|
Post by the answer on Jul 23, 2006 1:41:35 GMT -5
Sure!!
What it means is that your statement that "there is no part of us that is left untouched by sin" is INCORRECT. Because now you "grant" that there is in fact a part of us that has been left untouched by sin. Total Depravity is now refuted.
The idea that God breathed into us the breath of life to me simply means that we are alive.
It seems weird for me to say " Being alive is part of being a human being" Having God's breath as I see it, means we are alive.
Therefore I don't see it as what makes me a human.
Now when it comes to Total depravity, i still maintain that Total depravity means that our rebellion against God is total, everything we do in this rebellion is sin, our inability to submit to God or reform ourselves is total, and we are therefore totally deserving of eternal punishment.
Can u explain why we as humans have no ability to come to God on our own? I say it is because we are totally depraved...we are in rebellion against God..totally, unless God comes to the rescue.
"For the mind that is set on the flesh is hostile to God, for it does not submit to God's law; indeed, it cannot. Those who are in the flesh cannot please God."
|
|
|
Post by eternal on Jul 23, 2006 3:17:39 GMT -5
Do you recognize also that God's spirit/presence is also within human beings? I am reffering to the multiple scriptures I posted in refference to this, with specific attentin towards Job 34.
Now onto your post...So you believe that "God's breath" is simply a metaphor for us being alive? So you reject the notion that any aspect of God dwells within us, be it His breath or His spirit?
If that is indeed your contention, how do you deal with Job 34?
And on what basis do you define God's breath as simpy us being alive, and not literaly His breath or any other aspect of the Divine? How did you come to that conclussion? Was it through academics, or just a personal feeling?
Can u explain why we as humans have no ability to come to God on our own? I say it is because we are totally depraved...we are in rebellion against God..totally, unless God comes to the rescue.
Well, I guess we look at that question differently, which then illustrates the heart of our conversation. Is total depravity true? I see the biblical revelation that God is a part of all existence, and in particular humanity. So when we respond to God, it is a response to His presence and revelation that exists naturaly within us. God is revealed just by what is made. The calvinist turns this Romans truth into some sort of "general revelation" vs. "special revelation." When in reality all revelation is of the same God. One revelation isn't any more divine than any other. Truth is the truth, and the bible says that rejection of that truth is the same, and that rejection of the revelation in creation is enough to condemn, and in fact no one is without excuse, Paul writes.
God is inherent to all being. And for our purposes, people. Multiple passages discuss Gods' presence in humanity, be it through His breath within us, His spirit within us, His image we were born in, etc. All things exist in God, God is "in all", etc. All this is repeated biblical language.
So to declare total depravity would mean to either reject these clear biblical truths as factual, or to declare God's presence in all its forms as depraved and marred by sin, as we have seen stated in this thread already.
Perhaps you could respond to the points as I outlined them in my PM to you?
peace.
|
|
|
Post by the answer on Jul 23, 2006 23:39:16 GMT -5
Now onto your post...So you believe that "God's breath" is simply a metaphor for us being alive? So you reject the notion that any aspect of God dwells within us, be it His breath or His spirit?
If that is indeed your contention, how do you deal with Job 34?
And on what basis do you define God's breath as simpy us being alive, and not literaly His breath or any other aspect of the Divine? How did you come to that conclussion? Was it through academics, or just a personal feeling?
4 “The Spirit of God has made me, And the breath of the Almighty gives me life
Here the bible says that the breath of God gives us life.
Here in 1 kings 15:29 it says : 29 It came about as soon as he was king, he struck down all the household of Jeroboam. He did not leave to Jeroboam any persons alive, until he had destroyed them, aaccording to the word of the Lord, which He spoke by His servant Ahijah the Shilonite.
The word "breath" used in Job 34 here is translated alive.
I asked u what having his breath does for us, I don't remember u giving an answer. Does the breath of God effect how we think? act? what we do? When u say it's a part of being human, what specifically is that? To me, it simply gives us life.
The calvinist turns this Romans truth into some sort of "general revelation" vs. "special revelation." When in reality all revelation is of the same God. One revelation isn't any more divine than any other. Truth is the truth, and the bible says that rejection of that truth is the same, and that rejection of the revelation in creation is enough to condemn, and in fact no one is without excuse, Paul writes.
Are u saying that looking into the stars and reading the bible are the same in terms of what they reveal? Jesus came to reveal the Father. What was he "revealing" if all people had to do was look into the sky?
God is inherent to all being. And for our purposes, people. Multiple passages discuss Gods' presence in humanity, be it through His breath within us, His spirit within us, His image we were born in, etc. All things exist in God, God is "in all", etc. All this is repeated biblical language.
I don't see where this gets us if we both know humanity is in rebellion against God. So what God is "in all" People who die without Jesus still go to hell. Why did Jesus give us the the great commission? Why not point to the fact that they are near God, and he's in them etc.. The language of God being in humanity is not in relation to salvation, therefore whats te point?
In fact u beleive God is gonna destroy ( annihilate) humanity who bear his image. What does that say about God's view about those who bear his image?
OR, we say that God's spirit and breath which both continue to reside in man (as you and Roldan apparently agree with), and HAS NOT been currupted or marred by sin. However if this is true, then it is no longer true that "every aspect of humanity has been touched by sin."
Here again, total depravity teaches that man rebellion is total, because of his condition. You have yet to disprove that. Can man redeem himself?
Man cannot think,act, or believe right without God. Why is that? Why do men reject God? What do u believe about our condition?
Is it your belief that something in man seeks out God, apart from him?
|
|
|
Post by eternal on Jul 24, 2006 9:33:05 GMT -5
4 “The Spirit of God has made me, And the breath of the Almighty gives me life
Here the bible says that the breath of God gives us life.
Here in 1 kings 15:29 it says : 29 It came about as soon as he was king, he struck down all the household of Jeroboam. He did not leave to Jeroboam any persons alive, until he had destroyed them, aaccording to the word of the Lord, which He spoke by His servant Ahijah the Shilonite.
The word "breath" used in Job 34 here is translated alive.
This is truth, but not the whole truth. You have grabbed the tail of the elephant, and have declared it to be a snake. We must take a look at the whole picture to be able to determine what it is we are looking at.
For instance, I have already discussed with Roldan that the breath of God gave us life. Genesis said that when God breathed into man he became a living being. Paul says that he became a living soul. So the breath of God animated lifeless man. It was the catalyst so to speak. It was the final component to our life.
You could say that it is the batteries to our walkman. Can a walkman work without batteries? Even moreso with us.
I have shown repeatedly through the scriptures that the breath of God is actually IN every person. As Job 33:4 says, "the breath of the Almighty gives me life." Job 27:3 says, "For as long as life is in me, And the breath of God is in my nostrils,"
The breath of God is described as an actual entity within us.
I agree that it gives us life, but it is a PART of us. A part of WHO we are. My heart gives me life as well, and my heart is a key component of who I am.
So it is with God's breath and spirit. Without them I would not be alive. Job 34:14-15 confirms this, as does other passages we have discussed. Without the breath of God or the Spirit of God, we would not be alive. Even further if God were to COLLECT these aspects of our existence, and to take them back, then we would expire all together, no longer sharing in existence at all. This is what the bible teaches (Ecclesiastes 12:7; Psalm 104:29-30;Psalm 146:3-4; Job 34:14-15; etc).
So yes, these pieces are foundational to our life. Without them we would have no life. Our life is dependent upon them...all of us, sinners and saints alike. This is a foundational truth.
I asked u what having his breath does for us, I don't remember u giving an answer. Does the breath of God effect how we think? act? what we do? When u say it's a part of being human, what specifically is that? To me, it simply gives us life.
The above is my answer to this. And is what I have been saying this entire thread. The breath and Spirit of God within us all helps consititute our being. It gives us life. We are alive because we have the breath of God and the spirit of God within us. Without it, as the bible teaches, we would expire all together, or just plain wouldn't be.
That is what the breath does. I will pick up on more of this in my answer below...
I don't see where this gets us if we both know humanity is in rebellion against God. So what God is "in all" People who die without Jesus still go to hell. Why did Jesus give us the the great commission? Why not point to the fact that they are near God, and he's in them etc.. The language of God being in humanity is not in relation to salvation, therefore whats te point?
In fact u beleive God is gonna destroy ( annihilate) humanity who bear his image. What does that say about God's view about those who bear his image?
I agree it does not give us salvation in and of itself. I agree we still need to recieve Christ. I believe that hell awaits all those who are not in Christ. I agree. But this has nothing to do with what we are talking about.
Just because the bible teaches that God's breath is within us and Gods' spirit is within us, doesn't mean the bible doesn't also teach we are fallen. Heed the spirit not the flesh, right?
The human condition is more complex than the Calvinist makes room for in their systematic. We are not totally depraved. It is foolish to say that every aspect of our existence has been marred by sin. It is foolish because God's breath and spirit are a part of our existence, and it HAS NOT been marred by sin. I would agree that everything else about us has, but not God's spirit and breath. So we are ALMOST totaly depraved.
And it is this truth that makes sense of Romans 1:
God is EVIDENT WITHIN THEM! ***REPEAT!*** God is EVIDENT WITHIN THEM. For God has made it evident to them.
This is what I have been saying. That God is inherent to our condition. God is constantly making Himself known to us. His revelation is inherent to our condition. By the fact that His breath and spirit reside in us and we are made in His image, He is constantly being revealed to us. God is evident within us. For God has made HImself evident to us. As a result WE ARE WITHOUT EXCUSE. We all have contact with God, intimate contact with God. For though they knew God, they neither honored nor gave thanks. Instead they "suppress(ed) the truth in unrighteousness."
Paul said of the Gentiles who did not have the law...
The Gentiles who never heard the law, "INSTINCTIVELY" obeyed the law? Why is that? Is it because just as Romans 1 suggests, the truth of God is EVIDENT WITHIN THEM, because God has made it evident? And instead of suppressing the truth that has been revealed to them in this fashion, they complied and obeyed? And did "instinctively the things of the law?" Yes! As a result, Paul says, they showed "the work of the Law written in their hearts, their conscience bearing witness," etc.
This is what the breath of God and the Spirit of God within us does. It does not mean that every individual is saved or has never been tainted by sin. Not at all. That is false doctrine. What it does mean is that total depravity is wrong. Flat out wrong. It is error. Plain and simple. Total Depravity denies the two quotes from Romans I have put up. Total depravity denies that those who never heard the law could "instinctively" obey it.
Total Depravity is a false doctrine.
Every aspect of humanity has in fact NOT been tainted by sin, because the breath of God resides in us. The spirit of God resides in us. Neither of these have been marred by sin.
The very deffinition of total depravity is false in respect to the biblical witness. Because the breath of God and the Spirit of God are pieces to our existence. And neither have been touched by sin. AMEN!
peace.
|
|
blackcalvinist
New Member
think eternal (not him....HIM ^^ )
Posts: 11
|
Post by blackcalvinist on Jul 24, 2006 9:46:49 GMT -5
Very many pamplets, but I've read books by John MacArthur, and he would never admit it, but he's a Calvinist. I don't believe the book was actually about T.U.L.I.P but it was from that Calvanistic view point. My pastor is supposed to let me borrow a book about it but I don't know the title or author. By your own admission, you really haven't done your homework here. A pamphlet is not 'in-depth study'. My suggestion is you go pick up (for example) Sproul's book on the topic (What Is Reformed Theology), or several other good works and read them through cover to cover before you decide on whether it's biblical or not. By the way, you're wrong about MacArthur (more evidence that you need to do your homework before you talk). www.monergism.com/thethreshold/articles/onsite/MacArthur_5pts.htmlThe above named book is an EXCELLENT one on the subject, and it will cover just about every objection you have or will have. Take a few dollars and pick it up. Read it from cover to cover. Another is online: The Sovereignty of Grace by Arthur Custance www.custance.org/Library/SOG/Index.htmlA third is James White's book The Potter's Freedom. When you pick one of these up and start reading, then you'll be in a better position to talk about whether or not Calvinism is biblical or not.
|
|
blackcalvinist
New Member
think eternal (not him....HIM ^^ )
Posts: 11
|
Post by blackcalvinist on Jul 24, 2006 9:58:24 GMT -5
e-
You might wanna re-read those passages again and not READ INTO them.
First with the Job passage, God giving life (Psalm 104:30) is NOT the same as God giving His Spirit to the believer so they can understand spiritual things (1 Cor. 2:14-15). You made a HUGE jump there and I'm surprised no one has called you on that.
Second, your misquote of Romans 1:19 does NOT say that 'GOD IS EVIDENT WITHIN THEM' - what it says is that WHAT MAY BE KNOWN OF GOD IS MADE EVIDENT TO THEM. You did a HUGE epistemological leap there and it's nowhere supported by scripture.
Neither does your quoting Romans 2:14-15 disprove total depravity. It simply shows that conscience - an innate recognition of wrong and right - is present with each man and woman on the planet because God made them that way. The conscience is like the human eye - it doesn't determine right and wrong, it simply senses it (just like the eye doesn't create color, it just senses it). The eye has a set of 'laws' imprinted in it that help it to either present something as black or as white or another color in-between so that even if I never told you black was black, you'd still know it because that's how the eye is constructed to view things. The eye (and the person the eye is attached to) are to be informed by written knowledge of what the differences in shades of red are and so on and so forth. Likewise, the human conscience determines right and wrong based on whatever standards are set up around the person. Hence, special revelation is necessary for the conscience to be informed properly, just like special training is necessary for the artists' eye to be able to properly differentiate between shades of color.
You anti-Calvinist guys are funny. And none of you have probably even read through the Canons of Dordt, Westminister Confession, London Baptist Confession, etc.....
|
|
|
Post by eternal on Jul 24, 2006 10:32:04 GMT -5
Black Calvinist, would you like to tackle the issues laid out in this thread challenging the false doctrine of total depravity? If God's breath and Spirit are inherent aspects of our being, then the concept of Total Depravity must take this into consideration. As it stands, it defines our condition as have being completely tainted by sin in every realm of our being. Or as the answer has said, not one aspect of humanity has not been touched by sin. So either we claim that God's spirit and breath are both tainted by sin, or we claim that it has not. If we claim that it has been touched and marred by sin then we have gone against all of Christianity to say that Sin has indeed currupted God. I don't think any of us want to claim that simply in order to maintain a man made systematic (TULIP). OR, we say that God's spirit and breath which both continue to reside in man (as the scriptures teach), and HAS NOT been currupted or marred by sin. However if this is true, then it is no longer true that "every aspect of humanity has been touched by sin." Clearly that statement is false if it is simutaneously true that God's breath and Spirit are likewise a part of the human condition. ^^^^^^^^>>>>>I am looking forward to your interaction with this<<<<<<<<<^^^^^^^^^^^^^ First with the Job passage, God giving life (Psalm 104:30) is NOT the same as God giving His Spirit to the believer so they can understand spiritual things (1 Cor. 2:14-15). You made a HUGE jump there and I'm surprised no one has called you on that.Which Job passage are you reffering to? I assume you are speaking of Job 34:14-15 which has been the principle Job passage in this thread (though there have been others discussed, so your clarity would help much). If indeed you do have Job 34:14-15 in mind, further explanation is needed from you. It says, 14 "If He should determine to do so, If He should gather to Himself His spirit and His breath, 15 All flesh would perish together, And man would return to dust.Now as I have already said, It is impossible to dispute that God's spirit/presence and breath is in every individual. The bible says it very plainly. With that said, I am unsure of what your quoted portion above was reffering to, or even what it intended to imply. Please clarify your response. Thank you. Second, your misquote of Romans 1:19 does NOT say that 'GOD IS EVIDENT WITHIN THEM' - what it says is that WHAT MAY BE KNOWN OF GOD IS MADE EVIDENT TO THEM. You did a HUGE epistemological leap there and it's nowhere supported by scripture.I believe it is. What is it that is made known? And are those things "God" or not? I wonder what your answer would be to those two questions? Neither does your quoting Romans 2:14-15 disprove total depravity. It simply shows that conscience - an innate recognition of wrong and right - is present with each man and woman on the planet because God made them that way. The conscience is like the human eye - it doesn't determine right and wrong, it simply senses it (just like the eye doesn't create color, it just senses it). The eye has a set of 'laws' imprinted in it that help it to either present something as black or as white or another color in-between so that even if I never told you black was black, you'd still know it because that's how the eye is constructed to view things. The eye (and the person the eye is attached to) are to be informed by written knowledge of what the differences in shades of red are and so on and so forth. Likewise, the human conscience determines right and wrong based on whatever standards are set up around the person. Hence, special revelation is necessary for the conscience to be informed properly, just like special training is necessary for the artists' eye to be able to properly differentiate between shades of color. I am not intrested in the science of the eye. I am intrested in scripture and what it says about the presence of God within all humanity, and how it operates...and what these biblical truths mean for the false doctrine of total depravity. Do you believe that Rom. 2 has anything to do with Romans 1? The discussion of suppressing truth and the evidence of God known within them? Open rebellion and growing in depravity? Does this dicussion have anything to do with the follow up discourse on "instinctively doing the things of the law," and their actions "show the work of the Law written in their hearts?" Or that their conscience serves as a WITNESS either accussing or deffending them? How can people INSTINCTIVELY do good? I believe it is because the biblical account of God's presence within humanity www.itstheanswer.proboards46.com/index.cgi?board=discuss&action=display&thread=1152073560&page=2#1153515118 (plus the others noted in my last response to answer) serves in this capacity. It is exactly because we are NOT totaly depraved that we can "instinctively" obey God. And it is exactly because of the fall that we can instinctively sin. This is the condition of post adam man. You anti-Calvinist guys are funny. And none of you have probably even read through the Canons of Dordt, Westminister Confession, London Baptist Confession, etc.....Black Calvinist, this is not other message boards. Please respect the other posters. I have already washed my hands of one other person due to their ad hominem attacks and repeated misstatements of my positions despite previous corrections to the contrary. So please do not go down that road, or I will be forced to refuse interaction with you as well. We have had some rough discussions, you and I, and I chose not to engage in those kinds of fruitless conversations any longer. I just want to discuss theology, not each other, or make "funny" or condenscending statements about other people. If you believe I am in error, feel free to state that, but leave the other stuff alone or save it for other message boards. Here, lets try and stay above the belt, agreed?
|
|
|
Post by DoGMaTiX on Jul 24, 2006 17:03:03 GMT -5
e- You might wanna re-read those passages again and not READ INTO them. First with the Job passage, God giving life (Psalm 104:30) is NOT the same as God giving His Spirit to the believer so they can understand spiritual things (1 Cor. 2:14-15). You made a HUGE jump there and I'm surprised no one has called you on that. Actually that is exactley the first thing I pointed out but then he started building his strawman friend. THis is his premise and a erroneous one at that. Take this down the rest crumbles.
|
|
|
Post by DoGMaTiX on Jul 24, 2006 17:13:05 GMT -5
So either we claim that God's spirit and breath are both tainted by sin, or we claim that it has not. If we claim that it has been touched and marred by sin then we have gone against all of Christianity to say that Sin has indeed currupted God. I don't think any of us want to claim that simply in order to maintain a man made systematic (TULIP). This is his logical fallacy. Equating God's spirit with his breath. He claims not to make them the same but continues to associate them together. If they are two different things then he has to prove that God's SPIRIT is in each person, we know His breath is because thats just the life giving power but its NOT GOD. This is his error. And Eternal has YET to prove that this is true.
|
|
|
Post by DoGMaTiX on Jul 24, 2006 17:14:17 GMT -5
I have already washed my hands of one other person due to their ad hominem attacks and repeated misstatements of my positions despite previous corrections to the contrary. LOL!
|
|
|
Post by eternal on Jul 24, 2006 17:23:59 GMT -5
So either we claim that God's spirit and breath are both tainted by sin, or we claim that it has not. If we claim that it has been touched and marred by sin then we have gone against all of Christianity to say that Sin has indeed currupted God. I don't think any of us want to claim that simply in order to maintain a man made systematic (TULIP). This is his logical fallacy. Equating God's spirit with his breath. He claims not to make them the same but continues to associate them together. If they are two different things then he has to prove that God's SPIRIT is in each person, we know His breath is because thats just the life giving power but its NOT GOD. This is his error. And Eternal has YET to prove that this is true. This is false. Please check your PM.
|
|
|
Post by DoGMaTiX on Jul 24, 2006 18:14:30 GMT -5
Prove that God's Spirit is in every human being, its that simple.
|
|
|
Post by eternal on Jul 24, 2006 19:10:26 GMT -5
Prove that God's Spirit is in every human being, its that simple. 1. Can you tell me what ever led you to believe that I claim that God's breath and spirit are identical? Please show me where I ever said this. Especially since I have said the oppossite on a few occassions. 2. Prove it? There is no need for me to repeat myself so: Of man, God says that they die when His Spirit is removed from them: " Then the LORD said, " My Spirit shall not strive with man forever, because he also is flesh; nevertheless his days shall be one hundred and twenty years." (Genesis 6:3) The bible says that this Spirit returns back to God: Ecclesiastes 12:7 then the dust will return to the earth as it was, and the spirit will return to God who gave it.As I already wrote, Ecclesiastes 12:7 then the dust will return to the earth as it was, and the spirit will return to God who gave it.We see this clarified in Psalm 104:29-30 and 146:3-4. Both passages teach that the Spirit that God gave returns back to Him, and without that Spirit, the person "expires" God's breath/spirit is a part of who we are. We have skin, bones, eyes, knees, a mind, emotions, God's breath, God's Spirit, etc. All of this is a part of who we are. You say that every aspect of "who we are" has been currupted by sin. I ask you in return, do you include God's breath and God's spirit since both of these help constitute "who we are." Give attention to Job 34:14-15 >
14 "If He should determine to do so, If He should gather to Himself His spirit and His breath, 15 All flesh would perish together, And man would return to dust.Amen! Without God's Spirit and breath, there is no being. Period. If God were to take it away, we wouldn't exist. However, we do exist, and His Spirit and breath help constitute this existence. What spirit is it that returns back to Him? And if it is "back" to Him, where did it come from? Do you believe we are spirits sort of along the lines of the gnostic belief? Eccl. says that the spirit will return back to God. Job says 14 "If He should determine to do so, If He should gather to Himself His spirit and His breath, 15 All flesh would perish together, And man would return to dust. "See? "HIS SPIRIT AND HIS BREATH" are in all human beings. THis is what the bible teaches. Now, if you would like to reject the biblical teaching that God's spirit is within all of humanity (Job 34:14-15; Eph. 4:6-notice, "in all") then I would hope you are prepared to deffend that rejection. As it stands I have shown through the scriptures that you are incorrect AGAIN, your are erroneously equating God's breath with God's Spirit, this is a logical fallacy and a false interpretation with NO biblical warrent therefore untenable.Perhaps you have not read closely to what I have typed, either that or it has been going over your head. I have never equated God's breath and God's spirit. I have made it clear that they are two distinct entities, just as Job 34 makes clear. Please reread my posts and this will be made abundantly clear. So he is talking only about believers? LOL. HOw about in Acts 17 where he says it is "in God we exist?" He was actually speaking to heathens at the time. Was Paul not telling the truth at Mars Hill? Or Romans 11:36? Here he says that God is through "all things." Does he mean by this "all things Christian?" This theme runs deep throughout the scripture. Nothing has being outside of God. Jer. 23:23 says ""Do I not fill the heavens and the earth?" Do you disagree with the obvious answer to this? A) God is omnipresent, which includes within people God is invisible/spirit: (Col. 1:15; 1 Ti. 1:17; Jn. 4:24)
Psalms 139 discusses the inescabability from God's Beautiful Presence. The author imagines going through all aspects of reality, the muti tier levels as he describes it, yet God's Spirit is at every turn.
1 Cor. 8:6 yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom are all things and we exist for Him; and one Lord, Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we exist through Him. 7 However not all men have this knowledge
Eph. 4:6 one God and Father of all who is over all and through all and in all.
Acts 17:27 that they would seek God, if perhaps they might grope for Him and find Him, though He is not far from each one of us; 28 for in Him we live and move and exist."
Rom. 11:36 For from Him and through Him and to Him are all things.
Jer. 23:23 "Am I a God who is near," declares the LORD, "And not a God far off? 24 "Can a man hide himself in hiding places So I do not see him?" declares the LORD. "Do I not fill the heavens and the earth?" declares the LORD.
Coloss 1:17 And He is before all things, and in Him all things consist. Clearly, God is "over all and through all and in all."
Aside from this clear and detailed biblical witness, we find further biblical record in the passages I cited earlier, and have already pointed out your contradiction. Perhaps this time you will find time to address it?
Job 34:14-15 >14 "If He should determine to do so, If He should gather to Himself His spirit and His breath, 15 All flesh would perish together, And man would return to dust."I was also trying to prove that your view that God's breath=His OWN Spirit was false hence my using the same equation and example to illustrate my position which obviously was taken the wrong way.Roldan as I have already told you, when I wrote,
I have never equated God's breath with His spirit. In fact throughout this thread I have treated them as seperate entities. And I must ask you again to cease attributing false statements and doctrines to me. I have already warned you about this before in this thread. And now on this issue this is the second time. I do not equate God's breath and God's spirit as being identical. If you continue to make this claim, I will be forced to wash my hands of you. So it is with God's breath and spirit. Without them I would not be alive. Job 34:14-15 confirms this, as does other passages we have discussed. Without the breath of God or the Spirit of God, we would not be alive. Even further if God were to COLLECT these aspects of our existence, and to take them back, then we would expire all together, no longer sharing in existence at all. This is what the bible teaches (Ecclesiastes 12:7; Psalm 104:29-30;Psalm 146:3-4; Job 34:14-15; etc).So yes, these pieces are foundational to our life. Without them we would have no life. Our life is dependent upon them...all of us, sinners and saints alike. This is a foundational truth. Which Job passage are you reffering to? I assume you are speaking of Job 34:14-15 which has been the principle Job passage in this thread (though there have been others discussed, so your clarity would help much). If indeed you do have Job 34:14-15 in mind, further explanation is needed from you. It says, 14 "If He should determine to do so, If He should gather to Himself His spirit and His breath, 15 All flesh would perish together, And man would return to dust.Now as I have already said, It is impossible to dispute that God's spirit/presence and breath is in every individual. The bible says it very plainly. All direct refferences to God's spirit are highlighted in green for your convenience. And also for your conveniences, my direct rejections of your claims on what I believe are highlighted in purple. This post should never have been made. All of these direct quotes are throughout this thread. Next time please just take a little more time and try to take in what is being presented in a more careful manner. Thanks. peace.
|
|
Cyple
Full Member
Posts: 131
|
Post by Cyple on Jul 24, 2006 22:59:58 GMT -5
Limited Atonement- Perhaps the most ridiculous point of the five. Many times Christ says he died for all. Some, including my pastor, will say that by "all" and "world" meant the elect. (1 John 2:2- not only for us, but for the whole world.) I believe that Christ's death is sufficient for all but will be efficient only for some, those who believe. This is the point that I'm really confused with. There are many passages where it says that Jesus died/ransom for all men, the whole world. Why would God not be more specific here it that was his intention? 1 Timothy 2 1I urge, then, first of all, that requests, prayers, intercession and thanksgiving be made for everyone— 2for kings and all those in authority, that we may live peaceful and quiet lives in all godliness and holiness. 3This is good, and pleases God our Savior, 4who wants all men to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth. 5For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, 6who gave himself as a ransom for all men—the testimony given in its proper time. 7And for this purpose I was appointed a herald and an apostle—I am telling the truth, I am not lying—and a teacher of the true faith to the Gentiles.In verse 3, why even mention the word saved if he is talking to men who are already saved? Later in verse 6 why say all men? Why not say all the elect, or all that he has chosen? John 3:16 (Really confusing!) 16"For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son,[f] that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. 17For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. 18Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God's one and only Son.Okay let's substitute "whoever" and "world" with "those I have chosen". John 3:16 16"For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that "those that I have chosen" believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. 17For God did not send his Son into the "those that I have chosen" to condemn the "those that I have chosen", but to save the "those that I have chosen" through him. 18"those that I have chosen" believes in him is not condemned, but "those that I have chosen" does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God's one and only Son.Doesn't make sense to me. If we are to believe that the Word is only talking about the elect when dealing with "all", and "world", then our vocab must change when talking to the unsaved. Instead of saying that they must accept that they are sinners. We should say that God will reveal to you that you are a sinner. Our language should change if we believe the Calvinist point of view. Would should let non-believers know that they are not yet recipients of God's grace. We should also let them know that John 3:16, 1 John 2:2, etc, do not apply to them. I don't know how this sounds to you, but it sounds very unlikely that God would want this sort of confusion going on.
|
|
|
Post by the answer on Jul 25, 2006 0:08:41 GMT -5
1 Timothy 2 1I urge, then, first of all, that requests, prayers, intercession and thanksgiving be made for everyone— 2for kings and all those in authority, that we may live peaceful and quiet lives in all godliness and holiness. 3This is good, and pleases God our Savior, 4who wants all men to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth. 5For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, 6who gave himself as a ransom for all men—the testimony given in its proper time. 7And for this purpose I was appointed a herald and an apostle—I am telling the truth, I am not lying—and a teacher of the true faith to the Gentiles.
In verse 3, why even mention the word saved if he is talking to men who are already saved?
You assume "all men" = every single indivdual. Is there a reason u make that assumption?
Also, God ( who has all power) wants all to get saved, yet all don't. God must not really want it.
John 3:16 16"For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that "those that I have chosen" believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. 17For God did not send his Son into the "those that I have chosen" to condemn the "those that I have chosen", but to save the "those that I have chosen" through him. 18"those that I have chosen" believes in him is not condemned, but "those that I have chosen" does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God's one and only Son
That doesn't make sense to me either.
Question: Does John always use the word "world" to mean every single individual?
Instead of saying that they must accept that they are sinners. We should say that God will reveal to you that you are a sinner. Our language should change if we believe the Calvinist point of view. Would should let non-believers know that they are not yet recipients of God's grace. We should also let them know that John 3:16, 1 John 2:2, etc, do not apply to them. I don't know how this sounds to you, but it sounds very unlikely that God would want this sort of confusion going on.
Did Jesus tell people "I'm gonna die for u"?
Did the apostles preach about the "love of God"?
Jesus' message was: REPENT and believe the gospel.
That is all we need to tell people.
|
|
|
Post by the answer on Jul 25, 2006 0:23:18 GMT -5
Total Depravity is a false doctrine.
Every aspect of humanity has in fact NOT been tainted by sin, because the breath of God resides in us. The spirit of God resides in us. Neither of these have been marred by sin.
The very deffinition of total depravity is false in respect to the biblical witness. Because the breath of God and the Spirit of God are pieces to our existence. And neither have been touched by sin. AMEN!
(1) Our rebellion against God is total. (2) In his total rebellion everything man does is sin 3) Man's inability to submit to God and do good is total (4) Our rebellion is totally deserving of eternal punishment.
Do u disagree with any of these points? If not, this is what total depravity is.
You have still not told me WHY people rebel. Even while having God's breath within them, they sin. Which is the point. Even if "every aspect of humanity ISN'T tainted by sin" ( b/c as u contend God is within us) that still does not defeat total depravity.
|
|
|
Post by eternal on Jul 25, 2006 8:53:40 GMT -5
Total Depravity is a false doctrine.
Every aspect of humanity has in fact NOT been tainted by sin, because the breath of God resides in us. The spirit of God resides in us. Neither of these have been marred by sin.
The very deffinition of total depravity is false in respect to the biblical witness. Because the breath of God and the Spirit of God are pieces to our existence. And neither have been touched by sin. AMEN!(1) Our rebellion against God is total. (2) In his total rebellion everything man does is sin 3) Man's inability to submit to God and do good is total (4) Our rebellion is totally deserving of eternal punishment. Do u disagree with any of these points? If not, this is what total depravity is. You have still not told me WHY people rebel. Even while having God's breath within them, they sin. Which is the point. Even if "every aspect of humanity ISN'T tainted by sin" ( b/c as u contend God is within us) that still does not defeat total depravity. Total is a tricky word, as even you would say that man is not as BAD as he could possibly be, right? That we still have the capacity to love, etc. Just not in its fullness. Therefore you say that every aspect of man has been tainted by sin, and use that to define total depravity. But now that the later definition has been shown to be flawed, you are reverting back to this form? How would you allow the concept of people not being as "bad" as they could be (ie only murdering, stealing, lying, etc with no generosity, tenderness, etc) within the framework of "total?" I do believe all people are deserving of punishment, but that is largely irrelevant, as far as I can tell, to the conversation. Why do people rebel? Because we have sin in our lives, are trained up in sin, etc. The fall was real, answer. I have never denied this. Why are you asking me this question? Where does it stem from? May I ask you, do you still affirm that every aspect of man has been touched by sin? Why or why not?
|
|
Cyple
Full Member
Posts: 131
|
Post by Cyple on Jul 25, 2006 13:35:44 GMT -5
You assume "all men" = every single indivdual. Is there a reason u make that assumption?
Because when you say "all" you usually mean everything. To be clearer to the reader, if He meant "only those that he has chosen" why not say that? Why not say, I desire only those that I will save, to be saved? It is a double negative. It is like me saying I desire to give 5 dollars to those who I have already chosen to give it. But instead I say I want to give it to all. It doesn't make sense.
Also, God ( who has all power) wants all to get saved, yet all don't. God must not really want it.
Don't you see that this implies that we have part in hindering ourselves from being saved? Because, yes if God does want all to be saved, like it says, then everyone would be saved.
It's just like I want everyone to understand racism and why it is bad. But I cannot force them to understand it. I want them to find out on their own why it is bad. Because forcing someone would make it an ingenuine belief.
I believe the grace lies in him removing the "deception" of Satan and showing us the truth. Once we see the "real" truth it is a no-brainer. It does not mean that we can take responsibility for our conversion, because he did not have to reveal the truth to us.
Plus, why would Satan even need to deceive people if God is not trying to go after all men?
That doesn't make sense to me either.
Question: Does John always use the word "world" to mean every single individual?
I don't know about always, I'm talking about this particular passage. The definition "world" meaning all people fits here.
Did Jesus tell people "I'm gonna die for u"?
Did the apostles preach about the "love of God"?
Jesus' message was: REPENT and believe the gospel.
That is all we need to tell people.
Not off the top of my head he never said that he was going to die for the sins of the world.
Yes.
Yes, why do we say believe, if we don't have the capacity to believe? If we are totally depraved, then he would have to make us believe. So in the back of my mind when I'm talking to someone, I'm not really saying believe, I'm saying I hope God makes this person believe. We can't go up to someone and say this is the gospel, God will either make you believe or not.
It doesn't take a special person to choose between life and death. Meaning if I put a gun to your head and say do you want me to pull the trigger or not? What will you choose? If you value your life, then it's an obvious choice.
That is why I say God makes the choice obvious to us. It doesn't mean that we have take responsiblity for the choice.
If we take responsiblity of the choice it's like us being happy that we did roll a gutter ball with the bumpers on the lane. It was impossible, you nitwit.
Yes, I'm saying God makes it impossible for us to choose death. My definition of His saving grace.
Cyple out.
|
|
|
Post by the answer on Jul 25, 2006 14:31:54 GMT -5
Because when you say "all" you usually mean everything. To be clearer to the reader, if He meant "only those that he has chosen" why not say that? Why not say, I desire only those that I will save, to be saved? It is a double negative. It is like me saying I desire to give 5 dollars to those who I have already chosen to give it. But instead I say I want to give it to all. It doesn't make sense.
Why do u keep inserting "all I have chosen"? That isn't how we take this verse.
ALL here is "all sorts of men" Look at the context.
Paul says pray for everyone, then he says for kings and those in authority. Then in Vs4 says God wants "all men" to be saved. In other words, GOd wants kings and prezidents, and rulers to be saved too, not just the regular folk.
So God wants all sorts of men to be saved. He's saving the nations, not just one type of people.
Don't you see that this implies that we have part in hindering ourselves from being saved? Because, yes if God does want all to be saved, like it says, then everyone would be saved.
It's just like I want everyone to understand racism and why it is bad. But I cannot force them to understand it. I want them to find out on their own why it is bad. Because forcing someone would make it an ingenuine belief.
I believe the grace lies in him removing the "deception" of Satan and showing us the truth. Once we see the "real" truth it is a no-brainer. It does not mean that we can take responsibility for our conversion, because he did not have to reveal the truth to us.
Plus, why would Satan even need to deceive people if God is not trying to go after all men?
We are born rebellious. We need no help from satan in being bad people. God does in a sense FORCE people to be saved.
HAve u ever prayed for someone to get saved? What did u pray? Lord save them, right? ARen't u praying for the Lord to do something? For u that would not be genuine belief cuz God interviened. For u would geninue belief only be if God did nothing?
I don't know about always, I'm talking about this particular passage. The definition "world" meaning all people fits here.
It may "fit" but that doesn't mean it means every human on the planet. Because John uses the word in at least 6 different ways.
1After this, Jesus went around in Galilee, purposely staying away from Judea because the Jews there were waiting to take his life. 2But when the Jewish Feast of Tabernacles was near, 3Jesus' brothers said to him, "You ought to leave here and go to Judea, so that your disciples may see the miracles you do. 4No one who wants to become a public figure acts in secret. Since you are doing these things, show yourself to the world." John 7:1-4
Did they mean show yourself "to every human on the planet"?
7Now the crowd that was with him when he called Lazarus from the tomb and raised him from the dead continued to spread the word. 18Many people, because they had heard that he had given this miraculous sign, went out to meet him. 19So the Pharisees said to one another, "See, this is getting us nowhere. Look how the whole world has gone after him!"
Were the Pharisees saying " look, every human being on earth is going after Jesus"?
GOd loved the world of people. Whoever in the world wants to be saved, can.
LEt me re pharse my question..Did the apostles ever say to unbelievers "God loves you"?
Yes, why do we say believe, if we don't have the capacity to believe? If we are totally depraved, then he would have to make us believe. So in the back of my mind when I'm talking to someone, I'm not really saying believe, I'm saying I hope God makes this person believe. We can't go up to someone and say this is the gospel, God will either make you believe or not.
Our message is simple: repent and believe the gospel. That is what Jesus said. we are not responsible for unbelief.
Where do u stand our ability to come? Do u say " we can come on our own" or do u say " God has to call us for us to come"?
It doesn't take a special person to choose between life and death. Meaning if I put a gun to your head and say do you want me to pull the trigger or not? What will you choose? If you value your life, then it's an obvious choice.
Not for all. Some will say, "pull it, i don't care" Humanity is in rebellion. THey don't care about God. THy are 1 sec from eternity, and don't care, even when they are warned. We are DEAD spirtually. We cannot respond, unless we are made alive. ( Eph 2)
Yes, I'm saying God makes it impossible for us to choose death. My definition of His saving grace.
Huh? can u expalin that...i don't understand.
|
|
blackcalvinist
New Member
think eternal (not him....HIM ^^ )
Posts: 11
|
Post by blackcalvinist on Jul 25, 2006 15:59:00 GMT -5
You assume "all men" = every single indivdual. Is there a reason u make that assumption?Because when you say "all" you usually mean everything. To be clearer to the reader, if He meant "only those that he has chosen" why not say that? Why not say, I desire only those that I will save, to be saved? It is a double negative. It is like me saying I desire to give 5 dollars to those who I have already chosen to give it. But instead I say I want to give it to all. It doesn't make sense. Read through this..... www.pbministries.org/books/pink/Sovereignty/appendix_03.htmContext, context, context, my friend.
|
|