What's that supposed to mean? You've been pussyfooting around the fact that God did indeed repent and relent when the Bible says so plainly.
Total Depravity
- Thread starter TMS
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
i have been saying those passages are prefiguring Christ mediating for us in heaven, making propitiation for sin on the cross, and God forgiving sin, in His mercy & lovingkindness looking over tresspass and relenting from the condemnation we deserve.
that by doing so, these things do not represent God being restricted by time, as the open theist suggests, but in fact show that His eternal purpose of redemption remains unchanged.
that these are not contradictions of Malachi 3:6, "I The LORD change not" - they are affirmations of it. His name is Salvation and He saves.
That must be why Calvinists in general fopcus on infiltrating churches/sheepfolds, and keep busy trying to convert sheep to Calvinism, and don't bother much about going after goats to get them recreated into sheep. for God's flock.
I the LORD change not does NOT mean God cannot change His mind or choose to do otherwise... It is talking about God's being, God will remain faithful, true, loving, righteous etc.
Can you show in scripture where a goat was changed into a sheep, or a tare that became wheat?
How about every single human being. We are all tares at some point. Lets use one of your own proof texts, the one that talks about people being DEAD in sins and trespasses in Ephesians 2.
Thats a TARE, but then, they hear, believe, the Gospel, respond to God's grace in the affirmative and are granted spiritual life and BOOM its a SHEEP
While those verses teach that all come into the world with a fallen nature and practice the same, they don't identify sheep or goats, wheat or tares. You assume them into the passage.
Ah my bad. It doesn't use the exact phrases, I wonder if I could use this argument of assuming as well? Nonetheless I will play along: Would this qualify: The sheep HEAR the voice of the shepherd. Do the people Dead in Sins mentioned in Ephesians 2 hear His voice? No? Then they arent sheep (yet!)
Ephesians 2
As for you, you were dead in your transgressions and sins, 2 in which you used to live when you followed the ways of this world and of the ruler of the kingdom of the air, the spirit who is now at work in those who are disobedient. 3 All of us also lived among them at one time, gratifying the cravings of our flesh[a] and following its desires and thoughts. Like the rest, we were by nature deserving of wrath. 4 But because of his great love for us, God, who is rich in mercy, 5 made us alive with Christ even when we were dead in transgressions—it is by grace you have been saved.
Why Calvinists are wrong:
1) As for you, you were dead in your transgressions and sins...
Emphasis is personal sin, not inherited sin.
2) Paul affirms that all of us “were. . . children of wrath.” The verb emetha (“were”) is an imperfect tense, middle voice form. The imperfect tense describes on-going action as viewed in the past.
Thus, here it depicts the style of life which had characterized these saints prior to their conversion. Had the apostle intended to convey the notion of inherited sinfulness he would have stated BORN children of wrath.
Salmon, S. D. F. Expositor’s Greek Testament. Vol. 3. Ed. W. Robertson Nicoll. New York: George H. Doran Company.
3) It is possible that the King James Version, and most subsequent translations, reflect a Calvinistic bias in the rendition, “by nature children of wrath.” The Greek word phusei rendered “nature” in our common versions can denote “a mode of feeling and acting which by long habit has become nature” (Thayer, 660).
Clearly, these people by habitual practice had become worthy of divine wrath. McCord’s translation suggests that the Ephesians had “by custom” become children of wrath.
Therefore “Nature” >>>>Habitual Practice.
Winer contended that their trespasses and sins had made them “natural children of wrath” (270). His understanding of the Greek are consistent with the immediate context of this passage and the tenor of the Bible as a whole.
Winer, G. B. 1825. A Treatise on the Grammar of New Testament Greek. Edinburgh: T & T Clark.
Jesus was sent for the lost sheep of the house of Israel. Those who heard His voice went from being lost sheep into found sheep. He also had sheep not oof that fold.
The Bible never speaks of a fold of goats that belong to Christ. It does state that all things are after their own kind.
Of course it doesn't. Thats the REBIRTH! You are born again, then united to Christ
do you have some kind of proof that orthodoxy since the time of Augustine has never engaged in evangelism or is that just a random accusation?
Paul is taking up the imagery from Jeremiah 18, which is exactly the opposite of Calvinism's view.
As for the vessels, even Paul elsewhere in the new testament says:
In a large house there are articles not only of gold and silver, but also of wood and clay; some are for special purposes and some for common use. So if anyone cleanses himself of what is unfit, he will be a vessel for honor: sanctified, useful to the Master, and prepared for every good work
There is that word again. IF. That word appears a lot in Scripture. No such thing as unconditional election unto salvation. Unconditional election as a word doesn't even make sense, it means RANDOM election. What is election? Choosing something, if you choose for NO REASON, it is effectively random.
when Christ talked about wheat and tares He didn't say anything about tares being transformed into wheat.
what He did say is that in the same field, He plants wheat and Satan plants tares, and that the workers should not try to separate them - He will send His angels at the end of the age to separate them; the workers are incapable of distinguishing the two with accuracy.
the same with sheep and goats. He says nothing about goats becoming sheep; He says He knows His sheep, seeks them out, finds them and does not lose even one. He says He Himself will divide the sheep from the goats.
The fact that Paul says "You were DEAD in your transgressions and sins in which trespasses and sins you used to LIVE" indicates that dead does not mean incapable of acting otherwise. You were dead in sins, but living in those same sins. Dead therefore means "condemned to death" not actually already dead. And dead in trespasses and sins means under condemnation for past sins, not unable to do anything now but sin. And living in trespasses and sins means doing trespasses and sins.
IF dead does not refer to a state of inability to act otherwise, but a state of being under condemnation for past sins, then there is no reason to suppose that the same person dead in trespasses and sins, and living in trespasses and sins, doing trespasses and sins, cannot break out of doing their sin habits and do something that justifies them to life, such as listening to the gospel and trusting in Christ.
PaulThomson said:
That must be why Calvinists in general focus on infiltrating churches/sheepfolds, and keep busy trying to convert sheep to Calvinism, and don't bother much about going after goats to get them recreated into sheep. for God's flock.
This is another great example of Calvinists being triggered by a phrase and their mind rushing automatically, without any actual thinking, to a response that feels to them like a reasonable conclusion, but is a complete non-sequitur.
That must be why Calvinists in general focus on infiltrating churches/sheepfolds, and keep busy trying to convert sheep to Calvinism, and don't bother much about going after goats to get them recreated into sheep. for God's flock.
Do you not understand what the term "Calvinists in general" means? Do you think "Calvinists in general" means the same thing as "orthodoxy since the time of Augustine?
This is another great example of Calvinists being triggered by a phrase and their mind rushing automatically, without any actual thinking, to a response that feels to them like a reasonable conclusion, but is a complete non-sequitur.
They aren't just dead. They are under the dominion of Satan...according to the prince of the power of the air. This is what so many leave out. Jesus came to destroy the works of the devil. Dominion is one of those works.
Another thing that often goes unconsidered is that Christians recognize that they can do nothing apart from Christ, but somehow believe the unconverted can operate just fine without Him. We were without God and without HOPE in this world. We were in a completely helpless position. Then, some awesome words...but God...
Why would God need to change His mind when He knows the end from the beginning? How is He changing His mind when it has always been His intention to forgive those who repent?
God says things for our sake. According to our limited understanding He accommodates us.
In reality, God can not repent.
Not if He is truly God, He can't.
God wants us to grow and mature in our thinking to learn to understand Him.
He starts off treating us as if we are ignorant.
Too many want to stay there.