks Robert,

First I'd say I never said it's crazy for you to draw those conclusion. I'd say it's not the correct interpretation but I wouldn't say it's a crazy one. I do admit there are certain verses that may seemingly "sound" Calvinistic but upon further proper exegesis they do not mean what they may appear to mean to some.

Towards the scriptures you shared which deal with "being of God" or being born of God, I'd say the burden of proof is on you to prove that they must be interpreted in terms of God irresistibly making sinners "be of God" or become born again apart from any free will choice of theirs. I'd say that when comparing scripture with scripture, we find that sinners do in fact have a choice in the matter.

Towards unrepentant sinners not believing in Christ because they are not part of His sheep, I'd say again that the burden of proof is on you to prove they don't have a choice in the matter of being or not being part of His sheep.

In other words, because they are willingly of their father the devil and refuse to be part of His sheep when He calls out to them to be saved, they refuse to hear His words and to believe upon Him so as to be saved.

If on the other hand it means as you seem to imply, that they have no choice but to be of the devil and that God is the one preventing them from being part of His sheep, would that not give them an excuse to continue in their rebellion against Christ?

In other words, if Christ is essentially telling them, "You do not believe in Me because God has not made you willing to believe in Me through irresistible means," would that not give them good reason to turn around and say to Him, "If we cannot but remain in our unbelief and have absolutely no choice in the matter, there is no hope for our salvation but must remain in our unbelief."

Yet that would contradict so many scriptures which speak of God calling out to all sinners to be saved and holding them responsible (able-to-respond) for their refusal to be saved. Unfortunately I do not have the time right now to share several of those scriptures.

_________________
Oracio

Hi savannah, I think you hinted on something very relevant and revealing in this discussion. You implied that if we believe man has a choice in the matter of receiving the salvation God offers, man gets some of the glory instead of God getting all the glory for salvation.

But I'd say respectfully that you are conflating God's prerogative to save sinners with their ability and responsibility to respond to God's offer.

In other words, it is God alone who offers salvation and does all the saving, 100% of it. But that does not mean man cannot receive that salvation (which again is offered and wrought 100% by God) through a free will choice of his own.

_________________
Oracio

Oracio said,

"I do admit there are certain verses that may seemingly "sound" Calvinistic but upon further proper exegesis they do not mean what they may appear to mean to some."

_______________

George said,


Before this period I had been much opposed to the doctrines of election, particular redemption, and final persevering grace; so much so that, a few days after my arrival at Teignmouth I called election a devilish doctrine. I did not believe that I had brought myself to the Lord, for that was too manifestly false; but yet I held, that I might have resisted finally.

And further, I knew nothing about the choice of God's people, and did not believe that the child of God, when once made so, was safe for ever. In my fleshly mind I had repeatedly said, "If once I could prove that I am a child of God for ever, I might go back into the world for a year or two, and then return to the Lord, and at last be saved."

But now I was brought to examine these precious truths by the word of God. Being made willing to have no glory of my own in the conversion of sinners, but to consider myself merely as an instrument; and being made willing to receive what the Scriptures said; I went to the Lord, reading the New Testament from the beginning, with a particular reference to these truths. To my great astonishment I found that the passages which speak decidedly for election and persevering grace were about four times as many as those which speak apparently against these truths; and even those few, shortly after, when I had examined and understood them, served to confirm me in the above doctrines.

As to the effect which my belief in these doctrines had on me, I am constrained to state, for God's glory, that though I am still exceedingly weak, and by no means so dead to the lusts of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, as I might and as I ought to be, yet, by the grace of God, I have walked more closely with Him since that period.

My life has not been so variable, and I may say that I have lived much more for God than before. And for this have I been strengthened by the Lord, in a great measure, through the instrumentality of these truths. For in the time of temptation, I have been repeatedly led to say:

"Should I thus sin? I should only bring misery into my soul for a time, and dishonour God; for, being a son of God for ever, I should have to be brought back again, though it might be in the way of severe chastisement."

Thus, I say, the electing love of God in Christ (when I have been able to realize it) has often been the means of producing holiness, instead of leading me into sin. It is only the notional apprehension of such truths, the want of having them in the heart, whilst they are in the head, which is dangerous. - George Mueller


George read through the entire Scriptures over 100 times.

Thanks Oracio for responding.

There is no burden of proof on anybody. The Scriptures I put forth supply similar meanings of what “of God” means. When you have time, please give the Scriptures that would help us know the meaning of 'of God'. We can and should first use Scripture to better understand Scripture and clearly “of God” needs a definition because Jesus says you cannot hear Him unless you are of God.

I understand you don’t think my verses gives us a good explanation of the term, so when you have time give me the Scriptures that you would use to define that term. That’s not putting a burden of proof on you. It’s asking for a definition of a term from Scripture rather than an interpretation.

_________________
Robert

Hi Daniel: God uses his own word to bring about the power of God for salvation so yes it is necessary. Individual occurrences of dreams or visions or warnings will lead them back to confirmation in the word of God.

When I witness, I do share both the sinful condition they are in, the punishment for that sinful condition and how God through Christ is calling all men to repent and believe.
Those who are engaging, questioning and I sense the working of God upon them are especially encouraging to me. I will pray with them, invite them to believe and receive Jesus Christ. I will offer them a bible or invite them to Church.

I do let sinners know there is love from God for sinners, but their case is sad...they have not sought to know God, but rather run from him, sinned hoping he would never invade their lives. Such suppression of God's convictions proves God exists...otherwise suppression, avoidance and denial would be of no consequence. No one creates excuses and suppresses a thing unless that thing truly has power.
No one avoids flying spaghetti monsters...but God they avoid.

I exhort them, now is the time to stop running.

This and many other kinds of confrontative witnessing I do.

_________________
Marvin

Hi Robert,

I did not mean to confuse you or Ray, Jesus is the one who made both statements. Jesus said: "There is nothing hidden that is not meant to be concealed..." and "what I tell you in secret proclaim openly".

You can not read Isaiah without seeing the heart of God to be known by His people and their own stubborn refusal to turn back to him. Jesus' words were to "fulfill the prophecy of Isaiah" because God foreknew the condition of His people.

Jesus was being asked a question by His disciples, Why do you speak to the multitudes in parables? He quoted Isaiah, to explain why the secrets of the kingdom of God were given to those able to understand it. He did not stop there that is why he answered their question with His own question to them.

"Which of you light a lamp only to cover it with a bowl? Or Who lights a lamp and then places it under a bed?. Robert, can't you SEE the reason for His question? NO ONE LIGHTS a LAMP to "CONCEAL" anything. Jesus was making it clear, that it was NOT HIS FATHER who is trying to hide the light from the people, it was their condition, foreseen and foreknown to be similar to the hearts of the people in Isaiah's day, that was the cause of their blindness.

You can not read and understand Isaiah without seeing how great God's longing was for His people to know and understand Him. He pled with them - "COME let us reason together says the Lord..." Their response to His clear and passionate desire for them to know Him is the backdrop behind "they have eyes but do not see, ears but do not hear." His desire for them is so evident in the very same passage. 'If they saw with their eyes, and heard with their ears. and understood with their hearts, THEY WOULD TURN, and I would heal them." That is what God wants, but the people -"closed their eyes, shut their ears, and hardened their hearts." God gives people over to their stubborn refusal to hear and that is why we have this admonition. "Today if you hear His voice, harden not your hearts."


I believe a little child can see God's heart for His people, if someone were to simply relate to them all that God has done and how the people had responded. But the "wise and the learned" just won't see it that way.


mak

_________________
Alan and Dina Martin

Thanks Mak,

I think you are misinterpreting the light under a bushel passage. Jesus in Matthew 5 told his apostles that they would be persecuted but blessed because they would be going out to proclaim Jesus as resurrected and the Christ, being peacemakers. He warned them not to back down from the persecution that would come and to proclaim what He whispered to them ( Matthew 10 ). He said in Matthew 5 and Matthew 10 that if they failed in their mission to be salt and light that they would be dung. Strong words but that was what Jesus was telling them with the light/bushel teaching.

God likewise told Isaiah that he would go forth with a warning to the people but they would not listen to Isaiah. Yet God sent him anyway. Same thing happened to Jeremiah and all the prophets.

Again, Mak, God makes entreaties in spite of His knowing they won't respond. It is because He wants their repentance but He also knows their hearts. Further, God wants to reveal His own goodness by continually reaching out and to reveal the evil in men's hearts by their continual refusal.

The really amazing thing is that God decides to reserve for Himself a remnant. Now you will likely say they are a remnant because they decide they won't bow the knee to Baal and I would agree. Why they don't bow the knee is the question. You say its because they freely choose to listen to God and I would agree with that. The question beneath even that answer is why do they freely choose to hear God and not close their ears to hear His warning and entreaty ? Because they are wiser, more humble, or because they worked up a good heart? I think Scripture has a clear answer.....God gives them that compliant, understanding, listening and freely loving heart.

The fact that He gives them a heart that by nature that is inclined to good seems to be objectionable because somehow if that is what happens God is thereby "forcing" someone to have a good heart and decide for Him when they don't really want to. I don't think that way. I think God is creator and He can form a lump of clay into anything He wants and I for one am grateful He gave me a heart that naturally is inclined to love Him, fear Him, treasure Him, understand Him, believe in Him and be so ready to be with Him.

ADD, Mak, just saying someone is more willing or was willing at all isn't an answer to why? The question is why were they willing? What made one man more willing than another man. Saying that someone is more willing just because they freely willed is not an explanation but a conclusion. Why is one guy more willing when many were not?. Is it because the willing guy possessed more Wisdom, Humility, more Knowledge
or a better heart or was just a "better"responder to grace? I think one would need to be really careful about making that the answer because there are Scriptures that would speak directly against that claim.

_________________
Robert

Robert,

Please look at the context again of the light under a bushel. To understand the analogy, simply put the sentences together.

No one, when he has lit a lamp, covers it with a vessel or puts it under a bed, but sets it on a lampstand, that those who enter may see the light. 17 For nothing is secret that will not be revealed, nor anything hidden that will not be known and come to light. 18 Therefore take heed how you hear. For whoever has, to him more will be given; and whoever does not have, even what he seems to have will be taken from him.”

The statements that follow expand upon the prior ones. It is light that makes visible. Light is given for "visibility". Whoever has will be given more - "Visibility", but whoever does not have (lack of visibility), even what he thinks he has, will be taken from him."


Where do you get any idea of persecution or hiding from this passage. That interpretation is very subjective. The theme of the parable is the different conditions of men's hearts and this is the reason for differing results.


The path of the righteous is as the first gleam of dawn, shining ever brighter unto the full light of day. He who follows me will never walk in darkness but will have the light of life.


This is the verdict, Light has come, but men loved darkness more than light because their deeds were evil. Everyone who loves the truth, comes into the light....


Light represents God's revelation. Jesus came a light. Those who receive His light, will be given more, and they will have an abundance. Those who refuse to come to the light, even the light they think they have will be taken from them. BECAUSE they did not approve to have God in full knowledge, He gave them over to a disapproved mind. Their ignorance was not His desire, but the result of their own choice.


mak

_________________
Alan and Dina Martin

Thank you Marvin for responding. I am relieved to find that you agree that God's gospel word is His power to save (regenerate) lost sinners. For a minute there I thought you were going to tell me that God just "zaps" people into regeneration without any gospel being presented at all.

I also applaud your witnessing. If you encourage the lost to believe on the Lord Jesus and then suggest that their believing (true faith of course and not mental assent or just saying a prayer) is evidence or confirmation that they are saved I can also live with that even though I think technically the order is reversed. I have decided ideas about how our positive response to hearing the gospel doesn't earn salvation for us but does receive the free gift. But as long as you preach the gospel and let people know that believing and salvation are inextricably tied together I won't fault you. If you believe, salvation is yours. God grants faith and repentance in the sense that only after He enables us by His Spirit working with the Word upon our heart can we actually repent and believe. But after enabling, it is us who does the repenting and believing and neither are "works" that earn us anything. Grace is not opposed to effort, it is opposed to earning. Earning is an attitude. Effort is an action.

I, like you, came from a Charismatic background and believe in the exercise of spiritual gifts and the working of miracles. I can imagine the eyebrows you raise in Reformed circles. I'm so glad you are not cessionist like they are. Be blessed.

-Daniel

Thanks Mak, I'll revisit the passage as suggested and come back. Would you mind letting me know your thoughts as to why some are willing and some are not?

_________________
Robert