Conversion, the result of regeneration.

Carbon said:
Yes.

Just as it says friend, just as it says.

I’m not breaking down verses and passages teaching theology to a list sinner. God the Holy Spirit uses the word as it is, it’s the power of God into salvation.
According to you, should I break it up into peacemeal, apply what I think it means and serve it? Does God need my help?


Next…..
Click to expand...
Which Bible version ? Can this one work , from the message ?

This is how much God loved the world: He gave his Son, his one and only Son. And this is why: so that no one need be destroyed; by believing in him, anyone can have a whole and lasting life. God didn’t go to all the trouble of sending his Son merely to point an accusing finger, telling the world how bad it was

Or does it have to be the Greek ? The KJV, NIV, ESV ? Which John 3:16 can save the sinner ?
 
Theophilus said:
So I will take your answer as a no to my question . Since it’s a different gospel Synergism vs Monergism would you say it’s a false gospel ?
Click to expand...
Yes, because as a former Arminian myself, adding or subtracting anything changes and distorts the Gospel, and is no Gospel at all. Allow me to share a article that highlights key questions to further ponder upon. You are a Arminian I am guessing, if so, do you hold to Total Depravity? Because Classical Arminianism teaches . Now for you information, the Father of Arminianism (Arminius) believed and taught, that sinful man could not prepare himself or possesses any natural powers to incline himself to God or Christ. Because the fall and the sinful state of lapse affected every faculty of man's ability, desire or will to understand, seek, choose the things of God without the Grace of Regeneration to restore or renovate man's faculties to bring man to faith in Christ. So, Arminius got this right, but then ruins it, distorts it, perverts the Gospel; human cooperation with grace formed a basis of acceptance before God, this is not the good news of the Gospel. Nor is it even biblical teaching, on the contrary it is the worst enemy of Grace! Placing the glory on man's actions, and not the Cross and what Christ did.

Here's part of the Article it's lengthy so I can post it in parts if you wish.

The purpose of this essay is to explore conversion from two perspectives: (1) the individual sinners' existential exercise of faith and (2) the supernatural work of the Spirit in bringing men and women to faith in Christ. Evangelical Christians universally believe that "everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved” and that no one can know Christ or come to faith “without someone preaching” to them (Rom 10:13, 14). We all confess that people are generally not saved in a void but require the content of the gospel that they might know Christ. In the Gospel of John (chapter 8) Jesus speaks of setting people free from their bondage to sin. The question naturally arises: is it because we respond to the gospel as it is preached that natural fallen creatures are set free from bondage or is it because they are set free by the Spirit that they are then morally able to respond to the gospel? Is the will of man free by nature or it is free by the grace of Christ worked in us by the Holy Spirit? Does Christ become glorious in our eyes due to our natural affection or is it because the Holy Spirit makes Christ glorious in our eyes that we have affection for him? Can the unregenerate prepare themselves at any time by their natural powers to receive the grace of God as it is preached to them, or does the word fall on deaf ears without the Spirit unplugging them? What is the relationship to the preaching of the gospel and the work of the Spirit?
​
History and Sola Gratia ​

Evangelical Christians will all readily acknowledge that the Holy Spirit plays some role in persons coming to faith in Christ and could not come without Him for "no one says Jesus is Lord apart from the Holy Spirit (1 Cor 12:3). Unfortunately, most do not trace out the important implications of this biblical truth. This is evidenced by the fact that the vast majority of these same evangelicals teach the free will of man to believe the gospel, as if the moral ability to do so were a biblical axiom. The very fact that persons require the Holy Spirit for salvation shows that they have no free will to believe, left to his/her own corrupt disposition. We seem to have forgotten that this was, perhaps, the main point for which for Luther departed the Roman Catholic Church, which soon after anathematized the Reformers for rejecting the free will of man and affirming the bondage of the will and affections to sin (Justification Canons IV & V of the Counsel of Trent 1545-1560). This anathema was placed on Luther and other Reformers for believing in “justification sola fide [which] denied that human cooperation with grace formed a basis of acceptance before God; [and] salvation sola gratia without the admixture of what humans do as a triggering device for that salvation; in acceptance before God in solo Christo….[They] argued that sinners are not free to so choose but are completely captive to their sin…[that] nothing precedes grace …[and] the notion that we can train ourselves into becoming righteous [or even prepare ourselves for faith] -a notion Luther saw as rooted in Aristotle and mediated through much Scholastic theology-is the worst enemy of grace.”

​
 
Carbon said:
As long as the arms preach what’s in the word and don’t change the message, yes.
For example, to insert come forward and ask Jesus into your heart or, smile Jesus loves you, this isn’t the gospel.
Click to expand...
How can any sinner who is unregenerated by the Holy Spirit believe the spiritual things of God? The free-willers insert that it's their decision that is the basis or ground of their salvation, that cooperating with Grace is the basis, but then it's no longer by Grace Alone, but by Grace and works that saves. This is not the Gospel, but entirely another gospel, which is no gospel at all. Some if not most free-willers, hold to free-will coming even before Grace, this is definitely not the Gospel, nor it is biblical teaching.

I believe one needs to read the fine print to make sure they are not getting deceived. Because the Gospel is Monergistic through and through. And why Paul says the only place any person can boast is in the Cross! So I say no the Arminian position does not teach the Gospel that Paul preached!
 
Ladodgers6 said:
Yes, because as a former Arminian myself, adding or subtracting anything changes and distorts the Gospel, and is no Gospel at all. Allow me to share a article that highlights key questions to further ponder upon. You are a Arminian I am guessing, if so, do you hold to Total Depravity? Because Classical Arminianism teaches . Now for you information, the Father of Arminianism (Arminius) believed and taught, that sinful man could not prepare himself or possesses any natural powers to incline himself to God or Christ. Because the fall and the sinful state of lapse affected every faculty of man's ability, desire or will to understand, seek, choose the things of God without the Grace of Regeneration to restore or renovate man's faculties to bring man to faith in Christ. So, Arminius got this right, but then ruins it, distorts it, perverts the Gospel; human cooperation with grace formed a basis of acceptance before God, this is not the good news of the Gospel. Nor is it even biblical teaching, on the contrary it is the worst enemy of Grace! Placing the glory on man's actions, and not the Cross and what Christ did.

Here's part of the Article it's lengthy so I can post it in parts if you wish.

The purpose of this essay is to explore conversion from two perspectives: (1) the individual sinners' existential exercise of faith and (2) the supernatural work of the Spirit in bringing men and women to faith in Christ. Evangelical Christians universally believe that "everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved” and that no one can know Christ or come to faith “without someone preaching” to them (Rom 10:13, 14). We all confess that people are generally not saved in a void but require the content of the gospel that they might know Christ. In the Gospel of John (chapter 8) Jesus speaks of setting people free from their bondage to sin. The question naturally arises: is it because we respond to the gospel as it is preached that natural fallen creatures are set free from bondage or is it because they are set free by the Spirit that they are then morally able to respond to the gospel? Is the will of man free by nature or it is free by the grace of Christ worked in us by the Holy Spirit? Does Christ become glorious in our eyes due to our natural affection or is it because the Holy Spirit makes Christ glorious in our eyes that we have affection for him? Can the unregenerate prepare themselves at any time by their natural powers to receive the grace of God as it is preached to them, or does the word fall on deaf ears without the Spirit unplugging them? What is the relationship to the preaching of the gospel and the work of the Spirit?
​
History and Sola Gratia ​

Evangelical Christians will all readily acknowledge that the Holy Spirit plays some role in persons coming to faith in Christ and could not come without Him for "no one says Jesus is Lord apart from the Holy Spirit (1 Cor 12:3). Unfortunately, most do not trace out the important implications of this biblical truth. This is evidenced by the fact that the vast majority of these same evangelicals teach the free will of man to believe the gospel, as if the moral ability to do so were a biblical axiom. The very fact that persons require the Holy Spirit for salvation shows that they have no free will to believe, left to his/her own corrupt disposition. We seem to have forgotten that this was, perhaps, the main point for which for Luther departed the Roman Catholic Church, which soon after anathematized the Reformers for rejecting the free will of man and affirming the bondage of the will and affections to sin (Justification Canons IV & V of the Counsel of Trent 1545-1560). This anathema was placed on Luther and other Reformers for believing in “justification sola fide [which] denied that human cooperation with grace formed a basis of acceptance before God; [and] salvation sola gratia without the admixture of what humans do as a triggering device for that salvation; in acceptance before God in solo Christo….[They] argued that sinners are not free to so choose but are completely captive to their sin…[that] nothing precedes grace …[and] the notion that we can train ourselves into becoming righteous [or even prepare ourselves for faith] -a notion Luther saw as rooted in Aristotle and mediated through much Scholastic theology-is the worst enemy of grace.”

​
Click to expand...
I appreciate your honesty and being upfront about the issue of the gospel . I would agree with you from the opposite side that Calvins gospel was another gospel by biblical standards .
 
Ladodgers6 said:
How can any sinner who is unregenerated by the Holy Spirit believe the spiritual things of God? The free-willers insert that it's their decision that is the basis or ground of their salvation, that cooperating with Grace is the basis, but then it's no longer by Grace Alone, but by Grace and works that saves. This is not the Gospel, but entirely another gospel, which is no gospel at all. Some if not most free-willers, hold to free-will coming even before Grace, this is definitely not the Gospel, nor it is biblical teaching.

I believe one needs to read the fine print to make sure they are not getting deceived. Because the Gospel is Monergistic through and through. And why Paul says the only place any person can boast is in the Cross! So I say no the Arminian position does not teach the Gospel that Paul preached!
Click to expand...
Unchecked Copy Box
Act 16:30 - And brought them out, and said, Sirs, what must I do to be saved?
Unchecked Copy Box
Act 16:31 - And they said,Believe on the Lord JesusChrist, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house. Paul taught YOU have to believe why is that so hard for some to understand ? Instead of adding things to the Lord’s gospel and deceiving yourself and others why not just take Paul’s teaching about belief and believe? It was God’s decision to offer salvation to those who would believe through faith and putting God first why change that to follow what men think ?
 
Theophilus said:
I appreciate your honesty and being upfront about the issue of the gospel . I would agree with you from the opposite side that Calvins gospel was another gospel by biblical standards .
Click to expand...
Thanks for the respectable conversation, I am no longer a Arminian, but a convinced Classical Calvinist or better yet, a believer in the Doctrines of Grace, which Calvin preferred. I don't understand your last comment about Calvin, but it's great to have good dialogue and ask questions for clarity. Trying to find assurance or hope, in human hands is a terrifying situation in Redemption, Praise and Glory be to God Alone, who is rich in Grace and Mercy toward the ungodly, where in that we can have assurance and hope because of Christ Alone and through the Promise of God who made a Covenant or an Oath to save his people from their sins in his Son, the Promised Seed!
 
Leatherneck0311 said:
Unchecked Copy Box
Act 16:30 - And brought them out, and said, Sirs, what must I do to be saved?
Unchecked Copy Box
Act 16:31 - And they said,Believe on the Lord JesusChrist, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house. Paul taught YOU have to believe why is that so hard for some to understand ? Instead of adding things to the Lord’s gospel and deceiving yourself and others why not just take Paul’s teaching about belief and believe? It was God’s decision to offer salvation to those who would believe through faith and putting God first why change that to follow what men think ?
Click to expand...
Leatherneck, I am asking you honestly or tricks, are you reading and trying to understand our position at all? Or is your bias so blinded you that you don't care what we write?

We do not deny this, please show us, provide a post. I'll post an excerpt from article and hope you will take the time to at least understand it, then we can have a conversation, fair enough?

The purpose of this essay is to explore conversion from two perspectives: (1) the individual sinners' existential exercise of faith and (2) the supernatural work of the Spirit in bringing men and women to faith in Christ. Evangelical Christians universally believe that "everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved” and that no one can know Christ or come to faith “without someone preaching” to them (Rom 10:13, 14). We all confess that people are generally not saved in a void but require the content of the gospel that they might know Christ. In the Gospel of John (chapter 8) Jesus speaks of setting people free from their bondage to sin. The question naturally arises: is it because we respond to the gospel as it is preached that natural fallen creatures are set free from bondage or is it because they are set free by the Spirit that they are then morally able to respond to the gospel? Is the will of man free by nature or it is free by the grace of Christ worked in us by the Holy Spirit? Does Christ become glorious in our eyes due to our natural affection or is it because the Holy Spirit makes Christ glorious in our eyes that we have affection for him? Can the unregenerate prepare themselves at any time by their natural powers to receive the grace of God as it is preached to them, or does the word fall on deaf ears without the Spirit unplugging them? What is the relationship to the preaching of the gospel and the work of the Spirit?

History and Sola Gratia

Evangelical Christians will all readily acknowledge that the Holy Spirit plays some role in persons coming to faith in Christ and could not come without Him for "no one says Jesus is Lord apart from the Holy Spirit (1 Cor 12:3). Unfortunately, most do not trace out the important implications of this biblical truth. This is evidenced by the fact that the vast majority of these same evangelicals teach the free will of man to believe the gospel, as if the moral ability to do so were a biblical axiom. The very fact that persons require the Holy Spirit for salvation shows that they have no free will to believe, left to his/her own corrupt disposition. We seem to have forgotten that this was, perhaps, the main point for which for Luther departed the Roman Catholic Church, which soon after anathematized the Reformers for rejecting the free will of man and affirming the bondage of the will and affections to sin (Justification Canons IV & V of the Counsel of Trent 1545-1560). This anathema was placed on Luther and other Reformers for believing in “justification sola fide [which] denied that human cooperation with grace formed a basis of acceptance before God; [and] salvation sola gratia without the admixture of what humans do as a triggering device for that salvation; in acceptance before God in solo Christo….[They] argued that sinners are not free to so choose but are completely captive to their sin…[that] nothing precedes grace …[and] the notion that we can train ourselves into becoming righteous [or even prepare ourselves for faith] -a notion Luther saw as rooted in Aristotle and mediated through much Scholastic theology-is the worst enemy of grace.”​
 
Theophilus said:
Which Bible version ? Can this one work , from the message ?

This is how much God loved the world: He gave his Son, his one and only Son. And this is why: so that no one need be destroyed; by believing in him, anyone can have a whole and lasting life. God didn’t go to all the trouble of sending his Son merely to point an accusing finger, telling the world how bad it was

Or does it have to be the Greek ? The KJV, NIV, ESV ? Which John 3:16 can save the sinner ?
Click to expand...
Why ask me? Are you being nice and considering what I say?
 
Carbon said:
And how do you know I haven’t spent many hours studying God’s word?

Do I have to go for a brain transplant first.

I was a pow for many years and experienced brainwashing and learning curves.

I’m not interested. I love to study and learn God’s word as it is written. I do not anymore read scripture and conform it to a fallen human natured understanding.
Click to expand...

My pastor taught ex POW's. He himself was retired military.
He has taught us on the Communist brain washing techniques in detail.
And, taught lessons as to be a means to survive them!
He had a strong following of military around the world.

If you gave it a chance you will be handed keys that unlock left and right, and supplied to sustain you beyond what you can now understand.

He daily faithfully studied from the Hebrew and Greek, and taught his congregation at least six evenings a week.

Take a look and see the areas he covered over years of teaching. https://rbthieme.org/PDF/LessonListingForWeb2014.pdf

And, this is him: https://rbthieme.org/index.html#tabs-3

grace and peace ...........
 
Ladodgers6 said:
Leatherneck, I am asking you honestly or tricks, are you reading and trying to understand our position at all? Or is your bias so blinded you that you don't care what we write?

We do not deny this, please show us, provide a post. I'll post an excerpt from article and hope you will take the time to at least understand it, then we can have a conversation, fair enough?

The purpose of this essay is to explore conversion from two perspectives: (1) the individual sinners' existential exercise of faith and (2) the supernatural work of the Spirit in bringing men and women to faith in Christ. Evangelical Christians universally believe that "everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved” and that no one can know Christ or come to faith “without someone preaching” to them (Rom 10:13, 14). We all confess that people are generally not saved in a void but require the content of the gospel that they might know Christ. In the Gospel of John (chapter 8) Jesus speaks of setting people free from their bondage to sin. The question naturally arises: is it because we respond to the gospel as it is preached that natural fallen creatures are set free from bondage or is it because they are set free by the Spirit that they are then morally able to respond to the gospel? Is the will of man free by nature or it is free by the grace of Christ worked in us by the Holy Spirit? Does Christ become glorious in our eyes due to our natural affection or is it because the Holy Spirit makes Christ glorious in our eyes that we have affection for him? Can the unregenerate prepare themselves at any time by their natural powers to receive the grace of God as it is preached to them, or does the word fall on deaf ears without the Spirit unplugging them? What is the relationship to the preaching of the gospel and the work of the Spirit?

History and Sola Gratia

Evangelical Christians will all readily acknowledge that the Holy Spirit plays some role in persons coming to faith in Christ and could not come without Him for "no one says Jesus is Lord apart from the Holy Spirit (1 Cor 12:3). Unfortunately, most do not trace out the important implications of this biblical truth. This is evidenced by the fact that the vast majority of these same evangelicals teach the free will of man to believe the gospel, as if the moral ability to do so were a biblical axiom. The very fact that persons require the Holy Spirit for salvation shows that they have no free will to believe, left to his/her own corrupt disposition. We seem to have forgotten that this was, perhaps, the main point for which for Luther departed the Roman Catholic Church, which soon after anathematized the Reformers for rejecting the free will of man and affirming the bondage of the will and affections to sin (Justification Canons IV & V of the Counsel of Trent 1545-1560). This anathema was placed on Luther and other Reformers for believing in “justification sola fide [which] denied that human cooperation with grace formed a basis of acceptance before God; [and] salvation sola gratia without the admixture of what humans do as a triggering device for that salvation; in acceptance before God in solo Christo….[They] argued that sinners are not free to so choose but are completely captive to their sin…[that] nothing precedes grace …[and] the notion that we can train ourselves into becoming righteous [or even prepare ourselves for faith] -a notion Luther saw as rooted in Aristotle and mediated through much Scholastic theology-is the worst enemy of grace.”​
Click to expand...
I don’t place any faith in Arminianism or Calvinism my faith is in Jesus and God’s word. The confusion IMO comes in when both sides place more faith in the opinions of men than in God’s word. The Father draws men to His Son who then have the opportunity to respond to truth, but sadly some who are drawn reject the light( John 3). Grace cannot be earned, bought, stolen or negotiated for it is 100% provided by God through Jesus to those who humble themselves before God, confess and own that they have sinned against God, place their faith in Him, repent, and follow Jesus. Jesus is first in one’s life and they are telling others about Jesus and how God loves them and paid for their sins if they will believe and trust Him. If I glory it will never be in any man’s opinions or theology it will only be in Jesus. God’s word is sufficient and He blesses those that seek Him with their whole hearts.
 
Carbon said:
Do you believe man has free will? And can choose to be saved?

Yes, no?

I’ll let you label yourself.
Click to expand...
The TRUTH will make you free!

We need sound doctrinal teaching.
Not the clap trap we get peddled in most churches we find today.

For the time will come when people will not put up with sound doctrine. ​
Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number ​
of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear.​
​
2 Timothy 4:3​
 
Carbon said:
So you are a free willer?
Click to expand...
No. Not in ourselves.

Grace alone is what makes us capable. By grace we can gain faith (believing and understanding God's Word)

That is why grace must be given for us to become saved.
For the flesh on its own will always suppress free will and enslave us to its particular tendencies and desires.
 
Leatherneck0311 said:
I don’t place any faith in Arminianism or Calvinism my faith is in Jesus and God’s word. The confusion IMO comes in when both sides place more faith in the opinions of men than in God’s word. The Father draws men to His Son who then have the opportunity to respond to truth, but sadly some who are drawn reject the light( John 3). Grace cannot be earned, bought, stolen or negotiated for it is 100% provided by God through Jesus to those who humble themselves before God, confess and own that they have sinned against God, place their faith in Him, repent, and follow Jesus. Jesus is first in one’s life and they are telling others about Jesus and how God loves them and paid for their sins if they will believe and trust Him. If I glory it will never be in any man’s opinions or theology it will only be in Jesus. God’s word is sufficient and He blesses those that seek Him with their whole hearts.
Click to expand...
Yes man can have their isms, give me Sola Christos.
 
Theophilus said:
No first is a heart transplant not a brain .
Click to expand...
Actually... the Bible teaches that the brain is referred to the heart of a man.

"As a man thinks in his heart, so is he. " Proverbs 23:7

The Bible in both the Greek and Hebrew differentiated between the left and right lobes of the brain in their function long before psychiatry made the discovery.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top