Dead, Slave, Evil, Ungodly, Loving Darkness etc.........

[TibiasDad]

jds



Correct, only naturally though. Spiritual reason, intellect, and will man naturally is void of ! Man naturally is spiritually dead, not naturally dead.

Man’s reason intellect and will are fately comprised, and left unchecked can and will lead to ultimate and final death, but nothing is “dead” in the sense of completely incapacitated.

We are out of relationship with God in our natural state, but that very presence of God enlivens the heart of man to seek him. That is why there are so many different religions in the world! Our spirits know instinctively that there is something more, and we seek to find it. That is evidence of God’s presence and voice reaching out to us. God wants us to seek him and find him! (Acts 17:18-29)

Doug

 

[brightfame52]

Man’s reason intellect and will are fately comprised, and left unchecked can and will lead to ultimate and final death, but nothing is “dead” in the sense of completely incapacitated.

We are out of relationship with God in our natural state, but that very presence of God enlivens the heart of man to seek him. That is why there are so many different religions in the world! Our spirits know instinctively that there is something more, and we seek to find it. That is evidence of God’s presence and voice reaching out to us. God wants us to seek him and find him! (Acts 17:18-29)

Doug

Spiritually man is dead. Spiritually incapacitated. Nothing short of being born again can change that.

 

[zerinus]

Only those who are born again can do good

How do you explain this verse:

John 1:

8 He [John] was not that Light, but was sent to bear witness of that Light.
9 That [Jesus] was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world.

If every man without exception, who comes into the world, has been enlightened by the Spirit of God, then they can't all be as spiritually dead as you would like to portray them to be. Or consider this example:

Acts 10:

10 There was a certain man in Caesarea called Cornelius, a centurion of the band called the Italian band,
2 A devout man, and one that feared God with all his house, which gave much alms to the people, and prayed to God alway.
3 He saw in a vision evidently about the ninth hour of the day an angel of God coming in to him, and saying unto him, Cornelius.
4 And when he looked on him, he was afraid, and said, What is it, Lord? And he said unto him, Thy prayers and thine alms are come up for a memorial before God.

If everyone is spiritually dead, so that they cannot do any good until they are "regenerated," how was Cornelius approved and found righteous before God, which prompted Peter to later say:

Acts 10:

34 Then Peter opened his mouth, and said, Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons:
35 But in every nation [and religion] he that feareth him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with him.

How do you square these verses with your theology?

 

[preacher4truth]

one can want to be free, which is a choice..and also one can view the one causing all those things you listed above (not us since we are helpless), as the enemy and ask God to free of of the enemy. That is the extent of the "to be free" on this wretched earth.

So we're helpless and it's someone else's fault?

 

[Chalcedon]

How do you explain this verse:

John 1:

8 He [John] was not that Light, but was sent to bear witness of that Light.
9 That [Jesus] was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world.

If every man without exception, who comes into the world, has been enlightened by the Spirit of God, then they can't all be as spiritually dead as you would like to portray them to be. Or consider this example:

Acts 10:

10 There was a certain man in Caesarea called Cornelius, a centurion of the band called the Italian band,
2 A devout man, and one that feared God with all his house, which gave much alms to the people, and prayed to God alway.
3 He saw in a vision evidently about the ninth hour of the day an angel of God coming in to him, and saying unto him, Cornelius.
4 And when he looked on him, he was afraid, and said, What is it, Lord? And he said unto him, Thy prayers and thine alms are come up for a memorial before God.

If everyone is spiritually dead, so that they cannot do any good until they are "regenerated," how was Cornelius approved and found righteous before God, which prompted Peter to later say:

Acts 10:

34 Then Peter opened his mouth, and said, Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons:
35 But in every nation [and religion] he that feareth him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with him.

How do you square these verses with your theology?

a devout man who feared God so the Lord was already at work drawing Him by His mercy and grace.

See how simple the answer was when you are on the side of truth.

 

[JDS]

jds
Unsaved men do seek God


No they dont, that is totally contrary to Rom 3 11

11 there is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God.

This is talking about the True God !

I presented an argument from scripture and in context of an unsaved man attempting to please God by keeping the law. A man who by his own testimony and under the inspiration of God himself said he willed to do it but did not have the power to do it in his members, which equates to his body. he brought to our attention that a war existed in his being between his mind and his flesh. This struggle he faced was predicated upon his knowing the law of God and understanding his perfection that could be achieved if he had the means to keep the law. But, to his chagrin, the perfect law became his accuser instead of his savior and he found himself condemned and under the curse of death because it was not in his power to attain to it's perfect standard, try as he might, and he fell short of it. He said, as an unsaved man, he served the law of God with his mind and the law of sin through his flesh. This made him a conflicted man and frustrated with only one way out of this dilemma. It was "in Christ" who had kept the law perfectly and yet had endured the penalty for sin on behalf of all others and one could have that perfection in him. Christ cannot be condemned for sin and his sacrifice was a one time and forever sacrifice for sin, never to be repeated again and it is perfectly reasonable and logical to believe that if one were "in him" he would be safe from any wrath that God has in store for those who will not come to him for salvation from the wrath to come. That could be you because you do not seem to agree with anything the scriptures actually says. Paul, the great apostle, say a man such as you is a reprobate. These are not my words but his. He says it here.

2 Timothy 3:8
Now as Jannes and Jambres withstood Moses, so do these also resist the truth: men of corrupt minds, reprobate concerning the faith.

This is where I see Calvinists, especially hyper Calvinists. You simply cannot get the doctrines of the faith so wrong and still be approved of God. There is no use of beating around the bush about it.

 

[zerinus]

a devout man who feared God so the Lord was already at work drawing Him by His mercy and grace.

See how simple the answer was when you are on the side of truth.

Two problems with that:

(1) Cornelius had been a pagan, and continued to be a pagan, worshipping God as a pagan, while he had all of those experiences. That contradicts your theology of their having to be "regenerated" first, through faith in Jesus.

(2) Peter's response to Cornelius's conversion makes a very broad, general statement about people of all nations (and religions), who may not have even heard of Jesus, to be approved by God not for "faith," not for "regeneration," but for working righteousness:

Acts 10:

34 Then Peter opened his mouth, and said, Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons:
35 But in every nation [and religion] he that feareth him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with him.

Their approval was not based on faith, it was not based on regeneration, but on working righteousness, which again wrecks your theology completely, and renders it altogether defunct and dysfunctional.

 

[brightfame52]

Two problems with that:

(1) Cornelius had been a pagan, and continued to be a pagan, worshipping God as a pagan, while he had all of those experiences. That contradicts your theology of their having to be "regenerated" first, through faith in Jesus.

(2) Peter's response to Cornelius's conversion makes a very broad, general statement about people of all nations (and religions), who may not have even heard of Jesus, to be approved by God not for "faith," not for "regeneration," but for working righteousness:

Acts 10:

34 Then Peter opened his mouth, and said, Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons:
35 But in every nation [and religion] he that feareth him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with him.

Their approval was not based on faith, it was not based on regeneration, but on working righteousness, which again wrecks your theology completely, and renders it altogether defunct and dysfunctional.

Those verses apply to the regenerate such as Cornelius. Jn 1 8-9 is about those who Christ shall quicken and give spiritual light to as they come into the world. It ensures that they all will be given spiritual enlighlightment, even gentiles Lk 2 32

a light to lighten the Gentiles, and the glory of thy people Israel.

 

[brightfame52]

I presented an argument from scripture and in context of an unsaved man attempting to please God by keeping the law. A man who by his own testimony and under the inspiration of God himself said he willed to do it but did not have the power to do it in his members, which equates to his body. he brought to our attention that a war existed in his being between his mind and his flesh. This struggle he faced was predicated upon his knowing the law of God and understanding his perfection that could be achieved if he had the means to keep the law. But, to his chagrin, the perfect law became his accuser instead of his savior and he found himself condemned and under the curse of death because it was not in his power to attain to it's perfect standard, try as he might, and he fell short of it. He said, as an unsaved man, he served the law of God with his mind and the law of sin through his flesh. This made him a conflicted man and frustrated with only one way out of this dilemma. It was "in Christ" who had kept the law perfectly and yet had endured the penalty for sin on behalf of all others and one could have that perfection in him. Christ cannot be condemned for sin and his sacrifice was a one time and forever sacrifice for sin, never to be repeated again and it is perfectly reasonable and logical to believe that if one were "in him" he would be safe from any wrath that God has in store for those who will not come to him for salvation from the wrath to come. That could be you because you do not seem to agree with anything the scriptures actually says. Paul, the great apostle, say a man such as you is a reprobate. These are not my words but his. He says it here.

2 Timothy 3:8
Now as Jannes and Jambres withstood Moses, so do these also resist the truth: men of corrupt minds, reprobate concerning the faith.

This is where I see Calvinists, especially hyper Calvinists. You simply cannot get the doctrines of the faith so wrong and still be approved of God. There is no use of beating around the bush about it.

That scripture doesnt change anything. Man naturally doesnt seek after God. Also may I add, man naturally is a servant of sin.

 

[preacher4truth]

yes we were made helpless by what the satanic realm did. it’s the satanic realms fault. they orchestrated eden to fall.

That doesn't reflect a biblical revelation of truth, it's a cop out and is devoid of biblical truth.

 

[preacher4truth]

not true. prophets tell it.

Not even close, you are personally responsible for your own wicked heart and sinfulness, which is why you will give an account for you. There is no "devil made me do it" excuse before God, but you can get your last unbiblical word in.

 

[TibiasDad]

Spiritually man is dead. Spiritually incapacitated. Nothing short of being born again can change that.

We are incapable of doing anything simply because God must be willing forgive! Forgiveness is solely within his power, for he is the offended party. Even if man were completely able to understand his spiritual condition, could comprehend his true state in relation to God, (which he is not) God has no obligation to respond positively to anything man might try to do. It is all grace all the time!

Doug

 

[brightfame52]

this natural body is spiritually dead . it’s flesh.

The natural man is spiritually dead in sin !

 

[brightfame52]

We are incapable of doing anything simply because God must be willing forgive! Forgiveness is solely within his power, for he is the offended party. Even if man were completely able to understand his spiritual condition, could comprehend his true state in relation to God, God has no obligation to respond positively to anything man might try to do. It is all grace all the time!

Doug

Man is dead spiritually to God. His only hope is if God gives him spiritual life through the New Birth, then he can and will respond positively to God.

 

[TibiasDad]

Man is dead spiritually to God. His only hope is if God gives him spiritual life through the New Birth, then he can and will respond positively to God.

Spiritually dead is a metaphor for a dead relationship with God. We cannot be restored to relationship unless God wants to be restored, and that's precisely what the atonement accomplished; it reconciles the world to God so that the relationship can be restored. The whole man can do nothing because he's spiritually dead is misrepresented in its intended foundational meaning; a broken relationship, not a "total inability" as defined by Calvinists.

Doug

 

[zerinus]

Not even close, you are personally responsible for your own wicked heart and sinfulness, which is why you will give an account for you. There is no "devil made me do it" excuse before God, but you can get your last unbiblical word in.

In Calvinism, it is not "the devil made me do it;" it is "God made me do it!" which is even worse. I would rather put the blame on the devil for my sins than on God. Calvinism puts the blame on God!

 

[TibiasDad]

In Calvinism, it is not "the devil made me do it;" it is "God made me do it!" which is even worse. I would rather put the blame on the devil for my sins than on God. Calvinism puts the blame on God!

The devil only tempts us, we are responsible for our response to the temptation. On the other hand, I concur that Calvinism's 'God decreed everything meticulously' is a far worse non-starter.

Doug

 

[zerinus]

We are incapable of doing anything simply because God must be willing forgive! Forgiveness is solely within his power, for he is the offended party. Even if man were completely able to understand his spiritual condition, could comprehend his true state in relation to God, (which he is not) God has no obligation to respond positively to anything man might try to do. It is all grace all the time!

Doug

Not quite correct. God is bound by his own word. He is a God of truth and cannot lie (Titus 1:2). When it says in scripture that if we repent, our sins will be forgiven (Ezekiel 18:23; 33:11; Acts 5:31; 8:22; 1 John 1:9); he is bound by that promise, if we fulfill our part. He cannot deny his own word. Provided we fulfill our part, he is obligated to fulfill his. He cannot go back or reneg on what he has said.

 

[zerinus]

The devil only tempts us, we are responsible for our response to the temptation. On the other hand, I concur that Calvinism's 'God decreed everything meticulously' is a far worse non-starter.

Doug

Agreed!

 

[Theo1689]

The devil only tempts us, we are responsible for our response to the temptation. On the other hand, I concur that Calvinism's 'God decreed everything meticulously' is a far worse non-starter.

So you reject Gen. 50:20, Isa. 10:5-7, and Acts 4:27-28....
Good to know.

Btw, who do you think is responsible for creating the devil?

You can't get away from the fact that everything that happens ultimately goes back to God.

But I fail to see how,

"You meant it for evil,
but God meant it for good." (Gen. 50:20)

... is a "non-starter".

I guess you mean that since it utterly destroys your "free will" theology, it's pointless to "start" trying to defend it.

And you know what? I guess you're right...