Donations for the month of December


We have received a total of "0" in donations towards our goal of $175.


Don't want to use PayPal? Go HERE


Forum Search
Member Spotlight
Rick Bates
Rick Bates
Charlestown, R.I. US
Posts: 187
Joined: January 2020
Forum Statistics
Forums30
Topics7,320
Posts53,341
Members964
Most Online523
Jan 14th, 2020
Top Posters
Pilgrim 14,070
Tom 4,076
chestnutmare 3,087
J_Edwards 2,615
Wes 1,856
John_C 1,820
RJ_ 1,583
MarieP 1,579
gotribe 1,060
Top Posters(30 Days)
Tom 24
Pilgrim 19
Meta4 4
John_C 2
Robin 2
Recent Posts
Nero
by Meta4 - Fri Dec 03, 2021 5:56 PM
Spurgeon
by Pilgrim - Thu Dec 02, 2021 7:06 PM
Gracious High Priest
by NetChaplain - Wed Dec 01, 2021 2:05 PM
A Discourse on the Cleansing Virtue of Christ's Blood
by Pilgrim - Wed Dec 01, 2021 6:44 AM
Renewed Strength
by chestnutmare - Tue Nov 30, 2021 5:56 PM
Faith-Trials (Jas 1:3)
by NetChaplain - Mon Nov 29, 2021 3:20 PM
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate Thread
Hop To
Page 8 of 17 1 2 6 7 8 9 10 16 17
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
Well Jesus did teach that we are to become like little children.

The gospel was for the lowly and humble common folk, not the educate philospher. It is not hard to understand. But hat puts philosophers out of work and without a pride pedastel so they need to complicate matters.

Paul warned about this kind of thing often. And today there are those who actually believe their theology is "spiritual truth" when theology is simply philosphy about God, a quite fleshly thing. The spiritual man understands this.

PP

Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
Hi Zionseeker:

You said:

Quote
The passage never actually says that a dead man cannot believe,

Right, the passage never actually says that, but your response illustrates it beautifully <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />.

Quote
I wonder if you are Strict Baptist, since most Calvinists do not speek on these things as you do?

No, I am not Strict Baptist, and neither was Bunyan, or Owen his good friend who encouraged him to publish the "Pilgrims Progress" when he didn't know if he should. Owen, Calvin, Edwards, T. Goodwin, M'Cheyne, Whitefield, etc. all emphasized the witness of the Spirit and a spiritual knowledge of the things of God, in conjunction with correct doctrine, the Word always being the guide and structure for that experience. Spiritual knowledge never contradicts but rather enhances the understanding and is in full accord and harmony with the Word and correct doctrine. It imparts a relish for it and an insight into it that is not conveyed by the natural understanding.

But I agree these things are not emphasized to the extent they were at one time. That is why I was suggesting that you look at Nichols book on Edwards theology of the Holy Spirit. Joel Beeke delves into these issues also in his work "The Quest for Full Assurance".

Since you express an experiential knowledge of these things and yet see the scriptures entirely different on these matters than I, other than to pray for you and to wish you my kindest regards and extend my love and best wishes to you, I can offer you nothing more.

May the Lord Bless you richly and draw you to Him is my prayer.

In Him,

Gerry

Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
Quote
Where you are going wrong is that you are seeing regeneration as identical to justification.

Hi again. I haven't made an issue of that. Justification is a part of regeneration. What I am making an issue of is that the Bible says that in believing we have life:

Quote
"But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name." John 20:31

It is just that simple! According to the Bible, we believe, we have life. Those that are dead hear the voice of the Son of God, and those who hear live.

Quote
The Lord opens our heart,
We repent and trust in Christ,
We are justified by God.

I agree. But when do we receive the life? What does it mean to die with Christ, be baptised into his death, and to be raised up with him into newness of life? What is the quickening which makes us alive from being dead in trespasses and sins if not the being raised with Christ through faith in the operation of God?

Being dead means not having life in your spirit. it means not knowing or being able to know God and his Son Jesus Christ.

Quote
But no one believes for salvation until the Lord gives him life (John 6:44).

The verse does not say that. No verse says that. It says that all that the Father gives to Christ will be drawn to Christ. And then they will come to Him. And what happens to somebody when the COME to Christ the Lord???? What happens if they don't come to Him?

Quote
"And ye will not come to me, that YE MAY HAVE LIFE." John 5:40

So the drawing cannot be life-giving regeneration, because the life is given when a person has come. Remember, we must look at all the scriptures!


You are equating the Lord opening someone's heart to hear the gospel, with regeneration. That cannot be, since the scripture, as well as saying that life comes with believing, also says that regeneration comes by the gospel, the word of God. Regeneration is not given to open somebody's heart to the gospel, but comes as a result of the gospel itself. We "purify our souls in obeying the truth, being born again by the Word of God." The heart is not purified until we believe, as the apostle Peter, who knew Jesus and was called of him to be an apostle, testifies in the Book of Acts.

You are reading into the words "whose heart the Lord openened," a word that is not there - namely regeneration. Cornelius was a man who was devout, and feared God, but he did not receive the Holy Spirit until the Word was preached. His good deeds came up before God as a memorial, and God sent him an angel to tell him to go to somebody who could tell him the words whereby he could be saved. What does it mean to be saved? Ephesians 2:5 - to be made alive!
Hope this helps
Regards
ZionSeeker

Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
I am not really an avid reader of reformed literature anymore (I read the occasional John Metcalfe book if that counts). I remember though, when I did hold to the five points, reading a book called “Baptism With the Spirit: The Teaching of Dr Martyn Lloyd-Jones, I remember a chapter or two in that book talked about the Puritan and later Calvinist view of the Witness of the Spirit, and I found it very interesting. I didn’t realise that there were still Calvinists out there who held to that view.

Regards
ZionSeeker

Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
Quote
I remember though, when I did hold to the five points, reading a book called “Baptism With the Spirit: The Teaching of Dr Martyn Lloyd-Jones,

Martyn Lloyd-Jones was saddened by the drift of Calvinist thinking and teaching away from a balance of emphasis on both the objective and subjective aspects of true faith to a dry a Calvinism. Unfortunately, in his zeal to revive Calvinistic thinking, he embraced the concept of a non cessationist church, at least to some degree as far as I can tell, and thus put a damper on the true revival that he so longed for.

I see no non cessationist teaching in the works of the men I have mentioned, like Owen, Calvin and Edwards, however. In fact, they stressed that the miracle of God's love shed abroad in the heart of a true believer, a spiritual phenomena, was far more weighty and valuable, eternally so, than the mere miraculous manipulation of physical things, which was always and only, even when miraculous gifts did exist, designed to direct the heart and mind to the spiritual beauty of Christs Holiness.

I do not read reformed literature because it is Reformed, in fact I avoid much of it that claims to be, because it is dry and dead. Worship of the intellect is simply another form of worship of the creature, IMO. That is why I enjoy men such as Edwards and Owen and those that understand them, because though they had great intellects they clearly saw through the dangers of both intellectual idolatry, and emotional idolatry.

In Him,

Gerry

Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
Quote
Martyn Lloyd-Jones was saddened by the drift of Calvinist thinking and teaching away from a balance of emphasis on both the objective and subjective aspects of true faith to a dry a Calvinism. Unfortunately, in his zeal to revive Calvinistic thinking, he embraced the concept of a non cessationist church, at least to some degree as far as I can tell, and thus put a damper on the true revival that he so longed for.

I don't understand the cessationism. The bible says, "these signs shall follow them that believe." I believe it. I put it down to unbelief. People just don't have a big enough view of God. I don't see any scriptural reasons. But by and large calvinism is cessationist, except for some of the early scots presbyterians and some of the early particular baptists.

ZS

Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
Dear zs:

You said:
Quote
I don't understand the cessationism.

There is more truth in that statement I am afraid than you realize.

I too had to come to a point where I understood that the Bible does not teach the continuance of the miraculous gifts, as gifts given to men, to be signs of God given authority to speak and act for God with the same authority that the Apostles and prophets had. So I appreciate your position. But you have not yet thought it through, nor seen the unfortunate, indeed tragic and dangerous implicatiions of your beliefs.

I believe in the miraculous. I have seen it with my own eyes. I am a scientist and I know how to evaluate objectively physical phenomena in the sense of distinguishing between "what appears to be" and "what is".

I believe that God still does miraculous things, and more often than many suspect, but He gives NO MAN any longer, in my opinion, the ability to do so, and for very good and infinately wise reasons.

Quote
The bible says, "these signs shall follow them that believe." I believe it. I put it down to unbelief.

The Bible says a lot of things that may be, and are, misinterpreted to the great grief and shame and distruction of many. You have already demonstrated to my satisfaction your inability to properly interpret scripture according to sound hermeneutics, good logic, and simple wisdom, so your statement does not surprise me.

You will no where find the word Trinity in the pages of Holy writ, but it is every where taught there, as are many other things of which I fear you have, in your simplicity, little knowledge or understanding.

I suggest you go and learn what this means:

"To give subtilty to the simple, to the young man knowledge and discretion." Proverbs 1:4

before you do yourself and others a great deal of harm.

Respectfully,

In Him,

Gerry

Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 175
Addict
Offline
Addict
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 175
Dear Gerry,

I just wanted to thank you for your wonderful responses to ZS and Passionplayer! What a nice way you have dealt with them, understanding in the face of misunderstanding, reasonable in the face of unreasonableness,
and kindness in the face of insult. I fear that you are wasting your time in this conversation, but that your answers and prayers are of use to many others reading this thread! applause

In His Hands,

Ruth

Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
Zion Seeker,
Quote
I am not really an avid reader of reformed literature anymore (I read the occasional John Metcalfe book if that counts).
It is a shame that you have left the "Old Paths" and those men who have faithfully handled the Word of truth and that you are now following man-centered teachings instead.
You might be interested in reading this about John Metcalfe.
He is a false teacher BTW.
Thread here

Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
Quote
I too had to come to a point where I understood that the Bible does not teach the continuance of the miraculous gifts, as gifts given to men, to be signs of God given authority to speak and act for God with the same authority that the Apostles and prophets had. So I appreciate your position. But you have not yet thought it through, nor seen the unfortunate, indeed tragic and dangerous implicatiions of your beliefs.

I am all too familiar with your view. This is certainly the BEST cessationist argument. But it is just that - an argument. Paul implies at least twice that the gifts will be here until the second coming...and i must go with that. you seem to expect me to just accept things on the basis of your opinion.

Quote
You have already demonstrated to my satisfaction your inability to properly interpret scripture according to sound hermeneutics, good logic, and simple wisdom, so your statement does not surprise me.


What you mean is, I won't accept what you read into Ephesians, and I believe that life comes from believing just as the gospel of John says. I fear that you are really convinced of what you say. I marvel, and am sad at your hardness of heart at the same time, that you can dismiss whole scriptures because they don't fit your system. Am I wrong to believe that life comes from believing as John actually said? Or that the quickening is through faith as Paul said? No, it is you who cannot handle good logic. I note that you are not able to give an example. Sound logic means that you believe that life comes from believing, not deny it on the basis of something you have read into another verse!

The rest of your post, like the ones before, was full of subjective superior sounding claims. I suppose the early Scots Presbyterians were into dangerous and tragic beliefs too? But if the bible isn't good enough for you, appealing to the covenanters is pointless too.
ZS

Last edited by ZionSeeker; Sat Mar 27, 2004 3:22 PM.
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
Quote
It is a shame that you have left the "Old Paths" and those men who have faithfully handled the Word of truth and that you are now following man-centered teachings instead.

And what man centered teaching is that? That life comes from believing as the bible says?

Quote
You might be interested in reading this about John Metcalfe.

I am sorry you are able to call people false teachers when you have never read their books and only go by what one person said. I read him occasionally - mainly because there are problems with his teaching (he's a calvinist for example). Steve, in his criticism, got one or two points wrong, but you wouldn't be aware of that.

ZS

Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 14,070
Likes: 20
Head Honcho
Online Content
Head Honcho
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 14,070
Likes: 20
Quote
ZionSeeker proudly retorts:
I am all too familiar with your view. This is certainly the BEST cessationist argument. But it is just that - an argument.
And what is it that YOU are offering if not just "an argument"? The "light cessationist" arguments are based upon the biblical record using the Grammatico-Historico hermeneutic; i.e., it takes seriously the language and historical context of the passages which speak of the ecstatic gifts given to the Apostles during their earthly life. It also takes into account Biblical Theology, i.e., the progression of revelation that has been revealed in ALL of the Scriptures.

Quote
ZionSeeker further states:
Am I wrong to believe that life comes from believing as John actually said? Or that the quickening is through faith as Paul said? No, it is you who cannot handle good logic.
The answer to your first two rhetorical questions is, "Yes!", you are undoubtedly wrong to believe that regeneration results from believing. There is no text which teaches this. And your error is not a matter of "logic", but rather one of hermeneutics. As I have elsewhere told you, a "psycho-statistical-mean" approach to the Scriptures violates the most fundamental rules of language. But you are "unfortunately convinced of what you believe", not that being convinced of one's own beliefs is inherently wrong as you have implied. rolleyes2 Would one be more virtuous to confess that one is unsure, unconvinced or everything that is believed? Agnosticism in all its forms has never been deemed a prize to own.

Using your "logic", it would appear that every place where you see the word, "life" appear in a text where "belief or faith" appears, it is to be understood as a synonym for regeneration, e.g.,

John 20:31 "But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name."


Of course, you have totally ignored the wider context of this passage in that John is addressing people who already have believed and are united with Christ. (cp. 1Jh 5:1 with 1Jh 2:1; 2:7; 3:1, 2, 7, 18, 24; 4:1, 7; 5:10-13).

But, again, let's put your "logic" to the test in another passage:

John 3:15-16 (ASV) "that whosoever believeth may in him have eternal life [regeneration?]. For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth on him should not perish, but have eternal life [regeneration?]."


Let me try and illustrate the problem with your hermeneutic another way. If I should ask a group of people what the word, "bark" means, I should no doubt get answers such as, "the sound dogs make", or "the outside substance that covers a tree," or "how my wife speaks to me when she isn't happy with something I have done", etc. So, I take all the answers, add them up and the one which had the most responses is what I then use as a definition for the word, "bark". Now, is this logical? Is this the way language is designed to be used? How about another one... What does the word, "run" mean? Answer(s), "move one's feet rapidly in an alternating sequence", "a defect in a nylon stocking", "the movement of water", "what those do who are seeking political office", etc....

Surely the point can be easily seen, that the same word can have various and sometimes contradictory meanings depending upon the context in which they are used. Thus, to the point at hand, "life" may mean "regeneration", or "eternal existence in communion with God", or "one's physical existence", or "that invisible element of a human being which we call a soul/spirit", or... etc. As has been pointed out to you, and which you quickly rejected, the texts which you are wanting to eisogete by forcing the definition of "regeneration" upon the word "life", don't speak of regeneration at all, but of that life which is joined with Christ after one believes upon Him which results in being reconciled to God. It also includes an existence where the blessings of Christ's atonement are bestowed upon the one who believes. In short, there are many facets involved, many of which have no relation to "regeneration".

James 1:18 (KJV) "Of his own will begat he us with the word of truth, that we should be a kind of firstfruits of his creatures."

2 Timothy 2:15 (KJV) "Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth."


In His Grace,


[Linked Image]

simul iustus et peccator

[Linked Image]
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
We have already settled the fact that your highest authority is the Protestant Reformation, so why not leave it at that?

Quote
And what is it that YOU are offering if not just "an argument"? The "light cessationist" arguments are based upon the biblical record using the Grammatico-Historico hermeneutic; i.e., it takes seriously the language and historical context of the passages which speak of the ecstatic gifts given to the Apostles during their earthly life. It also takes into account Biblical Theology, i.e., the progression of revelation that has been revealed in ALL of the Scriptures.

People who deny the gifts do so because they have not experienced much of God - it is that simple. There are at least two scriptures which teach that the gifts will be around until the second coming...not including mark 16. But since your highest authority is the Protestant Reformation I won't waste my time and quote them. Besides your system always takes precedence over scripture.

Quote
The answer to your first two rhetorical questions is, "Yes!", you are undoubtedly wrong to believe that regeneration results from believing.

Actually I said that life comes from believing...exactly as the apostles taught. Before you saw the utter inconsistency of your "position" you would have agreed that regeneration means receiving new life:

Quote
The word in the Greek for "made alive" is suzoopoieo; i.e., to bring to life conjointly with. The reference is unmistakable. As Christ was raised from the dead in which He suffered for punishment of sins, vicariously and substitutionally, likewise did God raise us up from the dead, through our own trespasses and sins. This is regeneration.

Now you have a new understanding of receiving life above and beyond regeneration. Wow. Not only are we born "again" twice (sounds like the dispensational two "second" comings) - one as children of God, and an antecedent regeneration - but now we receive new life twice as well. You can quote all the different meanings of life - but you cannot explain how these supposed two different lives relate, compare, and contrast. So you are left with pontification.

Quote
Of course, you have totally ignored the wider context of this passage in that John is addressing people who already have believed and are united with Christ. (cp. 1Jh 5:1 with 1Jh 2:1; 2:7; 3:1, 2, 7, 18, 24; 4:1, 7; 5:10-13).

Yes, in First John he is. Perhaps though, when in the gospel of John he writes, "These things are written that ye may believe that Jesus is the Christ..." - just maybe, just perhaps, perhaps he actually meant that. hmm naw -that would contradict calvinism so that can't be right. oh well let's explain it away!

Quote
Using your "logic", it would appear that every place where you see the word, "life" appear in a text where "belief or faith" appears, it is to be understood as a synonym for regeneration, e.g.,John 3:15-16 (ASV) "that whosoever believeth may in him have eternal life [regeneration?]. For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth on him should not perish, but have eternal life [regeneration?]."

Regeneration means new birth. It is the beginning - the initiation into - new life.

Quote
The word in the Greek for "made alive" is suzoopoieo; i.e., to bring to life conjointly with. The reference is unmistakable. [...] This is regeneration.

Well, it was regeneration. Now it's not. Your whole argument has been that people are dead until they are regenerated, and that with this new life they then believe. Now you are saying that the new life comes after believing, and that to say otherwise is to make regeneration and life synonomous. Look, you just want to win an argument, so you want to interpret words differently in similar contexts in order to avoid the inconsistency of your carnal philosophical pseudo-intellectual drivel.

So do we not receive new life at regeneration? does the bible not say, as you quoted yourself, that eternal life is a result of believing? why is it you can never answer straitforward questions - you have to rant instead?

Quote
Surely the point can be easily seen, that the same word can have various and sometimes contradictory meanings depending upon the context in which they are used. Thus, to the point at hand, "life" may mean "regeneration", or "eternal existence in communion with God", or "one's physical existence", or "that invisible element of a human being which we call a soul/spirit", or... etc.

Yes, but not in the context of new life - eternal life - being made alive unto God. You are guilty of a theological sleight of hand. Now you see it now you don't. Here quickening refers to regeneration, here the very same thing refers to something else.

Quote
As has been pointed out to you, and which you quickly rejected, the texts which you are wanting to eisogete by forcing the definition of "regeneration" upon the word "life", don't speak of regeneration at all, but of that life which is joined with Christ after one believes upon Him which results in being reconciled to God. It also includes an existence where the blessings of Christ's atonement are bestowed upon the one who believes.

you said yourself that a person is dead until they are regenerated by God. If they are no longer dead, and if they are raised with Christ to walk in newness of life, how can they then be raised again through faith to receive life again? This is nonsense pure and simple. This is a cleverly devised fable. And you fell for it. Did not the passage in Ephesians say that the quickening which you identified as regeneration enabled the believer to be raised with Christ into his life? to be joined with him? you want to interpret every text independently of every other rather than admit you are wrong and receive the revelation of the truth which comes to those who receive the truth as little children. Please, go back to your Reformers whom you trust and spare me the pretence of biblical debate.
ZS

Last edited by ZionSeeker; Sat Mar 27, 2004 3:25 PM.
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
Quote
ZionSeeker said:
People who deny the gifts do so because they have not experienced much of God - it is that simple. There are at least two scriptures which teach that the gifts will be around until the second coming...not including mark 16. But since your highest authority is the Protestant Reformation I won't waste my time and quote them. Besides your system always takes precedence over scripture.

ZS, I'll let you and Pilgrim hash out the biblical warrant for tongues & other sign gifts if indeed such Scriptures actually exist. But we have a congregation here in Texas that contains many former Pentecostals who would tell you that they've never experienced so much of the grace and love of God as they have since they left Pentecostalism.

So, not everybody's experience is the same, is it? <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/scratch1.gif" alt="" />

Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 2,040
Persnickety Presbyterian
Offline
Persnickety Presbyterian
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 2,040
Quote
We have already settled the fact that your highest authority is the Protestant Reformation, so why not leave it at that?

No, Zion, YOU have settled that, and most uncharitably so. Pilgrim has a great deal of respect for the Reformers as men of God, gifted and wise men who saw the corruption both in doctrine and practice of the Church of Rome, but he does not worship them nor consider them the final authority (and how silly that would be, considering that there WERE disagreements among them!): his final authority is the Holy Bible, as it is for all the other Reformed believers here.


Kyle

I tell you, this man went down to his house justified.
Page 8 of 17 1 2 6 7 8 9 10 16 17

Link Copied to Clipboard
Who's Online Now
0 members (), 103 guests, and 9 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Newest Members
DiscipleEddie, atdcross, NetChaplain, winslowlady, Zach
965 Registered Users
ShoutChat
Comment Guidelines: Do post respectful and insightful comments. Don't flame, hate, spam.
December
S M T W T F S
1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 30 31
Today's Birthdays
There are no members with birthdays on this day.
Popular Topics(Views)
1,303,456 Gospel truth