The Highway Forums General Discussion Theology Discussion Forum true calvinism.......MJM please read

William,

I am discovering that the gulf between the theology of Calvinism and Arminianism is much larger than I had ever imagined and it disturbs me. One of Pilgrim's references for me pointed to a site with the paper, 'Arminian Errors' by William MacLean. It was an eye-opener, especially the section where he bashes evangelicals from Billy Graham "and on down" to use his words. I say that I am disturbed because my own views place me in position to be your opponent even though I would desire fellowship and a true sharing of God's word in humility.

I won't provide scriptures on MJM's behalf; I will let him defend the points he brings up because it is not my "battle". I jumped into this particular thread on 5-point Calvinism out of curiosity and a desire to discuss theology. However, I will provide some scriptures to discuss the topic of salvation or soteriology:

Acts 16:30-34
30 And brought them out, and said, Sirs, what must I do to be saved?
31 And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house.
32 And they spake unto him the word of the Lord, and to all that were in his house.
33 And he took them the same hour of the night, and washed their stripes; and was baptized, he and all his, straightway.
34 And when he had brought them into his house, he set meat before them, and rejoiced, believing in God with all his house.

Can we all agree that the Phillipian jailor was unsaved at the point of verse 30? Else he would not have asked, "...what must I do to be saved?" Let's discuss the state of the jailor at this point. According to the soteriology that I have studied, a person is in an un-regenerated state prior to being saved. Their spirit is dead and they cannot even receive the things of the Holy Spirit because their own spirit is dead. This was a condition brought to the whole human race through Adam's original sin. What prompted or motivated the jailor to desire salvation? The Holy Spirit who was drawing him. He observed Paul and Silas' faith and wanted this assurance of salvation in his own heart. What if the jailor had not followed their advice, what if he chose not to beleive? He would not have been converted according to verse 31.

Do you have a definition for conversion (the new birth)?

When does conversion occur in your theology?

What initiates conversion?

According to the Calvinist's view, they must say that the jailor has to do NOTHING. If the jailor's salvation hinges upon the condition to 'Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ...' then you will likely say that Sovereign Grace has been thwarted because the will of man is involved in something you say is entirely within God's will and resources to accomplish.

You and I might agree to a point that it is God who saves us as an act of His own good pleasure to graciously provide this gift of salvation to man. But the jailor above would not have been saved if he had not embraced the person of Jesus Christ according to verse 31.

Verse 31 is a conditional statement: ...Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved... And don't think for a moment that I think that the jailor is saving himself. No way, no how! No one can save himself. But we can delay or pass up the opportunity for God to save us if we refuse or choose not to believe.

Now according to what I was taught, the 'new birth' occurs at the point of salvation. The man accepting the person of Jesus Christ becomes a new creature, old things are passed away. Before this moment, the man was spiritually dead, separated from God and without hope in the world. But he saw how Paul and Silas lived that their testimony was one of calm assurance of the Savior's love and he desired this in his heart. You will say, 'How can he do this if his spirit is dead? How can he desire or seek after God as man is totally depraved and incapable, even not desiring to seek after God?'

The answer is that the Holy Spirit draws him to Christ and this tug or pull of God is difficult for unregenerate man to resist. The unregenerate man is incapable to desire the things of God or God Himself. But the Holy Spirit of God is able to convict the heart of unregenerate men and show them their need of a savior. In the case of the jailor, he allowed Paul and Silas to share God's word to him and he responded and received Jesus Christ as personal Lord and Savior. Unregenerate man's heart is utterly sinful and wicked. I believe that God is greater than our hearts and knows all things and He "reaches in" to our dead soul and miraculously intervenes to soften our hardened heart, allowing us to respond in His strength that He provides to believe Him and receive His person.

1 John 3:20 For if our heart condemn us, God is greater than our heart, and knoweth all things.

You will probably tell me that the jailor was elect although no one including himself can know this. You will say perhaps that the jailor having been chosen as part of the elect was pre-disposed to believe on the Lord Jesus Christ. I wonder if you even acknowledge the "new birth" that Jesus spoke to Nicodemus of in John 3?

Answer me this please, what is the significance of Acts 16:31? Is it not an appeal for believing faith unto salvation? Is it not an answer to the question, 'sirs, what must I do to be saved?'

God will not read His word for you. You must exercise iniative and pick up the word of God and read it. Or hire or listen to someone preach the gospel message. Did I help God write His word? No. Did I have any part in God saving me? No. Can I appropriate God's blessings, injunctions and edifications by simply reading and receiving His word? Yes. Do I need to do anything for God (Jesus) to save me? Yes. Believe on the Lord Jesue Christ. Does this mean I am helping God to save me? No.

It's somewhat ironic you should ask this question, Thomas. Let's look at the text dealing with the new birth in John 3:

Now there was a man of the Pharisees, named Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews; this man came to Jesus by night and said to Him, "Rabbi, we know that You have come from God [as] a teacher; for no one can do these signs that You do unless God is with him." Jesus answered and said to him, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born from above [or, born again], he cannot see the kingdom of God."

Nicodemus said to Him, "How can a man be born when he is old? He cannot enter a second time into his mother's womb, can he?"

Now, Nicodemus' confusion here is understandable. Jesus has just told him that he must be born from above. How on earth is it possible for a man once born to be born again? We can't exactly climb back into our mother's womb. And, of course, we didn't really choose to be born in the first place. Let's look at the next few verses, 5–8:

Jesus answered, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and of the Spirit he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. Do not be amazed that I said to you, 'You must be born from above [or, born again].' The wind blows where is wished and you hear the sound of it, but do not know where it comes from and where it is going; so is everyone who is born of the Spirit."

Now, at what point, exactly, does man's choice play a role in his new birth? At no point, as we can see from Jesus' answer. As our Lord illustrates, the new birth which comes by the Spirit is like the wind, which blows where it wishes, not where we wish. This squares with what John writes earlier in his gospel, 1:12,13:

But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, [even] to those who believe in His name, who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God.

To say that the new birth is dependent on our decision to believe in Christ—our will to believe on Him—is to nullify this truth entirely.

Now, looking at the Philippian jailer, what can we say? His new birth must occur in the same manner which Christ describes to Nicodemus. That is, the Spirit causes his new birth, which is not dependent on the jailer's decision. But the new birth is not the only aspect of conversion and salvation; as we see with the Paul and Silas' response to the jailer, the jailer must believe in Christ. So it is with all men: we must believe in Christ. Indeed, this belief is an act of our will.

However, this act of belief is impossible apart from the new birth! We are dead in our sins, wholly incapable of desiring the things of God, much less truly believing in Jesus Christ. The Holy Spirit must regenerate us, revive us, awaken us from our sleep of death before we can grasp the truth of our salvation through faith. And once we have been born again, it is impossible for us not to believe! If there were an actual possibility that we might choose not to believe in Christ once regenerated, how can it be said that we are regenerated? Our eyes and ears and hearts must yet be dead to the truth of the Gospel if we still reject Christ.

So, this is what we have: the Spirit of God regenerates a man, and as a result, he believes in Christ unto salvation.

I have stated, repeatedly, that Billy graham offers a different gospel. He offers a merely possible gospel where mans sovereignty is key. I believe in an effectual gospel, where Jesus death actually paid for sin and secured the salvation of many. We both limit the atonement; I limit its scope, you limits it efficacy.


I also doubt you could offer any examples of bashing in that paper. Disagreeing with somebody and saying so is not bashing. If you could offer an example, maybe.


This is correct. This doctrine is known as Total Depravity. Its basis was confirmed early in church history. Man is incapable of doing anything to save himself. Please note this, because everything must be Gods doing. This is a monergistic salvation rather than a synergistic. Jesus says; "he who commits sin is a slave to sin" (John 8:34), and this is what it means to be `dead in your sins and transgressions'--that `the natural man receives not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness to him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned' (1 Cor. 2:14). The `natural' man cannot know the things of the Spirit of God. Jesus also confirms this when He says “no man can unless the Father draw him” (John 6:44). So far we agree. However, this starting point, mans ability and the condition of his will, is important.


If God was drawing the jailer, it was either an effectual calling or general, though ineffectual pleading. I believe, that since God purposed to save a remnant, an elect, a people of God, he brings about their conversion. In the Arminian scheme, God only draws all people to a point of salvability, and then leaves the final choice to man sovereignty. This is an ineffectual call. This would also cause us to wonder where in scripture this middle ground, this spiritual equipoise, because it is never mentioned. I uphold what is known as Irresistible Grace. The result of God's Irresistible Grace is the certain response by the elect to the inward call of the Holy Spirit, when the outward call is given by the evangelist or minister of the Word of God. Christ, himself, teaches that all whom God has elected will come to a knowledge of him (John 6:37). Men come to Christ in salvation when the Father calls them (John 6:44), and the very Spirit of God leads God's beloved to repentance (Romans 8:14). What a comfort it is to know that the gospel of Christ will penetrate our hard, sinful hearts and wondrously save us through the gracious inward call of the Holy Spirit (I Peter 5:10). To me, there is no “what if”. Either the jailer was effectually called to repentance or his “choice” was made from his sinful nature.


The Holy Spirits drawing. Here is another passage from Acts tom illustrate this…….

And another…….

These people were called efficaciously. This is confirmed in that “My sheep hear my voice”, Jesus said in John 10:27. This is a major point of division between the Arminian and Calvinist. The Calvinist believes God elected specific people, provided real salvation for them, and calls effectually His chosen. The Arminian believes God elected a plan, made a way for salvation for all, and begs every person to “choose the right thing”. The difference here is a matter of efficacy. Who makes grace efficacious?


Calvinists do not classify faith as a work, nor do they exclude it from the process of salvation. They say with Paul `by grace [we] are save through faith, and this is not from [ourselves] but is God's gift; not from works so that none may boast' (Eph. 2:8-9). Calvinists do say that no fallen man will ever exercise saving faith, nor have the desire to do so unless God regenerates their heart and renews their mind (as per. 1 Cor. 2:14). If man must exercise free will in order to be saved; that is `agree with God', or `accept God's offer', etc., then man in a state of sin must be said to have the ability to do some amount of good, even if it be only a small amount, and thereby please God to the ends of salvation. How can this view be made consistent with verses like John 8:34, 1 Cor. 1:18; 2:14, Rom. 8:7-8, John 6:44 where it is plainly stated that sinful man has no ability to please God, agree with, receive or understand the things of God, or come to Christ, prior to regeneration?


Since you didn’t show how I do not uphold the new birth, or how my position is in opposition to it, I don’t see what you are saying exactly. I believe this was answered by somebody else already, though.


That’s correct, but your next set of statements contradicts these. However, I never claimed God would “read His word to me”. This claim has no meaning, unless it is a personal evaluation of my study habits. Nor did I ever claim you helped God write the Bible. I fail to see how this applies.


Wait. You can appropriate, by something you do, a work, Gods blessings? I disagree, in that grace, by definition, is unmerited favor. I believe that all are sinners (Romans 3:23) and unable by human performance to earn, deserve, or merit salvation (Titus 3:5). We believe that the wages of sin is death (Romans 6:23), and that apart from God's grace, no one can be saved (Ephesians 2:8-9). We believe that none are righteous, or capable of doing good (Romans 3:10-12), and that apart from the conviction and regeneration of the Holy Spirit, none can be saved (John 1:12-13; 16:8-11; I Peter 1:23-25). Mankind is clearly fallen and lost in sin.


I hope this helps to understand the differences in our positions, and which scripture upholds.


God bless,

william

CovenantInBlood (Kyle)

Thanks for your patience with me and taking the time to help me see your point of view. I am glad that you have shown a support for and belief in the new birth. I don't know how God does this, probably can not know in this mortal body. But I know that God in His manifold grace does this and I agree that I could never save myself. I can see how it could be that moments before I choose (or change my mind) to believe in Christ in faith, the Holy Spirit has actually already done or begun to change or let's say "quicken" my formerly dead spirit into the new creature who is able to receive and spiritually discern the things that God will now perform in my life.

Forgive my ignorance of Calvinistic principles, but for those the Calvinist considers personally, particularly chosen as elect of God (from the foundation of the earth): what is their disposition prior to the new birth? They will not be conscious of the fact that they are the elect, but I assume there may be several interventions by the Spirit of God into their lives so that they move more or less irresistably into right relationship with Him, finally resulting in their complete salvation. The reprobate should be equally unconscious of their election to damnation and apparently God passes them by instead of goading on to faith in Christ?

So does the Calvinist (again, sorry to use the label because it may not exactly represent your position) believe that there is a definite change or regeneration to new life in Christ? That is, do you also accept that a miraculous change takes place whereby we are born again but by the Spirit of God in Christ Jesus? And then could it be that God chooses the "moment" of salvation and prepares our heart. Then we as a result believe on Jesus Christ (now that our new, renewed spirit has been quickened (made alive) and is able to believe.

I guess that I would live in some apprehension, not wanting to outguess God for this moment, again I may be missing the point. By what I am hearing from you, believing faith is a post-salvic action, not a pre-salvic or "salvation initiated by the individual's will".

With that in mind, I can see now why the mass-invitation given by evangelists such as 'Billy' of my discussions would be viewed as distasteful and repugnant to the Calvinist. Let me think about this some. I have personally favored one on one or small Bible study evangelism for witnessing.

averagefellar,

You are right that in places I my illustrations appeared to be addressing, say your reading habits, etc. and I was only making an illustration, albeit a poor one. I may get back to you when I have more time. Please check my response to, was it william? I am beginning to understand that the belief for salvation FOLLOWS regeneration of the spirit. I suggested how the point of salvation might be viewed. You are welcome to get in on that response if you desire.

Thanks again for your time in discussing these truly crucial points of theology.

Thomas

I honestly think you are starting to understand.


before regeneration, we are all sinners deserving damnation. I think some people have assurance early on, but for some of us it is an ongoing 'struggle'. There are two camps on how the Holy Spirit draws. Some believe God works and draws throughout the life of the elect culminating in an effectual call. Others think it is an all-at-once thing. Either way, as you have noted, it is an effectual calling. Your summary of the reprobate is good. God leaves them in their preferred state. I think you are understanding the position of Total Depravity and Irresistible Grace.


I don't have anything against an invitation to a mass of people. Peter preached to thousands as did Christ. We offer the gospel to all. Only those elected will respond. The difference with Billy is his view of the atonement and the theology it necessitates. I also prefer small groups studies and personal contact evangelism. Keep studying, I think you are beginning to understand.


God bless,

william

I agree that the jailor was "unsaved" (i.e., justified) at the point of verse 30, but he was at that point regenerated, i.e., the new birth had already taken place. The Holy Spirit works in, through and in conjunction with the preaching/reading of the Word of God, which we know from the text was that which Paul spoke to the jailor. You then ask: What if the jailor had not followed their advice, what if he chose not to beleive? This question is akin to asking, "What if God was not holy?" The answer is, of course, then he would not be God. If the jailor had not followed the advice given, then he would surely not have been saved (i.e., justified), but since the inspired text says he DID repent and believe upon Christ, then there is no possibility that he wouldn't have done so. Why? Because of the very fact that he believed on Christ shows that the Holy Spirit had done that radical transformation of his soul (new birth/regeneration/made alive/born again), which of necessity terminates in repentance and faith in Christ. As a newborn "naturally" and infallibly begins to breath; inhale and exhale air, so likewise one who is spiritually reborn begins to "breath"; inhales spiritual things and exhales the fruit of spiritual life; aka: repentance (putting off sin and resolving to walk in righteousness) and faith (a love for God and a trusting in the person of Christ and His substitutionary work.) If there are no signs of physical life with physical birth, then the child is pronounced dead. Likewise, if there are no signs of spiritual life, then the person is undoubtedly dead.

First, a correction of your use of terms is indicated. "Conversion" is decidedly a different thing than "the new birth". Let's define "the new birth" before "conversion" because it precedes it. The "new birth" in Scripture has many corollaries, e.g., "born again", "regeneration", "made alive", "resurrection", et al. This is the sole, sovereign and secret work of the Holy Spirit whereby He restores the spiritual essence of the soul. A new "nature"; i.e., disposition/inclination is formed within the person so that where there was once a natural hatred for God and an aversion to all that is good, this new nature has an insatiable love for God, desire for holiness and a hatred of sin, albeit these things exist initially in principle and grow throughout the person's life, aka: sanctification. The "new birth" is not something which a sinner experiences; i.e., he/she is totally unaware of its creation at the time it occurs. (cf. Jh 3:8)

Now, as to "conversion", this is where the "fruit/result" of regeneration occurs, wherein the sinner comes under conviction of sin, repents and turns to Christ in faith, at which time he/she is "justified" before God. In conversion, the person experiences these things since they are part of the event. So, conversion follows regeneration and is the natural and infallible result of it.
When does conversion occur in your theology?

If by "what" you mean to ask, what circumstances surround one being converted, the answer is that generally, it is in the context of the preaching/reading of the Word of God. More specifically, the Holy Spirit attends the proclaiming of the Gospel, regenerating those whose time it is to be saved, according to the secret council of God. Neither the one speaking the Gospel nor the hearer have any prior knowledge of the Spirit's work as explained above; i.e., it is a secret work as it is a sovereign work, according to His will.

If you are understanding Calvinism to teach that salvation occurs without any involvement of an individual, then unfortunately, you have misunderstood this. As explained above, man has no part whatsoever in his "regeneration". And, although conversion is the natural and infallible result of regeneration, there is indeed an actual inclusion of the person in it, i.e., it is really the person who repents and believes. Perhaps I should have dealt with defining this term, "salvation" before now, but I'll do so now. This word "salvation/saved" is a very comprehensive word, which can refer to the totality of a person being brought into a new and eternal relationship with the living God, e.g., beginning with God's eternal decree, predestination, election, regeneration, conversion, sanctification, and final glorification> It also can mean specific elements of that "Golden Chain" (cf. Rom 8:29, 30), e.g., "saved" is sometimes synonymous with "justified", i.e., that moment in time when a sinner repents and believes upon Christ and God then pronounces that person "not guilty", imputing Christ's righteousness to his/her account. (cf. Rom 4:3; Gal 3:6; Jam 2:23).

No one who has been regenerated can or will "pass up the opportunity", for they are "made willing", i.e., the new nature of necessity reaches out to Christ, as this is it's intended purpose. The unregenerate, by nature, refuse to believe (cf. Jh 10:26; Acts 7:51). The regenerate always and immediately believe on Christ (cf. 6:37, 45, 65; 10:27; Acts 2:37, 41; 13:48; 16:14).

As others have already pointed out, such statements are contradictory in that you cannot be "dead" and even hope to "see the kingdom of God", for the preaching of the cross is foolishness and something which is hated (cf. Jh 1:12, 13; 3:19; Rom 8:7, 8; 1Cor 2:14; Eph 4:17-19; 1Pet 2:7, 8; et al). Further, Paul says that "while ye were dead, God made you alive . . ." (Eph 2:1, 5). Using the raising of Lazarus from the dead as an illustration of what happens spiritually when one is "made alive, aka: regenerated", we see nothing of a semi-alive state after Jesus calls him forth from the grave. The biblical record says that Lazarus was 4 days in the tomb and thus there is no possible denying that he was really dead; in fact his body in all likelihood had begun to decompose. When Jesus said, "Lazarus, come forth!", Lazarus didn't take on a state of being between being dead and being alive and in that state choose to live and consequently received a "full" condition of life. Man is either spiritually dead or he is spiritually alive. A sinner never chooses to be alive; he is MADE alive by the Holy Spirit (regenerated/born from above) and as a result he/she believes upon Christ unto salvation.

Yes, the jailor was numbered with the elect from all eternity by God's secret determinative council. And yes, no one, including the jailor was privy to what God had decreed. (cf. Acts 18:9, 10) But even though the jailor was one of the elect, he was not "predisposed to believe", for there is no difference in this regard as to a sinner's natural condition. ALL are born in sin and have no interest in Christ whatsoever. Their natural inclination is toward sin, and that only. (cf. Eph 2:2-4; Rom 3:10-18)

What we see in this passage is the response of the outward call of the Gospel, i.e., the necessity of all men to repent of their sins and to believe upon Christ unto salvation. There is no implication that man is "naturally" capable of heeding that call. It is simply a statement of what all men are responsible to do should they desire salvation. Only those who have been given the desire (regenerated) have any interest in being saved. (cf. Matt 11:25-28; Jh 6:44; et al)

In His Grace,

I think that Paul's words to the Ephesians, after he had explained the glory of their eternal predestination in Chapter 1 is more than sufficient to explain the condition of ALL men from birth:

Ephesians 2:1-3 (ASV) And you [did he make alive,] when ye were dead through your trespasses and sins, wherein ye once walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the powers of the air, of the spirit that now worketh in the sons of disobedience; among whom we also all once lived in the lust of our flesh, doing the desires of the flesh and of the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, even as the rest:--

Yes and no! Regeneration effects a radical change of nature; i.e., one's entire being is recreated, being given a predisposition that is inclined toward God. This just prior to (speaking of time) one's conversion. It is IN and BECAUSE of regeneration that one suddenly feels the need of salvation and the excellency of trusting in Christ as a means to receive remission of sins and reconciliation with God. To encapsulate the entire experience, we could say that after one is regenerated by the Holy Spirit, the sinner feels an insatiable desire to be united to God. And, at the same time, he/she experiences a conviction of the condemnation and guilt that separates them from God, i.e., sin; they are indeed helpless and hopeless sinners. And, it is also here that one finds Christ most lovely and desirable in and of Himself and as the only means by which they can be reconciled to God and receive the forgiveness of sins over which they mourn.

As averagefellar has already replied on this matter, it is not the scope of the "invitation" but rather the content of that invitation and all that it implies, i.e., "God has done everything he possibly can to save you; now it's up to you!". Also, I might add, that evangelists such as Billy Graham use unbiblical (aka: worldly) methodologies to gain "converts", e.g., Madison Avenue salesmanship techniques, psychological ploys which evoke the emotions, etc., etc. The results are the further hardening of sinners' hearts and a counterfeit assurance that they are right with God.

For a marvelous description of the differences between the "new gospel" and the biblical "old Gospel", see here: The Old Gospel and the New, by Dr. J.I. Packer.

In His Grace,

I think you are beginning to understand what I'm saying. It's a very important difference, in fact, to say that regeneration precedes faith rather than follows it. It makes all the difference between whether the salvation is by man's will or by God's.


The disposition of the elect prior to regeneration is the same as the disposition of the reprobate: they are totally disposed toward evil in all they think, say, and do. They are, in fact, enemies of God. The difference is that the elect will at some point be regenerated, whereas the reprobate will be condemned. The decision as to who is elect and who is reprobate is, of course, entirely God's, and it is not based on anything about us, but it is based entirely on the secret counsel of God. All of us deserve damnation, but God has endeavored to save a remnant in order that His love and mercy might be made manifest, to His glory.

Now, whether there are "several interventions of the Holy Spirit" in the lives of the elect, I think God is constantly intervening in the world. In fact, I think even the most minute detail is in the mind of God, decreed by Him from all eternity. (Even that speck of dust on the window!) All these things in conjunction work together for the good of the elect, for the just judgement of the reprobate, and for the glory of God.


I'm comfortable with the label "Calvinist." It accurately describes my theological outlook. (My only caveat would be that it accurately describes the Bible's theological outlook, as well. But that's the quibble between Calvinists and non-Calvinists, isn't it? <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />)


Yes, yes, yes! <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/yep.gif" alt="" /> God chooses the moment, prepares the circumstances, sends the Holy Spirit who quickens us, and as a result we believe.


Believing faith is a post-regenerate action, though I wouldn't say post-salvific. That is, in logical order, first there is regeneration, second there is faith and repentance, and third there is justification/salvation. But practically speaking, I'd say these occur simultaneously more often than not; that is, all in a single moment. If not knowing when this moment occurs causes you apprehension, I'm inclined to say you probably don't have to worry. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/BigThumbUp.gif" alt="" />


I don't think there's something wrong with mass invitations per se. Certainly, Peter's Pentecost sermon was delivered to a mass of people. The problem with Billy Graham's invitations is their content. Talk about how "God has done all He can, now it's up to you"—well, let's be honest, it's blasphemy. It paints a God who is dependent on man to save man, and that's both theologically ridiculous and unbiblical. Similarly all the junk about "accepting Jesus into your heart" by saying the "Sinner's Prayer." It becomes a kind of ritual whereby people think that because they have repeated a prayer, God owes them salvation.

Well, I hope what I've said helps clarify some things for you. You are of course welcome to ask further questions, and I and the others here will do our best to answer them. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/bigglasses.gif" alt="" />

Same link as Pilgrim posted, http://www.the-highway.com/gospeloldandnew_Packer.html, and an excerpt I think really sums it up.......

emphasis mine.

Good article.


God bless,

william