SermonIndex Audio Sermons
Image Map
Discussion Forum : Scriptures and Doctrine : Prevenient Grace

Print Thread (PDF)

Goto page ( Previous Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 Next Page )
PosterThread
JaySaved
Member



Joined: 2005/7/11
Posts: 1131
Kentucky

 Re:

Quote:
I think we need to consider that the text seems to suggest clearly that the individual that was drawn did in fact 'come'.



RobertW is the only one who seemed to respond to this part of my post. Many of you are saying that prevenient grace enables the man to come to Christ but there is no guarentee that the person will be raised at the last day.

But John 6:44 clearly states that the person drawn by God will be raised. The verse simply does not state or imply that the person drawn will not be raised at the last day.

"No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day."

I agree that man must choose to come, but I maintain that the person always chooses to come because coming to Jesus is what he wants to do.

 2007/3/9 9:22Profile
JaySaved
Member



Joined: 2005/7/11
Posts: 1131
Kentucky

 Re:

Does the Bible teach Prevenient Grace? by R. C. Sproul

As the name suggests, prevenient grace is grace that “comes before” something. It is normally defined as a work that God does for everybody. He gives all people enough grace to respond to Jesus. That is, it is enough grace to make it possible for people to choose Christ. Those who cooperate with and assent to this grace are “elect.” Those who refuse to cooperate with this grace are lost. The strength of this view is that it recognizes that fallen man’s spiritual condition is severe enough that it requires God’s grace to save him. The weakness of the position may be seen in two ways. If this prevenient grace is merely external to man, then it fails in the same manner that the medicine and the life preserver analogies fail. What good is prevenient grace if offered outwardly to spiritually dead creatures?

On the other hand, if prevenient grace refers to something that God does within the heart of fallen man, then we must ask why it is not always effectual. Why is it that some fallen creatures choose to cooperate with prevenient grace and others choose not to? Doesn’t everyone get the same amount?


Think of it this way, in personal terms. If you are a Christian you are surely aware of other people who are not Christians. Why is it that you have chosen Christ and they have not? Why did you say yes to prevenient grace while they said no? Was it because you were more righteous than they were? If so, then indeed you have something in which to boast. Was that greater righteousness something you achieved on your own or was it the gift of God? If it was something you achieved, then at the bottom line your salvation depends on your own righteousness. If the righteousness was a gift, then why didn’t God give the same gift to everybody?

Perhaps it wasn’t because you were more righteous. Perhaps it was because you are more intelligent. Why are you more intelligent? Because you study more (which really means you are more righteous)? Or are you more intelligent because God gave you a gift of intelligence he withheld from others?

To be sure, most Christians who hold to the prevenient grace view would shrink from such answers. They see the implied arrogance in them. Rather they are more likely to say, “No, I chose Christ because I recognized my desperate need for him.” That certainly sounds more humble. But I must press the question. Why did you recognize your desperate need for Christ while your neighbor didn’t? Was it because you were more righteous than your neighbor, or more intelligent?

The question for advocates of prevenient grace is why some people cooperate with it and others don’t. How we answer that will reveal how gracious we believe our salvation really is. The $64,000 question is, “Does the Bible teach such a doctrine of prevenient grace? If so, where?”

We conclude that our salvation is of the Lord. He is the One who regenerates us. Those whom he regenerates come to Christ. Without regeneration no one will ever come to Christ. With regeneration no one will ever reject him. God’s saving grace effects what he intends to effect by it.

[R. C. Sproul, Chosen by God. Tyndale House Publishers: Wheaton, Ill.]

 2007/3/9 10:28Profile
PreachParsly
Member



Joined: 2005/1/14
Posts: 2164
Arkansas

 Re:

Quote:
But this cannot be the case since all those who are called by God…come to God. Since not all people come to God…then not all people receive the same calling by God. Common Grace is not the call…Saving Grace is the call.



Not all that are called are saved. Robert already mentioned this verse.

I'm trying to look through the "calvinst" lenses right now. I think you even have to believe in a grace that is before "salvation." That is unless you believe that you are "saved" before you believe. You don't believe that do you?

Eph 2:8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: [it is] the gift of God:

Does the above verse not plainly say that we are saved by grace and the way we access it is "through faith?" If you believe that we are saved through faith then don't you believe God gave you that faith prior to "using" it? Is that not grace that you received "faith" to believe?

Here is a short commentary on John 6 a brother I know shortly put together. It's not a complete commentary on his thoughts, but is shows his line of thinking. I'll let you judge it.

John 6 has often been put forth as a pillar supporting Reformed theology. The Calvinist rightly emphasizes the fact of the necessity of divine drawing. Yet I believe the Calvinist errs when explaining the basis of this divine drawing in John 6. In Reformed theology that basis is found in the doctrine of unconditional election. I will contend here that the Calvinist is reading Reformed theology into the text while missing John’s explanation of the basis of the divine drawing in chapter 6 and throughout his gospel. This contextual explanation is what I seek to bring out here. Let the reader judge whether or not I have dealt faithfully and persuasively with the text.

In John 6:35-37 we find these words of the Lord Jesus to a crowd of Jews:

“Jesus said to them, ‘I am the bread of life; whoever comes to me shall not hunger, and whoever believes in me shall never thirst. But I said to you that you have seen me and yet do not believe. All that the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never cast out.’” (ESV)

Drs. Peterson and Williams of Covenant Theological Seminary say of this passage:

“John 6:35 illumines the meaning of ‘coming’ to Jesus. ‘I am the bread of life; he who comes to me will never go hungry, and he who believes in me will never be thirsty.’ (italics added). ‘To come’ to Jesus means to believe in him. Consequently, Jesus teaches that all whom the Father gives him will believe in (come to) him. The Father’s giving people to the Son is a picture of election. In addition, the Father’s giving people to the Son precedes their believing in him for salvation. Election is not based on foreseen faith; it precedes faith and results in faith.”

I think the error being made here is loosing sight of the specific historical context of the passage. Jesus is not teaching a class on systematic theology at this point but rather talking to a specific group of people who do not believe in him. What he clearly says is that these people have not come to / believed in him because the Father had not given them to Him. At this point Peterson and Williams see “a picture of election”, but Jesus gives a different reason for these people not being given by the Father to the Son.

In verse 45 Jesus explains:

“It is written in the Prophets, ‘And they will all be taught by God.’ Everyone who has heard and learned from the Father comes to me” (ESV)

Here Jesus declares that the basis of their not coming to / believing in him is not unconditional election, but rather because they have not “heard and learned from the Father”. They were not in a right relationship with the Father under the Old Covenant. This is a repeated emphasis throughout the gospel of John. Jesus continually points out in this gospel that if the Jews who opposed him were really faithful to the Father they would not be rejecting the Son. Jesus declares this principal clearly in John 5:46-47:

“If you believed Moses, you would believe me; for he wrote of me. But f you do not believe his writings, how will you believe my words?” ESV

Such passages in the gospel of John can be referenced again and again. My contention is that John 6 has nothing to do with unconditional election. This appears to me to be taking some phrases out of context and reading Reformed theology into them. What Jesus is saying is that those who had “heard and learned from the Father” were given to the Son. This is the faithful remnant in Israel at the coming of Jesus. These were those who believed Moses and responded to the ministry of John the Baptist. We must not loose sight of the fact that Jesus was speaking during a transition time when the Old Covenant was on it’s way out and the new was on it’s way in. Jesus was speaking in a historical setting and if we are to understand him we have to keep the context in view.

I believe this same argument will hold for Jesus’ mention of His sheep in John 10. I believe many in the Reformed tradition put the election label on passages that have nothing to do with election. The overwhelming evidence in the gospel of John is that Jesus is referring to the faithful under the Old Covenant who were being given to the Son under the New Covenant.

This can be clearly seen in Jesus prayer in John 17. He says:

"I have manifested your name to the people whom you gave me out of the world. Yours they were, and you gave them to me, and they have kept your word... While I was with them, I kept them in your name, which you have given me. I have guarded them, and not one of them has been lost except the son of destruction, that the Scripture might be fulfilled." (vv. 6-11 ESV)

It is clear here that Jesus is speaking not in general theological language, but about specific people (the 12) while he was on the earth. They were given to the Son from the Father.

The Calvinist has taken a specific historical situation and turned it into a general theological principle.

Therefore, I conclude that when Jesus says in John 6:44 that, "No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him. And I will raise him up on the last day." ESV, he is not speaking of inability. Those who rejected the light under the Old Covenant were not drawn to the light under the New.



_________________
Josh Parsley

 2007/3/9 11:05Profile
JaySaved
Member



Joined: 2005/7/11
Posts: 1131
Kentucky

 Re:

I wrote:

Quote:
But this cannot be the case since all those who are called by God…come to God. Since not all people come to God…then not all people receive the same calling by God. Common Grace is not the call…Saving Grace is the call.



PreachParsly wrote:
Quote:
Not all that are called are saved.



That sentence stands in direct contrast to Romans 8:30 which states, “whom he called, them he also justified” This verse tells us God calls men to Jesus and those who are called are justified. The same thing is said in John 6:44, “No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day.” Both verses tell us that man cannot come to Jesus apart from an inner working of God. Both verses tell us that this inner working of God results in justification and “being raised at the last day.”

But some believe that man can be called by God and not justified or raised at the last day. This is why it is important to distinguish between the Internal Calling and the External Calling. Why do I say there are two callings? Because scripture tells us that all who are called are justified and all who are drawn are raised. Since not all people are justified and raised we must assume that this calling is not common to call men. Scripture also speaks of the gospel message being given to all men. This calling is given to all men and can be refused by man. It is not an inward calling but an external calling. It is in this external calling that God inwardly calls a man to Himself. Let me give an example to make this clearer:
Johnny and Janie are both walking down the street when a man approaches them and begins to speak to them. The man tells them about Jesus, about sin, righteousness and judgment. He clearly tells both the gospel of Christ. What this man has done is issue the external gospel call to both Johnny and Janie. While listening to the man, Johnny begins to feel conviction and sorry for his sin while Janie argues and mocks the man. Once the man has finished speaking, Johnny and Janie continue walking to their destination. Johnny is thinking about God and feels that he should repent and become a Christian while Janie remarks that the man they met was a nut who needs to get a life. In this example, God has inwardly called Johnny to himself and has not inwardly called Janie. Johnny later repents and has a new life in Christ while Janie wonders what happened to her good friend Johnny.

PreachParsly wrote:
Quote:
I'm trying to look through the "calvinst" lenses right now. I think you even have to believe in a grace that is before "salvation." That is unless you believe that you are "saved" before you believe. You don't believe that do you?
Eph 2:8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: [it is] the gift of God:
Does the above verse not plainly say that we are saved by grace and the way we access it is "through faith?" If you believe that we are saved through faith then don't you believe God gave you that faith prior to "using" it? Is that not grace that you received "faith" to believe?



I do believe in a grace that is part of salvation that precedes faith. I do not believe someone is saved before they believe. In scripture I see that the salvation process begins with the inward calling of God upon a person—this is God’s saving grace. The person realizes that they are a sinner and responds to God’s call through faith. What is faith anyway? I once heard Adrian Rogers say, “Faith is you saying what God has already said.” I like that definition. It accurately shows that Faith is a response. I believe that God’s saving grace is prevenient in that it precedes faith, but I reject that God’s saving grace can be rejected because that would contradict scripture (ex. Romans 8:30 and John 6:44.

Quote:
Such passages in the gospel of John can be referenced again and again. My contention is that John 6 has nothing to do with unconditional election. This appears to me to be taking some phrases out of context and reading Reformed theology into them. What Jesus is saying is that those who had “heard and learned from the Father” were given to the Son. This is the faithful remnant in Israel at the coming of Jesus. These were those who believed Moses and responded to the ministry of John the Baptist. We must not loose sight of the fact that Jesus was speaking during a transition time when the Old Covenant was on it’s way out and the new was on it’s way in. Jesus was speaking in a historical setting and if we are to understand him we have to keep the context in view.



We are told that these words Jesus spoke are not meant for us but were only meant for those people during Jesus’ time. If this is true, why are they included in scripture? Remember John’s purpose of writing his gospel? John 20:30-31, “Now Jesus did many other signs in the presence of the disciples, which are not written in this book; but these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.” Also, John says in John 21:25, “Now there are also many other things that Jesus did. Were every one of them to be written, I suppose that the world itself could not contain the books that would be written.” So from John’s own words there are many things Jesus said and did that are not written in his gospel. The things that were included were included so that “you may believe. Who is the ‘You’? Is it only the first century Jews who had John the Baptist’s baptism? Of course not. This is why Jesus’ words, “No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day" applies to us today as much as those who here in His audience.

I pray that these words are used by God for edification.

 2007/3/9 12:24Profile
roaringlamb
Member



Joined: 2003/6/11
Posts: 1519
Santa Cruz California

 Re:

I am just wondering if "mercy" would not be what is granted to all men as in "it rains on the just and the unjust alike", and also all men who are living are given breath, and a heart beat, but is this not mercy? For in that they stand oppossed to God, He still grants them life(temporal)?

I wonder also if we see an idea between grace and mercy with Noah. For we read that, "Noah found grace in the sight of God." It was because of this grace that he was not destroyed when the rest of the world was. But all those around him were given mercy during the 120 years prior to the flood, and then it was over, and the one who had been given grace survived, but not those who had mercy.

Again I am not stating this as any doctrinal standard, just kind of musing aloud :-D


_________________
patrick heaviside

 2007/3/9 12:53Profile
UniqueWebRev
Member



Joined: 2007/2/9
Posts: 640
Southern California

 Re: Prevenient Grace

JaySaved, if you would read the whole bible instead of focusing intently on a few texts that you use to prove your point, you would be able to see that God prepares us for salvation, asks us if we will be saved, then acts on the answer. If we say yes, of course we will be raised up on the last day. The baptism of the Holy Spirit is the down payment of the final close of escrow on our souls.

Still sending Blessings your way,


_________________
Forrest Anderson

 2007/3/10 2:08Profile
Christinyou
Member



Joined: 2005/11/2
Posts: 3707
Ca.

 Re:

Quote: Jeff wrote

"I noticed you used Jeremiah as an example of the power of God's grace. How is it that Jeremiah knew God?"

Rather, "Before I formed thee in the belly." I approved of thee (as a prophet of whom I have chosen for this office)," and before thou camest forth from the womb" I made thee holy (dedicated you for this purpose); I have appointed thee (now by what I am telling you to say) "a prophet unto the nations."

"Unto the nations" - The privileges contained in this verse are of Christ so great as in their full sense to be true only of Christ Himself, while to Jeremiah they belong as being in so many particulars a type of Christ and a prophet of God for those that would believe in Christ when the fulness of time is come.

Galatians 4:1-7 Now I say, That the heir, as long as he is a child, differeth nothing from a servant, though he be lord of all; But is under tutors and governors until the time appointed of the father. Even so we, when we were children, were in bondage under the elements of the world:

((((But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law, To redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons.))))

And because ye are sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father. Wherefore thou art no more a servant, but a son; and if a son, then an heir of God through Christ.

This is why Jeremiah was called as a prophet.

In Christ: Phillip


_________________
Phillip

 2007/3/10 3:24Profile
UniqueWebRev
Member



Joined: 2007/2/9
Posts: 640
Southern California

 Re: Prevenient Grace

[color=336699]Ah, a statement worthy of rebuttal!
[/color]

JaySaved wrote:
Does the Bible teach Prevenient Grace? by R. C. Sproul

As the name suggests, prevenient grace is grace that “comes before” something. It is normally defined as a work that God does for everybody. He gives all people enough grace to respond to Jesus. That is, it is enough grace to make it possible for people to choose Christ. Those who cooperate with and assent to this grace are “elect.” Those who refuse to cooperate with this grace are lost. The strength of this view is that it recognizes that fallen man’s spiritual condition is severe enough that it requires God’s grace to save him. The weakness of the position may be seen in two ways. If this prevenient grace is merely external to man, then it fails in the same manner that the medicine and the life preserver analogies fail. What good is prevenient grace if offered outwardly to spiritually dead creatures?


[color=336699]God spends a great deal of preparation to get us just to the point of being able to say yes or no. The process of preparation is the gradual giving of knowledge until enough of the whole gestault of the Bible is understood enough for a decision to be made.

Being spiritually dead at this point is irrelevant. We are being offered a bargain where if we say yes, we will be made spiritually alive!
[/color]


On the other hand, if prevenient grace refers to something that God does within the heart of fallen man, then we must ask why it is not always effectual. Why is it that some fallen creatures choose to cooperate with prevenient grace and others choose not to? Doesn’t everyone get the same amount?

[color=336699]Teaching the History of God's relationship with man is a complex task. It is much harder to learn what the Bible speaks of before the Holy Spirit enlivens us, then after. But God does not change the heart before we say yes. That is the whole point. We are all offered the same bargain. Some just refuse to take it.
[/color]


Think of it this way, in personal terms. If you are a Christian you are surely aware of other people who are not Christians. Why is it that you have chosen Christ and they have not?

[color=336699]I studied the question for a long time, like the business proposition it was. I looked at the pros and cons. The pros were better. I said yes.[/color]


Why did you say yes to prevenient grace while they said no? Was it because you were more righteous than they were?

[color=336699]Hardly! I was a very good sinner, but after a long enough time I found that sinning made me dislike the end result of my sin. The teaching of God gave me another way to walk, that although hard, gave me a better end result.

I considered it a long time. I was baptised at 15, but backslid immediately, joining the devil in the occult. Again, I was a very good sinner. Lucifer must have cried when I re-committed to Jesus 29 years later, after 21 years of studying both sin and righteousness almost equally well.[/color]


If so, then indeed you have something in which to boast.

[color=336699]What, that I was a great sinner? Everyone can be - it's so easy.[/color]


Was that greater righteousness something you achieved on your own or was it the gift of God?

[color=336699]Ah, but my only righteousness is in Jesus Christ, and I had no Jesus until I recommitted, saying, finally, calmly, without emotion, "I choose to believe in Jesus Christ".
[/color]

If it was something you achieved, then at the bottom line your salvation depends on your own righteousness.

[color=336699]But it didn't, you see. It was God's choice to keep calling until I answered with finality, one way or the other.[/color]


If the righteousness was a gift, then why didn’t God give the same gift to everybody?

[color=336699]He does, as soon as you choose to make Jesus Christ your Lord and Saviour. Then you have Jesus's perfect righteousness, no sloppy human junk calling itself that.[/color]


Perhaps it wasn’t because you were more righteous. Perhaps it was because you are more intelligent.

[color=336699]Nope. God was just persistant, so I kept re-considering.[/color]


Why are you more intelligent?

[color=336699]You know, whether I am or not is irrelevant. A five year old has an easier time understanding God than I did as an adult. If I were barely able to understand, about an I.Q. of 80, God would be able to tell me in the simple terms I needed to understand.

If I were a genius, with an I.Q. over 150, God would speak to me in those terms. And I would ask a lot more questions, and get a lot more answers before saying yes. But I wasn't a genius.
[/color]

Because you study more (which really means you are more righteous?

[color=336699]You know, you have a hangup on righteousness. Or didn't you know humans have no righteousness of their own, unless you want filthy rags.(In the Greek, we are talking about rags that would make a man unclean all day just for touching them.)[/color]


Or are you more intelligent because God gave you a gift of intelligence he withheld from others?

[color=336699]You grow repetitive. You must not have a good argument. Intelligence matters nothing. God can speak in equivalent terms to a five year old, a nearly retarded man,(sorry, I'm not politically correct!), an uneducated man, a genius, or just a regular guy. God is the really Great Communicator, all due respect to Ronald Reagan.[/color]


To be sure, most Christians who hold to the prevenient grace view would shrink from such answers.

[color=336699]I don't, in case you hadn't noticed. Besides, what's wrong with a little honesty? It's in the Commandments, you know. Or do you?[/color]


They see the implied arrogance in them.

[color=336699]I'd rather be arrogant, with the Holy Spirit working on it with me, than humble in Hell.[/color]


Rather they are more likely to say, “No, I chose Christ because I recognized my desperate need for him.”

[color=336699]No way! I felt so undesparate that I felt I was jumping off a cliff unnecessarily. But I made a reasoned decision, and have never regretted it.[/color]


That certainly sounds more humble.

[color=336699]What you said, certainly. What I said...I don't think so.[/color]


But I must press the question. Why did you recognize your desperate need for Christ while your neighbor didn’t?

[color=336699]I am not the least bit humble...yet. In fact, pride is my most persistant sin. It comes first in my prayers of repentance, just before arrogance, vanity, selfishness, a wayward tongue...I could go on, but I think God sometime's even gets bored with the same-o same-o. I always get the impression He's asking, "yes, but did you notice ...."

God has a much better memory than I do, since I have the excuse of a short term memory deficit from that car accident in 1995. So then I ask Him to tell me, so I can repent properly. And that really is an ouch![/color]


Was it because you were more righteous than your neighbor, or more intelligent?

[color=336699]Neither. You have a worse memory than I do. Look above several paragraphs to when you asked the same questions.

Or is this a psychology test to see if I'm a potential alcholholic, or a persistant sex addict?[/color]


The question for advocates of prevenient grace is why some people cooperate with it and others don’t.

[color=336699]I would call it the inability to see which side their bread is buttered on, or who's got the loaded dice. God offers a terrific bargain, a great deal. Some people prefer their own deal to God's.

That's only lack of common sense, not lack of intelligence.

And since those that refuse Jesus generally think I'm the stupid one, I get to smile secretively, sort of like the Mona Lisa.

I wonder if that's why she's smiling?[/color]


How we answer that will reveal how gracious we believe our salvation really is.

[color=336699]I don't see what grace has to do with salvation before you get it - we don't get saving grace unless we say yes.[/color]


The $64,000 question is, “Does the Bible teach such a doctrine of prevenient grace? If so, where?”

[color=336699]Just about everywhere, but you have to take it as a whole, not tear it apart into little bitty snips. Part of it has to do with the Sovereignty of God, the Omnipotence of God, the Omniprescence of God, and the Omniscience of God. Then you add His creation of us, and His stubborn love of us.

Add an eternity of patience, the willingness to suffer on a Cross, and to endure the constant pain of rejection, and you wonder how even God can put up with the situation. That's worth a lot more than $64 million dollars - when are you going to pay me?[/color]


We conclude that our salvation is of the Lord. He is the One who regenerates us. Those whom he regenerates come to Christ. Without regeneration no one will ever come to Christ. With regeneration no one will ever reject him. God’s saving grace effects what he intends to effect by it.

[color=336699]You conclude it. I don't. You go right ahead and stay a Calvinist. I don't mind.

Got any more questions?[/color]

[R. C. Sproul, Chosen by God. Tyndale House Publishers: Wheaton, Ill.]

[color=336699]Many Blessings,
[/color]


_________________
Forrest Anderson

 2007/3/10 5:02Profile
JaySaved
Member



Joined: 2005/7/11
Posts: 1131
Kentucky

 Re:

Quote:
Teaching the History of God's relationship with man is a complex task. It is much harder to learn what the Bible speaks of before the Holy Spirit enlivens us, then after. But God does not change the heart before we say yes. That is the whole point. We are all offered the same bargain. Some just refuse to take it.



Why do some just refuse? This is the entire point of R.C.'s article. There has the be a reason that some choose and some do not.

Quote:
I studied the question for a long time, like the business proposition it was. I looked at the pros and cons. The pros were better. I said yes.



It was simply a 'business proposition'?

UniqueWebrev, from reading your response to R.C. it became very obvious that you were more interesting in disagreeing than actually hearing what he had to say. Case in point:

R.C. said:
Quote:
Rather they (Arminians) are more likely to say, “No, I chose Christ because I recognized my desperate need for him.”



You replied:
Quote:
No way! I felt so undesparate that I felt I was jumping off a cliff unnecessarily. But I made a reasoned decision, and have never regretted it.



By disagreeing with him you are saying that your salvation was a business transaction in which you did not recognize your desperate need for him. You speak of your decision to follow Christ being a matter of looking at the pros and cons and making a reasoned decision.

Brother, I dare not judge you, but I will be praying for you because this troubles my spirit.

 2007/3/10 9:00Profile
JaySaved
Member



Joined: 2005/7/11
Posts: 1131
Kentucky

 Re:

Quote:
JaySaved, if you would read the whole bible instead of focusing intently on a few texts that you use to prove your point,



I do read the entire bible, but it is funny you say that because it is a convenient answer when you don't want to address the verses in question.

I am just trying to show that in John 6:44...
"No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him. And I will raise him up on the last day."

...the Him raised at the last day is the same Him that is drawn.

I am focusing on this verse because it clearly shows that all who are drawn are raised up at the last day thus affirming the doctrine of Irresistible Grace as biblical.

The problem is that those who don't believe in Irresistible Grace refuse to take John 6:44 at face value. To do this, would mean that they would have to rethink much of their theology. But I understand the hesitancy because I was there just a few years ago.

I struggled against the doctrine of Election because in my mind it was not fair. But the more I read the scripture for myself the more God revealed to me that the "fair" thing for Him to do is let us all go to hell. I pray that God would give us all wisdom to hear his truth.

God bless you webrev.



 2007/3/10 9:12Profile





©2002-2020 SermonIndex.net
Promoting Genuine Biblical Revival.
Affiliate Disclosure | Privacy Policy