Faith is a fruit of the Spirit, heresy is a work of the flesh (Gal.5)

[tribesman]

Tribesman yes i believe scriptures show God draws men and empowers them to believe, all man. Not in their first born nature do they have even the inclination to do it on their own. Plenty of verses stating all men are given this drawing. All.

And yet all men are not coming to Him nor do they all believe, nor are they all saved. God would then empower all to do something, yet they would fail to do it? God's work is frustrated? The final word on it is not with God but with the will of man?

I rekon your saying He doesnt draw all men. If thats what your saying, then your forgetting part of word of God. You can say what i think your saying because you think that empowering a man to make a choice can only mean he has been regenerated, at least thats what i think your saying (by fruit). But that is not what the word teaches.

The word does teach that the characteristics of the regenerate are a fruit of the Spirit. This must assume and imply a new, regenerated and spiritual man. So, you are right in assuming that I do not think that "all" here literally means all persons and people that have ever lived. And where is your scriptures that supports the position that all men are empowered "to make a choice"? Earlier you have been quite clear that it is not possible to make such a choice without God's intervention. Shall I understand such notions as you believe in there being a co-operation between God and the sinner in regeneration/justification (synergism)? Or prevenient grace?

I think youve went to far with this if your saying that a mans choice to submit to God with the grace given him to enable him to choose is meritorious and adds to Christ alone. Hmm I sure dont agree. Nor do i agree this grace enablement is regeneration. According to that logic then the very fact that the Holy Spirit convicts the man and causes him to repent and regenerates him is adding to Christs sacrifice...therefore something was lacking in Christs sacrifice.

As far as I can recall I haven't used the word "add". What I am saying is that old, unregenerate and natural man lacks the ability to positively respond to God's calling. And you are wrong in your assumption that this "logic", as you call it, could be thought to mean that something lacked in Christ sacrifice, just because one says that it is a regenerate man who receives and believes the gospel. Because here it is not implied that faith is conditional for the issue at hand, it is instrumental in receiving what Christ has done. On the other hand, this very notion of Christ's sacrifice lacking anything at all, will fall back to those who make faith conditional on the decision on the sinner. THAT would be to move the met conditions from Christ to the sinner.

 

[Abiding]

And yet all men are not coming to Him nor do they all believe, nor are they all saved. God would then empower all to do something, yet they would fail to do it? God's work is frustrated? The final word on it is not with God but with the will of man?No! certainly the final word on it will be Gods. Gods work would only be frustrated if He wanted to regenerate the unwilling and those whose eyes that were open, and choose to reject Him. To say that since God wills all men to be saved and yet they wont all be saved is plainly taught that "they" would not receive the love of the truth, correct?



The word does teach that the characteristics of the regenerate are a fruit of the Spirit. This must assume and imply a new, regenerated and spiritual man. So, you are right in assuming that I do not think that "all" here literally means all persons and people that have ever lived. And where is your scriptures that supports the position that all men are empowered "to make a choice"? Earlier you have been quite clear that it is not possible to make such a choice without God's intervention. Shall I understand such notions as you believe in there being a co-operation between God and the sinner in regeneration/justification (synergism)? Or prevenient grace?No! I dont think that is completely correct. Drawing all men as Jesus said will be done if He is lifted up is from the power of Gods Spirit surely, yet not at all the same as the term fruit of the Spirit that is manifest in the regenerated saint. Any more than me giving you a swimsuit implies your gona swim and get wet. If you continue to not recognise that drawing men and equipting them with the grace to choose is not the same event that regenerates them when "they" "receive" the truth, well i spose we dont see the same in the economy of redemption. And the parable of the sower and the seed amongst many other scriptures would seem to be difficult to comprehend.



As far as I can recall I haven't used the word "add". What I am saying is that old, unregenerate and natural man lacks the ability to positively respond to God's calling. And you are wrong in your assumption that this "logic", as you call it, could be thought to mean that something lacked in Christ sacrifice, just because one says that it is a regenerate man who receives and believes the gospel. Because here it is not implied that faith is conditional for the issue at hand, it is instrumental in receiving what Christ has done. On the other hand, this very notion of Christ's sacrifice lacking anything at all, will fall back to those who make faith conditional on the decision on the sinner. THAT would be to move the met conditions from Christ to the sinner.

This is the first time i have actually conversed on this topic, i have heard it discussed, but never understood it. So being the first time i actually looked strait at it ill admit that its a very unusual understanding to me. I do think i understand Paul in Romans explaining its not man that willeth but God who shows mercy. So yes no doubt the bible teaches its God who chooses and not man....but it doesnt end there. If God reveals who He chooses and why, then we have more of an understanding revealed.Id have to say that faith is conditional, yup for sure. And enlightenment instrumental. Both supplied by the Spirit. And not a fruit of the Spirit.

I cant say i really understand your position Tribesman, nor can i say that my position is correct. But i can say from what i think i see. And thats that your world view would be obsurd to me. And the entire history of redemption would seem like nonsense. But ill admit i havnt read many of your posts, just some and a few here.

 

[shroom2]

And yet all men are not coming to Him nor do they all believe, nor are they all saved. God would then empower all to do something, yet they would fail to do it? God's work is frustrated? The final word on it is not with God but with the will of man?

Yes. God wants all men to be saved, and He provided the way. But all men have free will, and not all will choose to follow. It's every man's choice.

 

[Laodicea]

Yes. God wants all men to be saved, and He provided the way. But all men have free will, and not all will choose to follow. It's every man's choice.

Joshua 24:15
(15) And if it seem evil unto you to serve the LORD, choose you this day whom ye will serve; whether the gods which your fathers served that were on the other side of the flood, or the gods of the Amorites, in whose land ye dwell: but as for me and my house, we will serve the LORD.

 

[tribesman]

This is the first time i have actually conversed on this topic, i have heard it discussed, but never understood it. So being the first time i actually looked strait at it ill admit that its a very unusual understanding to me.

Are you sure you can begin to approach it now?

I do think i understand Paul in Romans explaining its not man that willeth but God who shows mercy. So yes no doubt the bible teaches its God who chooses and not man....but it doesnt end there.

It continues with that man is the one who does the choosing after all?

If God reveals who He chooses and why, then we have more of an understanding revealed.Id have to say that faith is conditional, yup for sure. And enlightenment instrumental. Both supplied by the Spirit. And not a fruit of the Spirit.

Would you say that God has chosen all, meaning every person that has ever lived? And what is the fruit of the Spirit, in regards to faith, that Paul is mentioning in Galatians? What I get from the scriptures is that the gospel is the good news of salvation conditioned on the atoning blood and imputed righteousness of Christ alone. If one says that the gospel is conditioned on something in the sinner, then what does one get?

I cant say i really understand your position Tribesman, nor can i say that my position is correct. But i can say from what i think i see. And thats that your world view would be obsurd to me. And the entire history of redemption would seem like nonsense. But ill admit i havnt read many of your posts, just some and a few here.

Tell me why and how it is absurd to you and why the history of redemption would seem like nonsense. Is it not clear, throughout the whole of the Bible, that the gospel is always what God does and not what we do? And, where are your scriptures that says that God "empowers all" to make a "choice" to believe or not believe?

 

[tribesman]

Abiding, Btw, look at my post#34 and you will se an input where R C Sproul is quoted. You will see there that what I have presented here is nothing "new" or some exclusive theory. By any stretch.

 

[tribesman]

Joshua 24:15
(15) And if it seem evil unto you to serve the LORD, choose you this day whom ye will serve; whether the gods which your fathers served that were on the other side of the flood, or the gods of the Amorites, in whose land ye dwell: but as for me and my house, we will serve the LORD.

This is not a general call to all and any people everywhere, it is a call to God's covenant people. They alone are addressed here. Not the heathen world.

 

[tribesman]

Yes. God wants all men to be saved, and He provided the way. But all men have free will, and not all will choose to follow. It's every man's choice.

Does not this scripture ring a bell?

John.15

[16] Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you, and ordained you, that ye should go and bring forth fruit, and that your fruit should remain: that whatsoever ye shall ask of the Father in my name, he may give it you.

Indeed, the fruit of the Spirit at work.

 

[2knowhim]

I have to answer this with a question, to get "where you are coming from" and your mind on this. You said that (because of scriptures like 2Cor.5:18-21 and 1Tim.2:6) God does not hold anyone accountable for their sin anymore. Then all ought to be saved. Will all be saved? Is that what scripture says? If it does not say that (which is doesn't) then how would you explain that some did not get saved? Was there something lacking in Christ's sacrifice or was there something lacking in them?

Niether, many are called few are chosen.

There is scripture to support a blanket Salvation for all because of Christ Sacrifice.
But to be chosen I believe is completly God, so ..........with that being said:

It's called "common Salvation" I don't have a great bible study program to check
this out like most, all I have is E-sword, and Heb. Greek Lexicon, but maybe all of us
is missing something. I'm kinda like Abiding I don't know all the details of how God
works, and I'm not a scholar but I can understand scripture.


Yes, I do believe Christ sacrifice is enough to save all, even if I don't see it now.
I think all that we have dicussed here is a part of it. And I must say, it is really nice
to be able to come together and discuss a subject without all the backbiting.

Now with all that being said, these are the scriptures I found concerning this word
"Common".

Jud 1:3 Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common salvation, it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort you that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints.
We normally don't think of Salvation as Common, right? and yet here it is.

Act 10:28 And he said unto them, Ye know how that it is an unlawful thing for a man that is a Jew to keep company, or come unto one of another nation; but God hath shewed me that I should not call any man common or unclean.
Tit 1:4 To Titus, mine own son after the common faith: Grace, mercy, and peace, from God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ our Saviour.

Like I said maybe there is more here than meets the eye.
After all, if the first Adam's disobedience cause sin to pass upon all
men, and death reigned upon all, for all has sinned,
Then can't we see that, the Last Adam, "Christ" has to have more
ability to save all, eventually?

If He doesn't then doesn't that make the first Adam more powerful?
I can't see that, can you?

You may be asking what does this have to do with what were talking
about, I think much. With the way God is working in all men, to call
all, and then give the ability to follow on as much or as little as they can.

Remember in the wilderness with the manna, they were to gather only
what they could eat, some gathered little, some gathered much "according
to their eating"?

Exo 16:18 And when they did mete it with an omer, he that gathered much had nothing over, and he that gathered little had no lack; they gathered every man according to his eating.

We are labourers with God are we not?

1Co 3:9 For we are labourers together with God: ye are God's husbandry, ye are God's building.

 

[Abiding]

Not really worth my time. Simply reading the threads and interacting now and then seem to be
enough for me. Thankyou for the response tribesman.

Maybe im wrong in my presumption, but i think i can usually see whether a dialogue is
going to resolve something or just expose a distinction. I see the distinction now, but feel
taking it further would only improve the distinction.

Although i have no problem in anyway with your position. It doesnt seem to be a right understanding
to me. And no all are not chosen, you know thats clear in scripture.

Although i do not believe that man has a free will. I do believe by the power of God he will have
a choice. He will choose. And that said the work of the cross is in no way made incomplete.

 

[Abiding]

Originally Posted by Laodicea
Joshua 24:15
(15) And if it seem evil unto you to serve the LORD, choose you this day whom ye will serve; whether the gods which your fathers served that were on the other side of the flood, or the gods of the Amorites, in whose land ye dwell: but as for me and my house, we will serve the LORD.

Tribesman:
This is not a general call to all and any people everywhere, it is a call to God's covenant people. They alone are addressed here. Not the heathen world.

Abiding:

If this can be said.....only to the covenant people then................below..was only to the disciples/apostles...acts 1:20-22


Originally Posted by shroom2
Yes. God wants all men to be saved, and He provided the way. But all men have free will, and not all will choose to follow. It's every man's choice.

Tribesman:
Does not this scripture ring a bell?
Quote:
John.15

[16] Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you, and ordained you, that ye should go and bring forth fruit, and that your fruit should remain: that whatsoever ye shall ask of the Father in my name, he may give it you.
Indeed, the fruit of the Spirit at work.

 

[tribesman]

Niether, many are called few are chosen. There is scripture to support a blanket Salvation for all because of Christ Sacrifice. But to be chosen I believe is completly God, so ..........with that being said:

It's called "common Salvation" I don't have a great bible study program to check this out like most, all I have is E-sword, and Heb. Greek Lexicon, but maybe all of us is missing something. I'm kinda like Abiding I don't know all the details of how God works, and I'm not a scholar but I can understand scripture.

It is common for God's covenant people, yes. It is not common in the sense meaning every man that ever lived. You believe in universalism? That literally all people eventually will be saved, it is just a matter of time?

Yes, I do believe Christ sacrifice is enough to save all, even if I don't see it now. I think all that we have dicussed here is a part of it. And I must say, it is really nice to be able to come together and discuss a subject without all the backbiting.

Yes, it is nice that we can discuss this without going to negatives. However, I cannot agree with you if you say that "all" will be saved through Christ's sacrifice, or that it was even intended for that.

Now with all that being said, these are the scriptures I found concerning this word "Common".

Jud 1:3 Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common salvation, it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort you that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints.

We normally don't think of Salvation as Common, right? and yet here it is.

This is a proof text for you of universalism? What is meant by common here is again common in the sense common for God's covenant people, not meaning common for all people or persons that are outside of this covenant.

Tit 1:4 To Titus, mine own son after the common faith: Grace, mercy, and peace, from God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ our Saviour.

Act 10:28 And he said unto them, Ye know how that it is an unlawful thing for a man that is a Jew to keep company, or come unto one of another nation; but God hath shewed me that I should not call any man common or unclean.

Yes, every one that fear God and works righteousness, keep His commandments, regardless of nationality and race, is received by God. What God taught Peter here was that the message of salvation now will go out to the gentiles.

Like I said maybe there is more here than meets the eye.

After all, if the first Adam's disobedience cause sin to pass upon all men, and death reigned upon all, for all has sinned, Then can't we see that, the Last Adam, "Christ" has to have more ability to save all, eventually? If He doesn't then doesn't that make the first Adam more powerful? I can't see that, can you?

Scripture says IN Adam and it also says IN Christ. So it means that Adam and Christ both are federal heads representing their each respective people. Adam represents literally all men, since all die in him, while Christ represents all men that are IN Him. Can't you see that?

1Cor.15

[21] For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead.
[22] For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.
[23] But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming.

You may be asking what does this have to do with what were talking about, I think much. With the way God is working i

n all men, to call all, and then give the ability to follow on as much or as little as they can.

He gives this ability in regenerating them, they do not have any such ability prior to that.

Remember in the wilderness with the manna, they were to gather only what they could eat, some gathered little, some gathered much "according to their eating"?

Exo 16:18 And when they did mete it with an omer, he that gathered much had nothing over, and he that gathered little had no lack; they gathered every man according to his eating.

We are labourers with God are we not?

1Co 3:9 For we are labourers together with God: ye are God's husbandry, ye are God's building.

The context here is that this is talking about God's people.

 

[2knowhim]

Dear Tribesman,

I do believe in all being redeemed yes, but I do not expect you would nor
would I try to convince you of such, that is not for me to do, I was just stating
my beliefs, please don't hold that against me to the point that we stop conversation.

I am not Universalists if they have the same belief then so be it, but I am not of such.

Now, back to the point, this I can not agree on:
"Scripture says IN Adam and it also says IN Christ. So it means that Adam and Christ both are federal heads representing their each respective people. Adam represents literally all men, since all die in him, while Christ represents all men that are IN Him. Can't you see that?"


No I can't, you are twisting( sorry for the wording) but what it says is

In Adam all, so also In Christ All
The same All.

The way you rephrased it was thus:

As in Adam all die, so also all In Christ,

And that is not what it says.

You switch it why did you do that?

1Co 15:22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.

When you switch it, it's not the same meaning, is it?
In Christ all, not All in Christ. Big difference.

I see it as it is, the same all in Adam is the same All in Christ
All die, All shall be made Alive.

Blessings

 

[2knowhim]

See I believe All are in Christ, that is what He did on the Cross
When He drew all men unto Himself, and nailed us to it and our sin.

But that does not mean that Christ is in All men, not as of Yet, but in due time.

 

[tribesman]

Dear Tribesman,

I do believe in all being redeemed yes, but I do not expect you would nor
would I try to convince you of such, that is not for me to do, I was just stating
my beliefs, please don't hold that against me to the point that we stop conversation.

I am not Universalists if they have the same belief then so be it, but I am not of such.

Now, back to the point, this I can not agree on:
"Scripture says IN Adam and it also says IN Christ. So it means that Adam and Christ both are federal heads representing their each respective people. Adam represents literally all men, since all die in him, while Christ represents all men that are IN Him. Can't you see that?"


No I can't, you are twisting( sorry for the wording) but what it says is

In Adam all, so also In Christ All
The same All.

The way you rephrased it was thus:

As in Adam all die, so also all In Christ,

And that is not what it says.

You switch it why did you do that?

1Co 15:22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.

When you switch it, it's not the same meaning, is it?
In Christ all, not All in Christ. Big difference.

I see it as it is, the same all in Adam is the same All in Christ
All die, All shall be made Alive.

Blessings

I am not switching anything at all. To switch things here would be to say that all people/persons are in Christ. That would be to go against the Scriptures. Those that are in Christ will be made alive in Him. Those who are not in Him will not be made alive in Him. It is that simple.

 

[tribesman]

See I believe All are in Christ, that is what He did on the Cross When He drew all men unto Himself, and nailed us to it and our sin. But that does not mean that Christ is in All men, not as of Yet, but in due time.

Yes, I see that you believe this. It is unscriptural though, as I showed in post #51.

 

[Abiding]

It's interesting to see that the scriptures that shroom gave in most cases are addressed to the covenant people of God or to people who already are regenerate. If we are to give the unregenerate the same qualities and characteristics as the regenerate we are mistaken, for God is not asking anything from the heathen in regards to "choose ye this day whom you will serve" or "this do and thou shalt live". We can not read the Bible with the idea that it in every case is addressing every people and person on earth without making gross errors.

How can you say the covenant people were regenerate? The text doesnt say that.
What does remnant mean? Im not saying this context should make doctrine as if it
was an explaination of the qualifications of salvation. But it is a example of a pattern.
And its doubtful to me that you can say baal worshipers were all part of the remnant.

 

[tribesman]

How can you say the covenant people were regenerate? The text doesnt say that.

Where did I say that? I didn't. Read it again. Not all that are in the covenant community are by necessity regenerate, but all who are regenerate are in the covenant community. What I am saying is that very much of the addresses in the Bible is addressed to this entity.

 

[2knowhim]

I am not switching anything at all. To switch things here would be to say that all people/persons are in Christ. That would be to go against the Scriptures. Those that are in Christ will be made alive in Him. Those who are not in Him will not be made alive in Him. It is that simple.

Ok, I'll let the post stand I think anyone can see that you did but
we'll let them be the judges of that.

If you don't believe that All are in Christ I can't see the point of continuing on really,
If he didn't drag all into Himself at Crucifixtion, then how did He Take away The sin
of The World? Because the Nature is what is in question here. The old unregenerate
and The new Regenerate.

Christ and His work should always be Central focus on any discussion.

I just want to say that, Christ in the person is what causes fruit, faith, and renewel.
until then I believe their sin is not being imputed unto them because of Christ, but
without Him living in them and quiding them into All Truth, they will remain in an unregenerate
state. And that is their state NO LIFE in this world, and then they await The Lake of fire,
Which will no doubt be their AWAKENING.

Blessings

 

[2knowhim]

Where did I say that? I didn't. Read it again. Not all that are in the covenant community are by necessity regenerate, but all who are regenerate are in the covenant community. What I am saying is that very much of the addresses in the Bible is addressed to this entity.

That's exactly what I'm saying too.
Not all IN Christ is Regenerate,
But those that Christ is IN, is.