"Works Salvation"

[Dizerner]

That entire post was largely absent of any real scriptural references and support.

False. The whole thing alludes to or directly quotes hundreds of verses, as well as containing their meaning in hundreds more.

You are either demonically blinded, or have mental impairment, or are completely dishonest.

I choose to think the best about you.

First, the phrase "sinful nature" is not found in scripture.

Completely irrelevant point. "Trinity" is not found in Scripture, it does not invalidate the meaning behind the word.

Second, whether the concept of "sinful nature" even exists in scripture is debatable.

Begging the question, hand-waving fallacy.

There is no doubt that no one, except Jesus Christ, has lived a life in which absolutely every thought and action was righteously meritorious. But that does not mean that every thought and action of every other human being was not righteously meritorious.

So you can merit 25% and Jesus merits the remaining 75% under your skewed and twisted system. Shoot, maybe you're pretty good and can 50 - 50 with the perfect sinless Son of God who took the hell you deserve.

That is just making Jesus a co-Savior, and exalting the goodness of man beyond what Scripture attributes to it.

And that has nothing whatsoever to do with the fact that Adam disobeyed God and ate the forbidden fruit from tree of the knowledge of good and evil. It only has to do with the fact that each and every human being has disobeyed God and has eaten of his own "forbidden fruit" in life.

Coincidentally, right. Because even though humans are born sinless holy perfect beings, all those temptations in life are just too hard for a sinless perfect being to handle...

The kind of mind that can entertain that kind of cognitive dissonance is very difficult for me to understand. There is a reason EVERY SINGLE PERSON SINS, and it's not just bad luck and God making the difficulty level super high.

 

[Jim]

False. The whole thing alludes to or directly quotes hundreds of verses, as well as containing their meaning in hundreds more.

Whether that is true or not cannot be determined from what is presented.

You are either demonically blinded, or have mental impairment, or are completely dishonest.

I choose to think the best about you.

You should not blame the reader for a poorly written article. Any commentary on the Bible should clearly distinguish between what the Bible says as written and what the commentator thinks it means.

Begging the question, hand-waving fallacy.

Not true since that is the very thing you are trying to prove.

So you can merit 25% and Jesus merits the remaining 75% under your skewed and twisted system. Shoot, maybe you're pretty good and can 50 - 50 with the perfect sinless Son of God who took the hell you deserve.

That is just making Jesus a co-Savior, and exalting the goodness of man beyond what Scripture attributes to it.

I have no idea what that might mean. You didn't get that from anything that I posted.

Coincidentally, right. Because even though humans are born sinless holy perfect beings, all those temptations in life are just too hard for a sinless perfect being to handle...

I wouldn't put it that way, but I won't argue the point.

The kind of mind that can entertain that kind of cognitive dissonance is very difficult for me to understand. There is a reason EVERY SINGLE PERSON SINS, and it's not just bad luck and God making the difficulty level super high.

Yes, there is a reason that we sin. One way or the other, we like it; it feels good; it triggers the "pleasure centers" in our brains. And some of those things that we like are not in compliance with God's law and those are sin.

 

[Studyman]

Plenty of examples in the Bible of men that did far more Good than evil.
Where is their inherited sin nature?
Cant be possible if we are born totally wicked

According to Scriptures, humans are created by God with the Capacity to "Learn obedience". Even Jesus "Learned obedience by the things HE suffered".

Prov. 22: 6 Train up a child in the way he should go: and when he is old, he will not depart from it.

You are right to point out the men who God Glorified as righteous before HIM, like David.

1 Kings 14: 7 Go, tell Jeroboam, Thus saith the LORD God of Israel, Forasmuch as I exalted thee from among the people, and made thee prince over my people Israel, 8 And rent the kingdom away from the house of David, and gave it thee: and yet thou hast not been as my servant David, who kept my commandments, and who followed me with all his heart, to do that only which was right in mine eyes;

Like Abraham.

Gen. 26: 4 And I will make thy seed to multiply as the stars of heaven, and will give unto thy seed all these countries; and in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed; 5 Because that Abraham obeyed my voice, and kept my charge, my commandments, my statutes, and my laws.

You are right to question this world's religious system, and the religious philosophies promoted by them. But know that they won't like it.

 

[Studyman]

That entire post was largely absent of any real scriptural references and support. I didn't get much passed the Preface. It is based almost entirely on some false ideas and beliefs. One is your definition of "sinful nature" which you stated as "a nature that is incapable of performing a righteously meritorious thought or action without supernatural undeserved grace from God". First, the phrase "sinful nature" is not found in scripture. Second, whether the concept of "sinful nature" even exists in scripture is debatable. Third, the idea that the human being is incapable of performing any righteously meritorious thought or action without the supernatural underserved grace from God is absolutely absurd.

Yes Jim, this philosophy is absurd. Nevertheless, there are many who have been convinced by this world's religious system, that God created instruction in righteousness for men to walk in but withheld from them the capacity to walk in them. Paul knew better.

Rom. 6: 12 Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal body, that ye should obey it in the lusts thereof. 13 Neither yield ye your members as instruments of unrighteousness unto sin: but yield yourselves unto God, as those that are alive from the dead, and your members as instruments of righteousness unto God.

And so did Jesus. "Now go and Sin no more".

There is no doubt that no one, except Jesus Christ, has lived a life in which absolutely every thought and action was righteously meritorious. But that does not mean that every thought and action of every other human being was not righteously meritorious. The truth is that even if one had lived an entire life in which every thought and action, except one, was righteously meritorious he would have failed to meet God's requirement for receiving an eternal life with Him in heaven. And that is why it was necessary for God's underserved grace given through the sacrificial death of Jesus on the cross.

And that has nothing whatsoever to do with the fact that Adam disobeyed God and ate the forbidden fruit from tree of the knowledge of good and evil. It only has to do with the fact that each and every human being has disobeyed God and has eaten of his own "forbidden fruit" in life.

The teaching that Jesus and Paul, like their Father, were instructing men to "do" what was impossible for them to do, is truly absurd. Consider this philosophy when the lipstick is removed.

They preach that God came to Save Israel from Egypt (Sin). And he did many wonderful works and signs that they might know HE was the God of their father, Abraham. And "many" trusted in Him. For those Israelites who trusted in Him, (these same men also claim God's Laws are only for Israel) they preach God placed a "Yoke of Bondage", impossible to obey Laws on the necks of God's Friend, Abraham's Children. Then God lied to them by telling them they could obey Him, then slaughtered them by the thousands when they didn't.

You are absolutely right Jim, this philosophy is absurd.

 

[atpollard]

Please quote the verses to back up your claim, thanks

Already provided (and denied by you) … remember you believe quoting Ephesians 1:3 through Ephesians 2:10 as a block to highlight what MAN and GOD do (respectively) is cherry-picking out of context.

 

[atpollard]

Choosing to sin is not the same as being born with a nature that only desires sin.

“Strawman Fallacy”: Where did I ever claim otherwise?

Since there are Bible examples of people who chose to do more good than evil.

Are you claiming Romans chapter 3 is false?
I never claimed people do not do good, God did. The context is that all GOOD ultimately comes through men FROM God (John 3:21 “… as having been performed in God.“) (Eph 2:10 “… which God prepared beforehand …”).

Totally depraved nature cannot be true.

Define the Doctrine of “Total Depravity”.
I have no confidence you correctly understand the doctrine, which means you are likely refuting a straw-man caricature of the actual Doctrine of Grace belief.

 

[GodsGrace]

Thread 'Where is the love in Calvinism?'

Jul 13, 2023

This is a thread from the old forum. I was told by the administrator that unfortunately they're not able to migrate the old form into the new something about copyright infringement. So I'll just do a workaround and throw the link up here back to that thread. I believe there was some really good posts on it.

In Calvinism... where is the love? | Berean-Apologetics

Unfortunately, Calvinists sometimes seem to have a blind spot for the love of God. Consider this question from The Shorter Catechism, which is an abbreviated version of The Westminster Confession of

berean-apologetics.boards.net

Also Civic posted A thread entitled "Does God love everyone?" It is very good.

Does God love everyone ? | Berean-Apologetics

I was looking at an old thread on another forum I started about love that had over a 1000 responses and I was leaving Calvinism at the time and being attacked by them like a pack of wolves discus

berean-apologetics.boards.net

• Theophilus
• Replies: 39
• Forum: Calvinism vs. Arminianism

Hi Ahar...
I don't think I'll have to be checking out the threads you posted.
Is there anything new under the sun?
No.
Calvinistic beliefs were the same when those threads were created...
and they're the same now.
Reformed theology does not agree with the NT.
It is not representative of the nature that Jesus portrayed re God.

 

[atpollard]

Hi Ahar...
I don't think I'll have to be checking out the threads you posted.
Is there anything new under the sun?
No.
Calvinistic beliefs were the same when those threads were created...
and they're the same now.
Reformed theology does not agree with the NT.
It is not representative of the nature that Jesus portrayed re God.

Respectfully, YOU would probably enjoy them. They are a “let’s trash Calvinism” festival of Arminian agreement. Unfortunately, that is really more of an echo chamber than a conversation without any Calvinist participation.
[there is a famous Reformed site where one could encounter the same thing in reverse].

I have little personal interest in either “yes, we are right” monologue. As a Baptist, I enjoy honest conversation between General Baptists and Particular Baptists over how we reconcile actual scriptures. Those conversations tend to be few and far between.

I just thought you should know the topic you dismissed as Calvinist is actually “anti-Calvinist”.

 

[GodsGrace]

Respectfully, YOU would probably enjoy them. They are a “let’s trash Calvinism” festival of Arminian agreement. Unfortunately, that is really more of an echo chamber than a conversation without any Calvinist participation.
[there is a famous Reformed site where one could encounter the same thing in reverse].

I have little personal interest in either “yes, we are right” monologue. As a Baptist, I enjoy honest conversation between General Baptists and Particular Baptists over how we reconcile actual scriptures. Those conversations tend to be few and far between.

I just thought you should know the topic you dismissed as Calvinist is actually “anti-Calvinist”.

Well A...I'm not here to trash Calvinism...
I'm here to show how it's incorrect theology.
I also don't like to be called an Arminium since I don't know anything abut Arminius.
I like the word CHRISTIAN,,,since that's what I am.
Reformed theology is a "denomination" and I address that. but I'm not dying on this hill.

BUT
You SHOULD be interested in who is right.
The reason is that the theology is so diametrically opposed that one has to be right
and one has to be wrong. I don't see any middle ground here.

And, I don't need to hear any anti-calvinists discussing between themselves.
I'm here to discuss theology...

I also want to say - in case you've forgotten - that I do not hate any calvinist person....
but, yes, I really do dislike a great deal reformed theology/calvinism.

Three reasons:
It's heretical. We could discuss.
It's blasphemous. We could discuss.
It change the very character of God.

 

[GodsGrace]

We discover that our Bibles have a Book called ROMANS and another called EPHESIANS that talk all about how People choose SIN and God chooses people … and we believed the Word of God.

I'm happy to get into Romans. No problem.
When I've done it, however, a few times...I give my reply and the other member disappears.
Maybe it'll be different with you.

Neither Romans, nor Ephesians, nor any other book in the NT states that God chooses PEOPLE.
The Elect refers to the Jewish people in the OT and believers in the NT.
Question is: How did they become the elect of God?

Predestination is also found in the bible.
It always refers to HOW or to PURPOSE,
and in the atonement of Jesus, which was surely predestined from before the beginning of time because God knew
Adam would fail/fall and God made a plan to save His creatures from this damning fall.

[Now, if you are talking about the whole baptizing babies … I don’t get that either! ]

I happen to know the history of the baptism of infants.
I also don't care to discuss it. I'll just say that:
The same person that John Calvin so loved - Augustine - changed the REASON for infant baptism.

 

[atpollard]

Three reasons:
It's heretical. We could discuss.
It's blasphemous. We could discuss.
It change the very character of God.

I don’t mind any discussion, but might I suggest we start with HERETICAL (which means contrary to Scripture) and the verse in my Signature as a brief exegetical scriptural support of most of TULIP. If I can support my belief with scripture, even if other scripture appears to contradict it, then it cannot (by definition) be HERETICAL.

Frankly, if either the “God does the saving 100%” (Calvinist / Reformed / TULIP / Particular Baptist) or “People must freely choose or God cannot save them” (Arminian / Wesleyan / Free Will / General Baptist) position were clearly Biblical and the other was clearly Heretical (contra-BIBLICAL), then this discussion would have been settled shortly after it began and would be a footnote except for cults (like the question of “Is Jesus really God?”).

It still rages on because the Bible offers clear support for BOTH positions. Lutherans embrace this fact by envolking the term “mystery” to describe the apparent conflict. Baptists split into two camps (those embracing the scriptures supporting a GENERAL atonement and those embracing the scriptures supporting a PARTICULAR atonement) and we hold each person responsible to answer to GOD and SCRIPTURE for their conscience, rather than any man or creed. So Baptists worship God side by side as mixed congregations of people holding BOTH views within one local church. It is one of the core “Baptist Distinctives” (things that make a Baptist, a Baptist).

 

[GodsGrace]

I don’t mind any discussion, but might I suggest we start with HERETICAL (which means contrary to Scripture) and the verse in my Signature as a brief exegetical scriptural support of most of TULIP. If I can support my belief with scripture, even if other scripture appears to contradict it, then it cannot (by definition) be HERETICAL.

Frankly, if either the “God does the saving 100%” (Calvinist / Reformed / TULIP / Particular Baptist) or “People must freely choose or God cannot save them” (Arminian / Wesleyan / Free Will / General Baptist) position were clearly Biblical and the other was clearly Heretical (contra-BIBLICAL), then this discussion would have been settled shortly after it began and would be a footnote except for cults (like the question of “Is Jesus really God?”).

It still rages on because the Bible offers clear support for BOTH positions. Lutherans embrace this fact by envolking the term “mystery” to describe the apparent conflict. Baptists split into two camps (those embracing the scriptures supporting a GENERAL atonement and those embracing the scriptures supporting a PARTICULAR atonement) and we hold each person responsible to answer to GOD and SCRIPTURE for their conscience, rather than any man or creed. So Baptists worship God side by side as mixed congregations of people holding BOTH views within one local church. It is one of the core “Baptist Distinctives” (things that make a Baptist, a Baptist).

It was very settled.
The reformation rebooted a 5th century gnostic belief.
We'll start with heretical but it's going on 11pm here.
Tomorrow A...
Have a nice evening.

 

[Red Baker]

Answer my question,
Where did Adam get his sinful nature to sin against God?

It is the results of Adam's disobedience to one simple commandment. God created Adam and Eve after his image, who were was created upright, innocent, pure, with wisdom, knowledge and understanding with a will free of a sin nature!

You asked: "Where did Adam get his sinful nature to sin against God?" By Eve being deceived by the devil, and Adam sinning in order to remain in fellowship with a deceived wife, but God held Adam guilty being the head of the children of flesh and blood.

So, how did the devil become the father of a generation of evil and wicked children? John 8; Matthew 23, etc.

The same way Adam became at enmity against God! God left both angels and Adam and Eve to the power of their own wills without giving them any assistance to continue in the state in which they were created. God did elect some of the angles which protected them from leaving the state in which they were created. 1st Timothy 5.

Under the new covenant God secured the salvation of his elect through sending his own Son to do what the first Adam could not do! The glorious truth we learn from all this is: God alone is immutable and cannot be tempered to sin...are created being are mutable and will sin when left to themselves proven by the fall of angels and man.

 

[Red Baker]

Plenty of examples in the Bible of men that did far more Good than evil.

If they born again, then yes, if not, they did evil from their youth up.

 

[praise_yeshua]

According to Scriptures, humans are created by God with the Capacity to "Learn obedience". Even Jesus "Learned obedience by the things HE suffered".

Prov. 22: 6 Train up a child in the way he should go: and when he is old, he will not depart from it.

You are right to point out the men who God Glorified as righteous before HIM, like David.

1 Kings 14: 7 Go, tell Jeroboam, Thus saith the LORD God of Israel, Forasmuch as I exalted thee from among the people, and made thee prince over my people Israel, 8 And rent the kingdom away from the house of David, and gave it thee: and yet thou hast not been as my servant David, who kept my commandments, and who followed me with all his heart, to do that only which was right in mine eyes;

Like Abraham.

Gen. 26: 4 And I will make thy seed to multiply as the stars of heaven, and will give unto thy seed all these countries; and in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed; 5 Because that Abraham obeyed my voice, and kept my charge, my commandments, my statutes, and my laws.

You are right to question this world's religious system, and the religious philosophies promoted by them. But know that they won't like it.

This world is full of disobedience. You're one of them. How do YOU learn from what you suffering when you're a illegitimate and not a son?

Heb 12:8 But if ye be without chastisement, whereof all are partakers, then are ye bastards, and not sons.

Rom 9:33 As it is written, Behold, I lay in Sion a stumblingstone and rock of offence: and whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed.

 

[praise_yeshua]

It is the results of Adam's disobedience to one simple commandment. God created Adam and Eve after his image, who were was created upright, innocent, pure, with wisdom, knowledge and understanding with a will free of a sin nature!

If Adam was exactly like God, then Adam would have never sinned.

Adam was incomplete. What you believe is contrary to Scriptures. It is nothing more than vain tradition.

When your children were young and innocent like Adam, did you judge them to die when they sinned?

 

[Red Baker]

If Adam was exactly like God, then Adam would have never sinned.

Never said Adam was like God ~ Adam did not possess God's attributes, one which is immutability. But, according to the word of God, he was indeed created after God's image, which image he lost!

 

[Salty]

The Bible indicates that fallen man retains the image of God with respect to our value and dignity, which is God’s explanation for forbidding the wrongful taking of human life:

“Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed, for God made man in his own image” Gen. 9:6

This statement was made after the fall, grounding the sanctity of even sinful human lives.

On the other hand, man has lost the vital core of the image of God in the form of righteousness and holiness in relating to Him. The result of sin, therefore, has been not the complete loss of the divine image but rather its thorough corruption.

 

[praise_yeshua]

Never said Adam was like God ~ Adam did not possess God's attributes, one which is immutability. But, according to the word of God, he was indeed created after God's image, which image he lost!

Funny how you say that Adam was made in God's image and then recognize God is immutable and Adam wasn't.

You're conclusion is nothing but your vain tradition. That is what you were taught. You got that nonsense from someone else besides God.

So tell me what other things was Adam missing besides immutability BEFORE he sinned........

Lets get that list going.........

What I said was true. Adam was incomplete. Adam was made before Eve. Adam was not good.... before Eve.

Gen 2:18 And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him.

 

[praise_yeshua]

The Bible indicates that fallen man retains the image of God with respect to our value and dignity, which is God’s explanation for forbidding the wrongful taking of human life:

“Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed, for God made man in his own image” Gen. 9:6

This statement was made after the fall, grounding the sanctity of even sinful human lives.

On the other hand, man has lost the vital core of the image of God in the form of righteousness and holiness in relating to Him. The result of sin, therefore, has been not the complete loss of the divine image but rather its thorough corruption.

You did good in the first part of your response yet missed the point.....

Who took another man's life? Was it Cain?

It wasn't just Adam's choices that got us where we are today. It was Cain's. Abel was righteous and he was murdered for his righteousness.