MacArthur

[D-28 Player]

1 minute ago, No Nicolaitans said:

 

Of course, but does God control, choose, and decide whom will be saved, and does God control, choose, and decide who will not be saved?

In an earlier post, you said...

I asked a sincere question in order to better understand your position. You said you were open to answering questions (with a caveat) and you would talk about what Calvinism actually teaches (with a caveat). Rather than answering the question and taking the opportunity to...

1. Affirm whether I was correct in my understanding, and...
2. Taking the opportunity to talk about what Calvinism actually teaches regarding my question

...sadly, you gave an answer that did neither. 

 

You asked if God controls who is saved. 

I asked you who saves if not God. 

How would that not indicate to anyone who has even a modicum of reading comprehension that God has at least some say in who He saves?

Or are you a proponent of open theism by which God does not know the future nor have any control over the world?

Is God not sovereign over who He saves? 

[No Nicolaitans]

4 minutes ago, D-28 Player said:

You asked if God controls who is saved. 

I asked you who saves if not God. 

How would that not indicate to anyone who has even a modicum of reading comprehension that God has at least some say in who He saves?

Or are you a proponent of open theism by which God does not know the future nor have any control over the world?

Is God not sovereign over who He saves? 

I gots skoolin'. 

Okay, I'll stop asking questions. Have a nice day.

[D-28 Player]

3 minutes ago, No Nicolaitans said:

I gots skoolin'. 

Okay, I'll stop asking questions. Have a nice day.

OK. 

Edited April 4, 2017 by D-28 Player

[No Nicolaitans]

4 minutes ago, D-28 Player said:

OK. 

You spent more time describing open theism than answering my actual question...which you still didn't answer. That's fine. I asked a direct question, and you gave a vague question in response rather than giving a direct answer...which you still didn't answer. You then resorted to questioning my intelligence...and you still haven't answered the question. 

It was a simple yes or no answer...

Me: Do you believe "this"?

You: Yes (or no).

That's okay, I've been around this block too many times in the past. I was actually giving you the opportunity to do what you said you would do (answer questions and talk about what Calvinism teaches), and I was doing it respectfully. However, I will bow out of this thread now and let others play the game with you. 

Now, I's gone see if I's can find somere's else to dally around wit.

 

[D-28 Player]

20 minutes ago, No Nicolaitans said:

You spent more time describing open theism than answering my actual question...which you still didn't answer. That's fine. I asked a direct question, and you gave a vague question in response rather than giving a direct answer...which you still didn't answer. You then resorted to questioning my intelligence...and you still haven't answered the question. 

It was a simple yes or no answer...

Me: Do you believe "this"?

You: Yes (or no).

That's okay, I've been around this block too many times in the past. I was actually giving you the opportunity to do what you said you would do (answer questions and talk about what Calvinism teaches), and I was doing it respectfully. However, I will bow out of this thread now and let others play the game with you. 

Now, I's gone see if I's can find somere's else to dally around wit.

 

Third time: YES, GOD IS NOT A SPECTATOR IN SALVATION. GOD CONTROLS SALVATION.

Second time: Yes, God does choose, and decide whom will be saved, but does not "control" who will be saved, as I believe you mean "control" in this instance to mean "to force against their will".

 To believe otherwise is open theism, which is heresy. 

 

 

 

Edited April 4, 2017 by D-28 Player

[heartstrings]

 

6 minutes ago, D-28 Player said:

Third time: YES, GOD IS NOT A SPECTATOR IN SALVATION GOD CONTROLS SALVATION.

Second time: Yes, God does choose, and decide whom will be saved, but does not "control" who will be saved, as I believe you mean "control" in this instance to mean "to force against their will".

 To believe otherwise is open theism, which is heresy. 

 

 

 

I have three robotic machines in my shop. i decide what they will do, program them and they do it.  but (technically) I do not control or force them against their will either...because they're robots.

[D-28 Player]

Just now, heartstrings said:

 

I have three robotic machines in my shop. i decide what they will do, program them and they do it.  but (technically) I do not control or force them against their will either...because they're robots.

Another straw man. Calvinists do not believe that God "programs" men or that men are "robots".  

[heartstrings]

Then how do they get saved because God  "decides" they will?

[D-28 Player]

3 minutes ago, heartstrings said:

Then how do they get saved because God  "decides" they will?

 

Men are saved by repentance and faith in Christ.

 

[Pastor Scott Markle]

7 minutes ago, D-28 Player said:

Men are saved by repentance and faith in Christ.

Indeed. But how are lost sinners REGENERATED? 

Are they regenerated THROUGH repentance and faith?  Or, are they regenerated BEFORE repentance and faith, and thus NOT through repentance and faith?

(Note: If you continue as you have, I shall expect you to provide me with . . . no answer at all to my question.)

[Invicta]

I know a pastor who was Gospel Standard Baptist (Strict and particular, i.e. hyper Calvinist) who said we become Christians because we want to go to heaven.  HS once posted on here that he became a Christian because he didn't want to go to hell.  I see no difference in the two, both are false beliefs.

[D-28 Player]

20 minutes ago, Pastor Scott Markle said:

Indeed. But how are lost sinners REGENERATED? 

Are they regenerated THROUGH repentance and faith?  Or, are they regenerated BEFORE repentance and faith, and thus NOT through repentance and faith?

(Note: If you continue as you have, I shall expect you to provide me with . . . no answer at all to my question.)

And if you continue as you have I will expect you to be unnecessarily aggressive and rude.

Just as a physically dead man cannot dial 911 to call for help, so a spiritually dead man cannot call on God for salvation lest the ability be granted to him by God. Please note that this means that regeneration must take place before man can repent or express faith in Christ, thus meaning that I have answered your question and any further claims that I have not are simply not true. 

You don't believe that and you won't accept any answer I give you and, at this point, I don't really care. 

Honestly, what we're seeing right now is precisely why IFBs have the reputation that you have. 

 

 

15 minutes ago, Invicta said:

I know a pastor who was Gospel Standard Baptist (Strict and particular, i.e. hyper Calvinist) who said we become Christians because we want to go to heaven.  HS once posted on here that he became a Christian because he didn't want to go to hell.  I see no difference in the two, both are false beliefs.

If he had said that he became a Christian by not wanting to go to Hell, that would have been a false belief. But I think that repenting and receiving Christ because you fear Hell and understand that Christ is God's remedy for sin and that Christ died to assuage God's wrath is perfectly reasonable. 

Edited April 4, 2017 by D-28 Player

[Pastor Scott Markle]

13 minutes ago, D-28 Player said:

And if you continue as you have I will expect you to be unnecessarily aggressive and rude.

Just as a physically dead man cannot dial 911 to call for help, so a spiritually dead man cannot call on God for salvation lest the ability be granted to him by God. Please note that this means that regeneration must take place before man can repent or express faith in Christ, thus meaning that I have answered your question and any further claims that I have not are simply not true. 

Brother "D-28 Player,"

Actually, I already knew the Calvinistic position on this matter.  Indeed, the Calvinistic system presents the matter as follows:

1.  A lost sinner is spiritually dead, such that he or she has no ability or desire whatsoever to come unto Christ in faith apart from some work of God's grace upon that sinner.

2.  The work of God's grace whereby a sinner is made able to come unto Christ in faith is the divine work of regeneration.  (By the way, this certainly means that within the Calvinistic system the divine work of regeneration is NOT AT ALL through faith, but is rather UNTO faith.)

3.  When God determines to engage His work of regeneration upon a lost sinner, He does so through an irresistible grace, such that the lost sinner CANNOT PREVENT his own regeneration (even if he did not want to be regenerated).

4.  Once God has engaged His work of regeneration upon a lost sinner, that lost sinner is now ABLE to come unto Christ in faith.

5.  Furthermore, once God has engaged His work of regeneration upon a lost sinner, that lost sinner most certainly WILL come unto Christ in faith, specifically because God's work of regeneration changed that sinner's will (desire) so that he or she now CERTAINLY WILLS (desires) to come unto Christ in faith.

6.  As such, EVERY sinner upon whom God engages His work of regeneration WILL CERTAINLY come unto Christ in faith.

7.  Then by God's grace through that sinner's faith, that sinner will be forgiven, justified, saved, reconciled, sealed, sanctified, and glorified.
 

22 minutes ago, D-28 Player said:

Honestly, what we're seeing right now is precisely why IFBs have the reputation that you have. 

Indeed, now you have actually answered my question.  IF you had done so after the first time wherein I had asked the question, I would NOT have had to ask FOUR more times or to place greater amounts of pressure in the repeated asking thereof.  Nor would I have been compelled to express reproof in my repeated questioning.

For the sake of the audience, I would challenge all to go back unto the first time wherein I asked my question (here) to discern if my question was originally presented in a "rude" manner.  I believe that will you also find that the second time wherein I asked my question (here) it was not in a "rude" manner.  I also believe that will you find that the third time wherein I asked my question (here) it was not in a "rude" manner.  In fact, it was not until the FOURTH time wherein I asked my question (here) that I began to challenge Brother "D-28 Player's" avoidance of my question.  As such, in that fourth time wherein I asked my question, I did indeed reprove him for that avoidance.  Finally, after the FIFTH time wherein I asked my question (here), in which I again expressed a reproof of his avoidance, Brother "D-28 Player" actually did answer my question.  Even so, although I certainly acknowledge that I expressed reproof, I do NOT at all accept the accusation that I committed the sin of "rudeness." 

[Pastor Scott Markle]

52 minutes ago, D-28 Player said:

Just as a physically dead man cannot dial 911 to call for help, so a spiritually dead man cannot call on God for salvation lest the ability be granted to him by God. Please note that this means that regeneration must take place before man can repent or express faith in Christ, thus meaning that I have answered your question and any further claims that I have not are simply not true. 

You don't believe that and you won't accept any answer I give you and, at this point, I don't really care. 

Brother "D-28 Player,"

You are indeed correct. I do NOT agree with all that you have presented above, but I DO agree with some of it.  Therefore, allow me to present a Biblical examination of that which you have presented.

1.  In your first sentence you state -- "Just as a physically dead man cannot dial 911 to call for help, so a spiritually dead man cannot call on God for salvation lest the ability be granted to him by God."  I myself AGREE that a spiritually lost and dead sinner as NO ability whatsoever within himself or herself to come unto Christ in faith for salvation, and thus that a spiritually lost and dead sinner CANNOT come unto Christ in faith for salvation except God graciously grant ability unto him or her.

2.  In your second sentence you state -- "Please note that this means that regeneration must take place before man can repent or express faith in Christ."  Herein you present God's work of regeneration as the ONLY possible means whereby God could grant a spiritually lost and dead sinner the ability to come unto Christ in faith for salvation.  Yet our Lord Jesus Christ Himself did NOT present God's work of regeneration as the means whereby God graciously grants this ability unto a spiritually lost and dead sinner.  In John 6:44 our Lord Jesus Christ declared, "No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day."  Herein we notice that our Lord Jesus Christ spoke about the ability to come unto Him in faith for salvation.  Yet our Lord Jesus Christ did NOT speak about the regenerating work of God as the means whereby He grants that ability.  Rather, our Lord Jesus Christ very specifically spoke about the DRAWING work of God as the means whereby He grants that ability.

[heartstrings]

1 hour ago, Invicta said:

I know a pastor who was Gospel Standard Baptist (Strict and particular, i.e. hyper Calvinist) who said we become Christians because we want to go to heaven.  HS once posted on here that he became a Christian because he didn't want to go to hell.  I see no difference in the two, both are false beliefs.

Not the whole story. When I got saved, God convicted me of Sin, Righteousness, and Judgment. Through the preaching of the Gospel and the wooing power (drawing) of the Holy Ghost, I was "convinced" of my sin, the Righteousness of God, and the damnation of Hell. I turned TO Jesus FROM sin and Hell. In order to be saved a person MUST realize there is something to be "saved" FROM and fully believe he DESERVES to go there. That something, the Bible says, is Hell. Jesus warned about it.  That is not false doctrine my friend: it is Biblical.