Total Depravity vs. Freewill

  • 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.
P

Powemm

Guest
I am always blind ... Without Christ I can not see... I had to one to a place of rest , not running out before Him an allowing Him to bring things to show me ... Upon showing, comparing all with scripture ... Allowing Him to reveal And unveil as He wishes...becomin less talkative to hear him.. Listening instead of proving a point ... I cone to these rooms often an just read ... Participatig less in discussions and listening to what te Hily spirit is revealingthrough all of it.. Seeing tue world from broad angles instead of up close views where I get into trouble ... The holy spirit who cones guides us and leads us back towards God.. Pointing the way to Him for answers... Direction and guidance.. So many times I run to men for answers when God has told us many times.. Approach my throne with boldness and confidence... Knock and I will answer , seek and you shall find.... it's easy to cone to these rooms and read all everyone has to say on subjects...
confusion of what we are doing that we should not be doing? Maybe? when we have Accra and a promise we can go directly to God in Jesus Christ and get tue full truth from Him... So many questions are asked... I have to hunk about who is it I'm suppose to be asking
 

zone

Senior Member
Jun 13, 2010
27,214
164
63
Dear Zone..if my stressing to live right and do right seems exhaustive to you..I merely am stressing what few churches even talk about anymore..
Grace that is true grace includes responsibility..and we may not have all the 'time' needed to tell others..if they get offended or feel its harping on them..or deflect it back with a 'focus on your life' let me live how i want(I hear this all the time..by christians and non christians by the way) then ultimately i stand before God and can only speak what i know he wants me to say.
I know, that he would not want me to keep quiet..Ive had some tell me this for fear of rejection..i even have family members who are not christian encourage me to not even bring a bible to work or even read anything 'religious' at my job..should i then be motivated by fear? Heavens no.
I simply wish someone would have been diligent to tell me..I am not mad..saddened though at times(id be lying if i said otherwise) and sad that i did not find the Wesleyan Church sooner..but better late than never..
that all sounds like good news to me raul:)
i'm very happy that things have turned the corner for you, and you know what is to be done.


peace to you in Christ Our Lord.
zone
 
Nov 26, 2011
3,818
62
0
Originally Posted by Skinski7

How is "submitting" to the righteousness of God establishing "one's own righteousness."?

If "faith works by love" (Gal 5:6) and "love fulfills the law" (Gal 5:14) and if this "faith upholds the law in the heart" (Rom 3:31) and if "we fulfill the law by walking after the Spirit" (Rom 8:4), how exactly is doing all that "establishing one's own righteousness"?

I really don't see this "transfer" of the righteousness of Jesus to your account anywhere in the Bible.

Why is preaching obedience to God equivalent, in your mind, to preaching "self righteousness"?

I am really trying to grasp that.

John did teach that righteousness is something that is "done" ie. an action, which logically must be represented by the outward conduct of an individual (1Joh 3:7). John did also teach that those who are born of God will MANIFEST right conduct when he said this...

1Jn 3:9 Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God.
1Jn 3:10 In this the children of God are manifest, and the children of the devil: whosoever doeth not righteousness is not of God, neither he that loveth not his brother.

Notice he puts "not doing righteousness" in the same box as "not loving."

So please explain your thoughts on this please. Explain those scriptures and what they mean to you.

Thank you.
Imputation and righteousness are highly essential elements of the gospel. Righteousness is perfect obedience to the law of God. Where does the Bible teach that "Righteousness is perfect obedience to the law of God?" Is that your own definition or is it actually Biblical? Also in the context of your statement "which law are you referring to"? The Mosaic Law or the Law of Love?

I see John clearly defining righteousness in these two verses...

1Jn 3:7 Little children, let no man deceive you: he that doeth righteousness is righteous, even as he is righteous.

1Jn_2:29 If ye know that he is righteous, ye know that every one that doeth righteousness is born of him.

Clearly John believes that being righteous means that your conduct is righteous. I don't see John teaching anywhere that the "virtue of Jesus is credited to your account>"


Imputation is to reckon to the account of another. Double imputation is implied in the gospel. Ok you make that claim that it is "implied" in the Gospel. Where is it implied? Where did Jesus teach this doctrine that you believe?

If you doctrine is based on what is taught in the scriptures you should be able to point to where it is clearly taught. I can point clearly to where "he that doeth righteousness is righteous" so I know for sure that what I am saying is Biblical.

The sins of the elect were imputed to Christ, so Christ became guilty in His person for the sins of His people and was justly punished for those sins, though He was perfectly sinless (2Cor. 5:21, Isa.53:4-6, 1 Pet.2:24). Ok you make some claims here and then you reference a few scriptures as evidence for these claims.

Claim - Jesus became guilty (via imputation) in His person and was PUNISHED for those sins.

2Co 5:21 For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him. This verse does not state that Jesus became guilty nor does it state that Jesus was then punished for those sins.

Isa 53:4 Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows: yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted.
Isa 53:5 But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed.
Isa 53:6 All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the LORD hath laid on him the iniquity of us all.
These verses do not state that Jesus became guilty nor do they say that Jesus was then punished for those sins.

1Pe 2:24 Who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree, that we, being dead to sins, should live unto righteousness: by whose stripes ye were healed.
This verse does not state that Jesus became guilty not does it say that he was punished for that guilt.

2Cor 5:21 simply says that an innocent was made sin for us in order that we be made the righteousness of God in Him. I know some theologians hold the view that "sin" is "sin offering" due to that the word for "sin" is translated as "sin offering" in the Septuagint which is what the early church used and that is why some conclude that the early church read the meaning of "sin offering" in that passage. This was the point Adam Clarke made on this (Adam Clarke's Bible Commentary - 2 Corinthians 5).

I myself am not too sure about this view because of the following passage.

Rom 8:1 There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.
Rom 8:2 For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death.
Rom 8:3 For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh:
Rom 8:4 That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.

The "being made righteousness in Him" in 2Cor 5:21 is a clear reference to the "Spirit of life in Christ Jesus" by which the "righteousness of the law is fulfilled in us who walk after the Spirit." Jesus was made in the "likeness of sinful flesh" and I tend to see that as a parallel to "being made sin for us."

That is my current understanding after giving it a lot of though simply because it fits in with the rest of scripture very well. I am willing to be corrected though.

Yet what 2Cor 5:21 DOES NOT SAY is that Jesus was "made guilty" and then "punished for that guilt." The verse is not worded anything close to that sort of meaning. Why do you use it as a proof text to support your statement then?

Isa 53:4-6 specifically states that "we esteemed him stricken, smitten of God." It does not say that Jesus was imputed guilty and then punished by God. That passage clearly teaches that Jesus suffered on our behalf and by his stripes we are healed. Our "iniquity was laid upon Him" in the same way as the iniquity of the people was laid on the scape goat in the Old Testament.

Jesus "offered Himself WITHOUT SPOT to God." The Bible does not teach that He offered Himself WITH OUR SPOTS.

Heb_9:14 How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?

Firstly Isa 53:4-6 does not state that Jesus was "made guilty" nor does it say he was "punished for the guilt." Secondly, if it did say that then it would be contradicting Heb 9:14.

1Pet 2:24 simply teaches that Jesus "bore our sins" and that we are healed through his stripes and are also dead to sin so that we can live for righteousness. Paul also taught about "being dead to sin."

Rom 6:11 Likewise reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord.
Rom 6:12 Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal body, that ye should obey it in the lusts thereof.
Rom 6:13 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.

Rom 6:14 For sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye are not under the law, but under grace.

Grace is the power of God to live free from the bondage of sin. Thus we don't YIELD ourselves to unrighteousness but rather we yield ourselves to righteousness.

Rom 6:15 What then? shall we sin, because we are not under the law, but under grace? God forbid.
Rom 6:16 Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey; whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness?
Rom 6:17 But God be thanked, that ye were the servants of sin, but ye have obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine which was delivered you.
Rom 6:18 Being then made free from sin, ye became the servants of righteousness.


All these passages line up perfectly with "he who does what is righteous is righteous." Righteousness is simply manifested through abiding in the Spirit of life in Jesus Christ.

The righteousness of Christ was imputed to His people, thereby His people was made righteous in the person of their substitute and are therefore acceptable before God, even though they are not perfectly sinless (2Cor. 5:21, Rom. 5:19). So here you make a claim and give two proof texts.

Claim: The righteousness (virtue) of Jesus is credited to the account of His people. Jesus is the substitute for the believer in the sense of double imputation, His virtue becomes yours and your wickedness becomes His.

2Co 5:21 For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him. Again this verse does not say what you imply it does. Nowhere in that verse does it say that the virtue of Jesus is credited to your account. It does not say anything even close to that. The verse plainly states that "we are made the righteousness of God in Him" and I already discussed exactly what that means above. When we abide in Christ the righteousness of God is manifested to us. It is a REAL ACTUALITY and not a JUDICIAL BOOK KEEPING ENTRY like you are teaching.

Rom 5:19 For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.
This verse says nothing about "the virtue of Jesus being credited to your account." It doesn't say anything close to that. It states that many were made sinners because of Adam and that many shall be made righteous because of Christ.

Now please think carefully here. I know you believe that Rom 5:19 is teaching that all human beings were made guilty because of Adam's sin. I am not sure if you hold to the Natural or the Federal view but it does not really matter to me. The problem with that view is that if you are consistent with the first past of that verse then you have have to apply it to the second part which would mean that Rom 5:19 is teaching universal salvation. Think about that point because I do not think there is anyway to escape that logic unless you simply ignore it.

Rom 5:19 is speaking of "example." Many were made sinners through Adam by doing the same thing he did, ie. walk after the flesh in rebellion to God. But many shall be made righteous by following Christ's example by walking after the Spirit in yielding to God.

There is no implication of this "imputation of the obedient track record of Jesus to your account" in that verse whatsoever. You are trying to stretch that text over your dogma.

Think about it. You are banking "your righteousness" on this "transfer" which you cannot show a single scripture which plainly states that it is true. Not a single scripture. You have to use "implied conjecture" in order force those verses to be teaching what you want them to be teaching.


If one does not believe in salvation by this imputed righteousness, then one obviously believes in salvation by a righteousness of his own. It has to be one of them two and not both at the same time. They can never mix. I see your error clearly here but you will have to pay attention to what I say. Seriously think about it. I want you to think outside the box so to speak for a bit.

You have alliuded to two paths...

1. The transfer of the righteousness of Jesus to your account.

2. Self Righteousness.

Correct me if I am wrong but I think that in your mind anyone who denies the "imputed righteousness of Christ" is trying to "save themselves by their own righteousness" and you also hold that such a view is the equivalent to "seeking justification via the law."

Here is what I think you are missing. I see THREE aspects and NOT TWO.

1. A believer is made righteous via righteousness of Christ being credited to the believers account.

2. Self righteousness where one seeks to be made righteous by keeping the law.

3. True righteousness where one is actually MADE RIGHTEOUS through abiding in the Spirit of life in Jesus Christ.


Number One is purely JUDICIAL in application. In other words it is the equivalent of a book keeping entry where one is PROVISIONALLY declared righteous while they are PRACTICALLY still wicked.

Number Two is the error of the Pharisees who sought their justification in the keeping of rules and regulations. It is the same as if I gave a piece of paper to someone which had written on it "don't murder and don't steal someone's stuff." The individual with the paper gets angry at someone and wants to take their stuff but they remember the paper and obey it. Then they come back to me and say "look how righteous I am because I did not murder or steal."

Number Three is what the Bible teaches. This is where an individual does not murder someone nor to they steal their stuff because they LOVE them and to do such a thing would be contrary to their character. This love is MANIFESTED by God through an individual who submits to His lead by faith.

Number Three sits in perfect harmony with the rest of Scripture.


Gal 2:20 I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me.
Gal 2:21 I do not frustrate the grace of God: for if righteousness come by the law, then Christ is dead in vain.

In the above passage Paul teaches that Number Two is wrong.

Gal 3:3 Are ye so foolish? having begun in the Spirit, are ye now made perfect by the flesh?

We are made perfect in the Spirit not by the law.

Gal 5:1 Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage.
Gal 5:2 Behold, I Paul say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing.
Gal 5:3 For I testify again to every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law.
Gal 5:4 Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace.
Gal 5:5 For we through the Spirit wait for the hope of righteousness by faith.
Gal 5:6 For in Jesus Christ neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision; but faith which worketh by love.

Does Gal 5:1-6 fit Number 1, 2 or 3? Think about it.

If justification is due to the "judicial imputation of Christ's virtue to the believer" then what has "faith works by love" got to do with it? Nothing!

Do we fulfill the law because "Jesus obeyed as our substitute and God transfers that obedience to our account" or do we fulfill it "through love."

Gal 5:14 For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this; Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.


Hence in Rom.10:3, God states that those who are ignorant of God's righteousness are lost since they are yet going about to establish their own righteousness. What is this righteousness of God that is so crucially important that those who are ignorant about it are said to be lost? Rom. 1:17 says that the gospel reveals God's righteousness.

Here is what Rom 1:17 states...

Rom 1:17 For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, The just shall live by faith.

The just live by faith because they walk in the spirit by love. They do what is right from their heart. They are no longer walking their own way according to the lusts of the flesh but have submitted themselves to the righteousness of God and thus MANIFEST that righteousness in their live.

When this is understood one does not have to "explain away" Bible verses as not meaning what they plainly state.

1Jn 3:7 Little children, let no man deceive you: he that doeth righteousness is righteous, even as he is righteous.
1Jn 3:8 He that committeth sin is of the devil; for the devil sinneth from the beginning. For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that he might destroy the works of the devil.
1Jn 3:9 Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God.
1Jn 3:10 In this the children of God are manifest, and the children of the devil: whosoever doeth not righteousness is not of God, neither he that loveth not his brother.
1Jn 3:11 For this is the message that ye heard from the beginning, that we should love one another.

A child of God is not PRACTICALLY WICKED while they are PROVISIONALLY RIGHTEOUS. That is a MYTH. A fairy tale. God is not going to judge you by whether you have had a "judicial exchange with Jesus," NO! He is going to judge you by what you do, your deeds!

Rom 2:6 Who will render to every man according to his deeds:
Rom 2:7 To them who by patient continuance in well doing seek for glory and honour and immortality, eternal life:
Rom 2:8 But unto them that are contentious, and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, indignation and wrath,
Rom 2:9 Tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that doeth evil, of the Jew first, and also of the Gentile;
Rom 2:10 But glory, honour, and peace, to every man that worketh good, to the Jew first, and also to the Gentile:
Rom 2:11 For there is no respect of persons with God.
Rom 2:12 For as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without law: and as many as have sinned in the law shall be judged by the law;
Rom 2:13 (For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified.

Those DOERS OF THE LAW. Not doing in the sense of being "under the law." No! Doing in the sense of a "faith that works by love" because one is "abiding in the Spirit of Jesus Christ" and thus the MANIFEST RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD is PRACTICALLY EVIDENT.

Jesus REALLY CAME to redeem us from all iniquity and to purify unto Himself a people zealous of good works. Jesus did not come to forensically cloak someone in their wickedness. This forensic cloak IS NOT IN THE BIBLE as I have clearly shown with an abundance of Scripture.

People are welcome to go to the judgement with the assurance of this cloak but they are DECEIVED.

He who DOES WHAT IS RIGHTEOUS IS RIGHTEOUS not HE WHO IS CLOAKED.
continued...
 
Nov 26, 2011
3,818
62
0
One key passage that gives more information about this subject is found in Romans 3:
Quote:
Rom.3

[20] Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin. The law justifies no-one!
[21] But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets; The righteousness of God is WITHOUT THE LAW because LOVE FULFILLS THE LAW. Remember the TWO GREATEST COMMANDMENTS. The law is but a shadow of love, the shadow cannot make anyone righteousness because it only deals with the OUTER MAN. Love deals with the INWARD MAN and God bestows that love on those who TRULY believe in Him (those who trust and yield).
[22] Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference: The faith of Christ was a faith that works by love. We are to have faith in Christ whereby we abide in Him and thus we have the same faith of Christ whereby we love our neighbour as ourselves and thus the ROOT produces TRUE outward fruit or righteous conduct.
[23] For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;
[24] Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus: Redemption is IN Jesus Christ. We have to ABIDE IN HIM just like He taught in Joh 15. Rom 8:2-4 very specifically states that it is the SPIRIT OF LIFE IN JESUS CHRIST WHICH SETS US FREE and that it is through this that WE FULFILL THE RIGHTEOUSNESS OF THE LAW AS WE WALK AFTER THE SPIRIT. It is so clear!
[25] Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God; Indeed Jesus atoned for our past rebellion so that we can be mercifully granted a fresh start where we can grow in the grace and knowledge of Jesus Christ as we obediently yield to His leading by faith.
[26] To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus. Those who truly believe are in a submissive relationship with Jesus Christ.

The gospel reveals how God is just when He justifies the ungodly. It reveals God as a "just God and a Saviour" (Isa.45:21). Any other "gospel" that reveals God to be neither a just God nor a Savior is a false gospel. The true and living God is one who does not show love, mercy, and grace at the expense of His justice. The righteous demands of His Law must be completely satisfied for all those whom He shows love, mercy and grace. And the true Christ established such a righteousness that demands the salvation of all those whom He represented.
Imputation and righteousness are highly essential elements of the gospel. Righteousness is perfect obedience to the law of God. Imputation is to reckon to the account of another. Double imputation is implied in the gospel:

Yet the imputation of the righteousness of Jesus to the believer is NOT IN THE BIBLE. None of the verses you used as proof texts stated anything remotely close.

Jesus NEVER taught it anywhere. If this is such a KEY FUNDAMENTAL of Christianity then why didn't the FOUNDER of Christianity teach it? That is no small bone of contention here.

Not only that it simply does not make sense that virtue and vice are transferable properties. This doctrine paints God as a weak God who can only save people FORENSICALLY but still leaves them in a filthy state.

This doctrine basically teaches that God TRICKS HIMSELF by pretending that you are Jesus and that Jesus was you. How can the rational mind which God gave us seriously swallow such a doctrine ESPECIALLY WHEN IT IS NOT IN THE BIBLE.
Thanks for responding again.
 
Jan 11, 2013
2,256
17
0
Thanks for responding again.

Doctrinally, there is much you have written that I would actually agree with(but certainly not all) .

Where your problem is arising, is that you read literally what is written, and do not allow for the practical working out of Grace in the Christians life. It seems to me that you see it is a rigid formula where the Christuian almost robotically follows and without deviation. It doesn't work like that Skinski.
Now you have stated time and time again, that upon conversion the convert MUST put their flesh to death/die to their flesh and they cannot sin.
There is here the issue of wilful, deliberate sin, and sin that needs to be dealt with that has deeply ingrained itself into a persons life. You don't accept that, but I draw the distinction. But as to the main point, we do of course have biblical references we can turn to as to what happens when real people receive the Gospel and are saved by it(become Christians)
So now we are not expounding scripture and giving our theological interpretations to it, but speaking of real people who Paul accepted as Christians, big difference, for this is the living reality.

Paul in his letters to the Corinthian church states the following:

They have divisions/quarrels, some follow one person and some another(1Cor1:10-12)

They act as worldly/carnal people(1Cor3:3)

They allow someone to be a member of their church who commits sexual immorality the like of which Paul says is not practised among the heathen(1Cor5:1)

People get drunk during the communion service, eat all the food so others must go hungry(1Cor 11:20&21)


According to your so often stated criteria for Christianity, once a person is saved, these people, could not be considered Christians. Yet who does Paul address the letter to?
'To the church of God in Corinth, to those sanctified in Christ Jesus, and called to be Holy'

Now before you accuse me(again) of excusing sin. That is the plain reality
Paul admonishes/rebukes the church for erring/their wrong ways and actions, but does not say they are not Christians

That Skinski is the reality of a church founded by the Apostle Paul. The people HAD NOT put their flesh to death obviously. They had many problems, they erred and they sinned, but Paul did bot say they were not Christians. So there is a difference between your rigid demands according to the literal word, and the practical outworking of Christianity in the Corinthian church.
Please note, I have just given you facts.

Let's go on to the Galatian church:

Well people had led them astray. They had left their pure and simple devotion and life of faith in Christ, and now they relied on self effort(Gal3:3) They thought once they accepted Christ they had to be good enough for God according to law keeping to remain saved. Paul was exasperrated. Did he tell these people who were erring doctrinally the were no longer saved?
No he did not.

Paul's letter to the Thesolonian church:

Finally brothers we instructed you how to live in order to please God, as in fact you are living. Now we ask and urge you to do this more and more
It is God's will that you should be sanctified, 1Thes 4:1-2

So obnviously the thesolonian church had not crucified their flesh fully either, or Paul would not be writing to them and telling them to live more and more a Holy life

You see Skinski, your rigid doctrinal formula based on the literal letter, does not in real life work out as you demand.
The early churches proved that

Again, I have given you fact, if you wish to cast aspersions now on me for doing so, so beit.
 
Last edited:
P

Powemm

Guest
it's that very "fine fine" line Jesus drew in the sand that keeps coming to me.... isnt this where Jesus is? He drew it , right? So I'm lead to wonder and ask myself the question...
What would Jesus do? what did He do?
I work in a hospital ...there is a large window that overlooks a highway.. On it stands multitudes of homeless people holding up signs asking for money.... I have driven by and done as Christ had asked to be done ... sometimes they look at a bottle of water I hand them and shake their head and put it down.... that's okay ... I'm looking at christs heart in me and what he wants me to do, rather than the other persons heart and what they should do.... I can't clean out the inside of their cup... I can only let christ clean out mine ....
 
C

Crossfire

Guest
True grace is not God's willingness to ignore sin but rather divine empowerment from God to overcome sin. A perfect example of such can be found in Matthew 6: 14-15:

For if you forgive men when they sin against you, your heavenly Father will also forgive you. But if you do not forgive men their sins, your Father will not forgive your sins.

If these were not the words of Christ himself, many modern denominations would dismiss such a statement as works and legalism. However, what many do not realize is that Jesus is attempting to reveal to us a greater work of grace that the gentile mind seemingly can not understand.

That greater work is simply this: "He who has been forgiven much, loves much." (Luke 7) One can not encounter the authentic grace of God without that grace transforming that person in some manner. If in one's heart of hearts you are truly humbled and thankful to have been forgiven of much transgression, then how can you deny such forgiveness to someone else? To deny forgiveness to another only reveals what truly resides deep within one's own heart. By refusing to forgive another, it is a sure sign a person is walking in unrepetance and rebellion or may actually have never experienced God's grace at all.

Authentic grace not only involves the forgiveness of sin but also grants us restored fellowship with God through the indwelling Holy Spirit. Scripture states that when one "walks in the Spirit" or surrender to both the will and works of the Holy Spirit, he or she need not fulfill the lusts of the flesh because the characteristics (fruit) of the Holy Spirit (the divine nature) is both manifest in us and through us.

Like it or not, there's not a single thing that man can do in and of himself to save himself but surrender all to the word and will of Christ. Man could not even do that if it were not for the Holy Spirit convicting his heart and drawing him.

So to answer the question: Total Depravity or Free Will, the answer is simple. Without God's divine intervention on multiple levels, none of it is possible.
 
Last edited:
J

Jordache

Guest
Allow me to throw a wrench. I believe in both. I believe the bible supports both and that just because they seem contradictory to our limited human brains doesn't mean it isn't possible with divine logic.
 
F

FORHISGLORY

Guest
Hello ! Brothers and sisters. I'm a refomed Pastor. I became a calvinist while studying theology in seminary. I believe that the doctrines of grace(TULIP) are biblically sound. More importantly, I believe the calvinist is arguing for the glory of God. The scriptures are sufficient to teach us that we don't have free will. We are born into bondage(Ps.51).That "no one seeks God(Romans 3)."That we "were dead in our sin(Eph.2:1)". Spurgeon said that the "doctrine of election is the most humbling doctrine of all." God is the one that makes the choices(John 1:13;Romans 9:16). This blog is encouraging ! I 've found most people on this site to be arminian in their theology. To God be the glory !
 
R

rauleetoe

Guest
Hello ! Brothers and sisters. I'm a refomed Pastor. I became a calvinist while studying theology in seminary. I believe that the doctrines of grace(TULIP) are biblically sound. More importantly, I believe the calvinist is arguing for the glory of God. The scriptures are sufficient to teach us that we don't have free will. We are born into bondage(Ps.51).That "no one seeks God(Romans 3)."That we "were dead in our sin(Eph.2:1)". Spurgeon said that the "doctrine of election is the most humbling doctrine of all." God is the one that makes the choices(John 1:13;Romans 9:16). This blog is encouraging ! I 've found most people on this site to be arminian in their theology. To God be the glory !
What makes you think that most people here are 'arminian'..and if you mean arminian because they do not accept the 'doctrines of grace' then I guess according to this terminology they are arminian..but honestly, I think thats broadening what an arminian truly is..and many here would disagree with being arminian, don't take it from me though..ask them. I do believe that there are believers who are niether..
I for one am a classical Arminian, and I am because I believe and appeal to God's goodness, and perhaps according to spurgeon this doctrine was the most humbling of all doctrines this election doctrine, but you obviously have not met the calvinists i have sir ;).

God does not need to send anyone to hell to get Glory..this is where i will deviate and disagree with you.
 
P

psychomom

Guest
We are not 'wretched' sinners anymore..if you are..or hold onto that identity its because you have chosen to believe a lie and appeal to grace without ever walking away from your sin..maybe its because many here want to still sin, and see how much they are able to get away with and be still considered christian(now i know why 5 point calvinism is so appealing..because its antinomian)
If you trust in the Holiness of God..you would not speak against Holy and right living..therefore you contradict yourself once again.

And as far as belief system..that is the difference. I believe something that says a response is required..five point calvinism hardly even talks about repentance..its all about being 'elect' and pointing to that. Look at the life of any typical calvinist..they smoke..cuss..go to bars..do whatever and still say they are christian..they point to reformed theology and claim this shows they are saved. Wow..what deception.
You say you wish you had been warned, so I take you at your word. :)

The phrase 'accuser of the brethren' comes to mind...

Please, be careful not to throw out the baby with the bathwater.
You do not know every 'typical Calvinist'.
And you most especially have no way to see into the lives of people here who hold to Reformed theology.

You seem to automatically assume that everyone who doesn't agree with you on a theological standpoint is an unregenerate, unrepentant, licentious sinner.

I admit, I am brand new to reformed theology's ideas, having arrived at some of those views merely by reading the Bible, but never having been 'taught' from a pulpit any of it.
Till fairly recently, we went to more of a 'fire and brimstone' preaching independent 'baptist' church. :rolleyes: (so called because they were the only church in the area that practices immersion baptism)
So there's a whole lot of what's called reformed theology that I can't answer questions about, simply because I've never been schooled in it.

But, by your standards, I must be smoking, and cussing, and visiting bars. :)
Which is, frankly, hilarious, to me, at least, and if you knew me, you'd laugh, too.

Because my sins are far more insidious.
They're far more serious (IMO), because they're invisible. :(
I used to have a pretty shallow concept of sin. (not proud of that, btw)
I used to think if I avoided the glaring, obvious sins, I was okay. :(

Please don't take any of the above paragraph as an accusation, Raul.
But since you've repeatedly stated you wish someone had warned you, well, let this stand as such, spoken in real love.
Please, do be careful whom you accuse.

Oh, and by the way....what exactly is God's grace for?

-ellie
 

Bookends

Senior Member
Aug 28, 2012
4,225
99
48
Doctrinally, there is much you have written that I would actually agree with(but certainly not all) .

Where your problem is arising, is that you read literally what is written, and do not allow for the practical working out of Grace in the Christians life. It seems to me that you see it is a rigid formula where the Christuian almost robotically follows and without deviation. It doesn't work like that Skinski.
Now you have stated time and time again, that upon conversion the convert MUST put their flesh to death/die to their flesh and they cannot sin.
There is here the issue of wilful, deliberate sin, and sin that needs to be dealt with that has deeply ingrained itself into a persons life. You don't accept that, but I draw the distinction. But as to the main point, we do of course have biblical references we can turn to as to what happens when real people receive the Gospel and are saved by it(become Christians)
So now we are not expounding scripture and giving our theological interpretations to it, but speaking of real people who Paul accepted as Christians, big difference, for this is the living reality.

Paul in his letters to the Corinthian church states the following:

They have divisions/quarrels, some follow one person and some another(1Cor1:10-12)

They act as worldly/carnal people(1Cor3:3)

They allow someone to be a member of their church who commits sexual immorality the like of which Paul says is not practised among the heathen(1Cor5:1)

People get drunk during the communion service, eat all the food so others must go hungry(1Cor 11:20&21)


According to your so often stated criteria for Christianity, once a person is saved, these people, could not be considered Christians. Yet who does Paul address the letter to?
'To the church of God in Corinth, to those sanctified in Christ Jesus, and called to be Holy'

Now before you accuse me(again) of excusing sin. That is the plain reality
Paul admonishes/rebukes the church for erring/their wrong ways and actions, but does not say they are not Christians

That Skinski is the reality of a church founded by the Apostle Paul. The people HAD NOT put their flesh to death obviously. They had many problems, they erred and they sinned, but Paul did bot say they were not Christians. So there is a difference between your rigid demands according to the literal word, and the practical outworking of Christianity in the Corinthian church.
Please note, I have just given you facts.

Let's go on to the Galatian church:

Well people had led them astray. They had left their pure and simple devotion and life of faith in Christ, and now they relied on self effort(Gal3:3) They thought once they accepted Christ they had to be good enough for God according to law keeping to remain saved. Paul was exasperrated. Did he tell these people who were erring doctrinally the were no longer saved?
No he did not.

Paul's letter to the Thesolonian church:

Finally brothers we instructed you how to live in order to please God, as in fact you are living. Now we ask and urge you to do this more and more
It is God's will that you should be sanctified, 1Thes 4:1-2

So obnviously the thesolonian church had not crucified their flesh fully either, or Paul would not be writing to them and telling them to live more and more a Holy life

You see Skinski, your rigid doctrinal formula based on the literal letter, does not in real life work out as you demand.
The early churches proved that

Again, I have given you fact, if you wish to cast aspersions now on me for doing so, so beit.
Psalms 37:23-24
23 The steps of a good man are ordered by the Lord,
And He delights in his way.
24 Though he fall, he shall not be utterly cast down;
For the Lord upholds him with His hand.
 

zone

Senior Member
Jun 13, 2010
27,214
164
63
But, by your standards, I must be smoking, and cussing, and visiting bars. :)
Which is, frankly, hilarious, to me, at least, and if you knew me, you'd laugh, too.

Because my sins are far more insidious.
They're far more serious (IMO), because they're invisible. :(
I used to have a pretty shallow concept of sin. (not proud of that, btw)
I used to think if I avoided the glaring, obvious sins, I was okay. :(
Psalm 32:5
I acknowledged my sin to you, and I did not cover my iniquity; I said, “I will confess my transgressions to the LORD,” and you forgave the iniquity of my sin.

Selah
 
P

psychomom

Guest
Psalm 32:5
I acknowledged my sin to you, and I did not cover my iniquity; I said, “I will confess my transgressions to the LORD,” and you forgave the iniquity of my sin.

Selah
just weeping for the amazing grace bestowed upon me.

Thank You, Lord God! ♥
I do love You.
I want to love You better.
 
R

rauleetoe

Guest
You say you wish you had been warned, so I take you at your word. :)

The phrase 'accuser of the brethren' comes to mind...

Please, be careful not to throw out the baby with the bathwater.
You do not know every 'typical Calvinist'.
And you most especially have no way to see into the lives of people here who hold to Reformed theology.

You seem to automatically assume that everyone who doesn't agree with you on a theological standpoint is an unregenerate, unrepentant, licentious sinner.

I admit, I am brand new to reformed theology's ideas, having arrived at some of those views merely by reading the Bible, but never having been 'taught' from a pulpit any of it.
Till fairly recently, we went to more of a 'fire and brimstone' preaching independent 'baptist' church. :rolleyes: (so called because they were the only church in the area that practices immersion baptism)
So there's a whole lot of what's called reformed theology that I can't answer questions about, simply because I've never been schooled in it.

But, by your standards, I must be smoking, and cussing, and visiting bars. :)
Which is, frankly, hilarious, to me, at least, and if you knew me, you'd laugh, too.

Because my sins are far more insidious.
They're far more serious (IMO), because they're invisible. :(
I used to have a pretty shallow concept of sin. (not proud of that, btw)
I used to think if I avoided the glaring, obvious sins, I was okay. :(

Please don't take any of the above paragraph as an accusation, Raul.
But since you've repeatedly stated you wish someone had warned you, well, let this stand as such, spoken in real love.
Please, do be careful whom you accuse.

Oh, and by the way....what exactly is God's grace for?

-ellie
And why should you be 'schooled in it'? The typical response from most people if you give them a bible and they read it is this, God is good. You have to be coached and taught this doctrine. Just like you yourself said Ellie..You are new to this..and I guarantee I know far more about Calvinism and Arminianism than you have..and if you heard anything. Most likely its biased. I suggest you study about both theologies and line it up with the word to see the theological implications of holding to five point calvinism, the dangers of it are that God is the author of sin..that he does not love everyone, and that is pleases hiim to condemn some and save others..
that is what reform theology teaches. So, it is not an accusation..rather from my reading about your reformed theology(i do this all day, read about theology)
I found that divine determinism and double predestination are the bedrock foundations of reformed theology.

I have met enough reform folk to know what the mainline mentality is..
Even some here, speak of ignorance about Classical Arminianism..not even having read about their own theology..a famous calvinist here did not even know what double predestination is which is pretty sad seeing as its the foundation and teaching from John Calvin who built upon the concept of Augustine's single predestination.
 
R

rauleetoe

Guest
You say you wish you had been warned, so I take you at your word. :)

The phrase 'accuser of the brethren' comes to mind...

Please, be careful not to throw out the baby with the bathwater.
You do not know every 'typical Calvinist'.
And you most especially have no way to see into the lives of people here who hold to Reformed theology.

You seem to automatically assume that everyone who doesn't agree with you on a theological standpoint is an unregenerate, unrepentant, licentious sinner.

I admit, I am brand new to reformed theology's ideas, having arrived at some of those views merely by reading the Bible, but never having been 'taught' from a pulpit any of it.
Till fairly recently, we went to more of a 'fire and brimstone' preaching independent 'baptist' church. :rolleyes: (so called because they were the only church in the area that practices immersion baptism)
So there's a whole lot of what's called reformed theology that I can't answer questions about, simply because I've never been schooled in it.

But, by your standards, I must be smoking, and cussing, and visiting bars. :)
Which is, frankly, hilarious, to me, at least, and if you knew me, you'd laugh, too.

Because my sins are far more insidious.
They're far more serious (IMO), because they're invisible. :(
I used to have a pretty shallow concept of sin. (not proud of that, btw)
I used to think if I avoided the glaring, obvious sins, I was okay. :(

Please don't take any of the above paragraph as an accusation, Raul.
But since you've repeatedly stated you wish someone had warned you, well, let this stand as such, spoken in real love.
Please, do be careful whom you accuse.

Oh, and by the way....what exactly is God's grace for?

-ellie
The problem with reform theology is one has to be disingenuous when 'marketing' this other gospel message..One cannot be honest and say God is a God of selective grace according to reform theology..how else do you think all these new calvinists aka the young restless reformed bunch are sprouting up out of nowhere these days? If all the cards were put on the table and people saw upfront what reform theology teaches..most would abhor it and head towards a more biblically sound theology that is consistent with the character of a good and loving God that does not send anyone to hell without first giving him or her the necessary ability to resist his Holy spirit and Reject the offer of a free gift of salvation. The matter at hand is..Calvinism is a grossly putrid stench in the nostrils of a Holy God..and anyone who acknowledges that God is a Holy God(i am going to guess that you agree) might want to reconsider following a flawed system by a flawed sinfull murderous man who was anything but Christlike.
 
R

rauleetoe

Guest
This is the issue at hand..
When you say that is what is grace for..and appeal to grace supposedly..you must consider that reform theology teaches a selective grace..and a selective love..and that God picks whom he chooses to bestow grace and love to. And that Ellie, I am sorry to be the bringer of bad news..it not true grace. It's calvinism's marring and malignancy of true grace. Do not take my word for it..Look into what Calvinism teaches..
That God in his good pleasure chooses to withhold grace upon some and for no apparent reason, and they live a life contrary to what God would want for anyone, and he uses these whom he has predestined to be sent to the pit of hell for nothing they really did..he ordained them and made them sin. He made them rebel, what kind of a God is this? Why would you want to believe God is like this? Because its trendy? Yes, Calvinism is very trendy..and 'hip' and amongst the youth they take this message hook,line and sinker. They do not question what it teaches in the light of what the Bible says in 1 john 2:2, John 3:16-17,1 timothy4:10,1 timothy 2:4,2 peter 3:9, deuteronomy 30:19..and other scriptures as well that prove that God is good and wants all men to be saved, and he does not delight in the death of any wicked, Ezekiel 18:23.

Read your bible..in its entirety..not just John 6 and Romans 9..
 

zone

Senior Member
Jun 13, 2010
27,214
164
63
The typical response from most people if you give them a bible and they read it is this, God is good.
hi rauleetoe.
the typical response from most people given a Bible to read should be i am in deep trouble.

Romans 3:9
What shall we conclude then? Are we any better? Not at all! We have already made the charge that Jews and Gentiles alike are all under sin.

Romans 3:23
for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God


and THEN i see God is Good because i see:


John 3:16
"For God loved the world in this way: He gave His One and Only Son, so that everyone who believes in Him will not perish but have eternal life.

Romans 6:23
For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.
 

Bookends

Senior Member
Aug 28, 2012
4,225
99
48
Hello ! Brothers and sisters. I'm a refomed Pastor. I became a calvinist while studying theology in seminary. I believe that the doctrines of grace(TULIP) are biblically sound. More importantly, I believe the calvinist is arguing for the glory of God. The scriptures are sufficient to teach us that we don't have free will. We are born into bondage(Ps.51).That "no one seeks God(Romans 3)."That we "were dead in our sin(Eph.2:1)". Spurgeon said that the "doctrine of election is the most humbling doctrine of all." God is the one that makes the choices(John 1:13;Romans 9:16). This blog is encouraging ! I 've found most people on this site to be arminian in their theology. To God be the glory !

Ok, so we are all robots...nice...

With all due respect to your position in the church, and you as an individual and a Christian brother, I don't consider my self neither a calvinist nor an arminian. Both offer some light and error in my opinion, just like the rest of us (even those who think they have a monopoly on the whole truth and knowledge of God and His Word). I

Can you please explain to me how Calvin is arguing for the glory of God, and where Wesley is not? Could not God still be sovereign and still give us the ability to Choose God by in which measure the Lord gives to each of us for the revealing of God's plan of salvation through His son the Christ?

Also can you please explain to me how on one hand God wishes that all men be saved (1 Timother 2:4) and then other hand predestines others to hell?


I'm sure you are well aware of John Calvin burning others with opposing doctrines to the stake? This alone I think lowers his creditability as a staunch commentator, however, I believe in the doctrine of security of salvation for the believer (for those of authentic repentance and belief)!

I'm looking forward to your response. Peace in Christ.