Faith is "trust" ... not a "work"

[Guest]

Faith is not a "work".

Would faith in the law be a work?

Mark

I'm quite sure you know what kind of faith I'm speaking of here brother. The same that Paul is speaking of in the text I quoted.

[Guest]

Mark,

I have two questions for you.

1) Suppose that Mark is of the elect and Toby is not elect. Why does God receive more glory by predestining Mark to the elect group and predestining Toby to the reprobate group?

2) Suppose that faith is not a gift. (Yes, you have to at least try to imagine this!) Based on your understanding and experience of faith, would you boast in your faith if it is not a gift? In other words, is faith being a gift the only thing that prevents you from boasting?

Lewis

P.S. Rick, nice to meet you as well.

[Guest]

Mark,

You wrote:

Quote:
2. In spite of Romans 1:16, "For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ, for it is the power of God to salvation for everyone who believes, for the Jew first and also for the Greek", the Gospel, God's word, is impotent to save anyone, nor is it credible, absent a miracle.


Another strange response, especially when one considers that Arminians themselves limit the atonement by actually daring to teach that God does not save any person in particular, but makes salvation possible for all!
I find it simply amazing that “the new birth” is not viewed as a miracle of God!
We even dare to suggest that Physical birth is a miracle, but Spiritual birth is not!
I do not get it.

You have completely misunderstood what I said. I said "absent a miracle", i.e., without a miracle (regeneration), the gospel is impotent according to the Calvinist doctrine.

And you wrote:

And they are not seeking after “Him” when they are seeking after these idols Homer. Where do you get that idea brother?

How about Paul?

Acts 17:22-23 (New American Standard Bible)

22. So Paul stood in the midst of the Areopagus and said, "Men of Athens, I observe that you are very religious in all respects.
23."For while I was passing through and examining the objects of your worship, I also found an altar with this inscription, 'TO AN UNKNOWN GOD ' Therefore what you worship in ignorance, this I proclaim to you.

Not seeking God was not their problem. Paul assigns their problem to ignorance, which, by the way, was once Paul's problem, even while he was seeking to do what he thought to be God's will. And we find that some of them chose to believe Paul's preaching, no mention of a miraculous operation on their hearts to allow them to believe. Seems Luke would mention it; he wasn't hesitant to describe numerous other miracles.

Acts 17:34

34. But some men joined him and believed, among whom also were Dionysius the Areopagite and a woman named Damaris and others with them.

[Guest]

Quote:
I suppose I could go through all of your counter assertions to the passages I quoted, with regard to context etc, but would it be worth it?
It seems most of your response pretty much took all of those passages as not relevant to us today or some such thing.

I don't think that I did this at all brother. With some (1 Cor. 15:19) I made the simple observation that they were not specifically Calvinistic.

I was going to say something about your use of scriptures being "calvinistic" etc, but did not.
There are no such scriptures in that sense, nor in an Arminian sense!

Scripture interprets scripture, so when you immediately read it as being some kind of "ism" you are not treating scripture with the respect it deserves, mainly upon its own terms.
"Isms" are merely nick names, and usually more often than not, misunderstood by those from differing presupositions.

Truth is, there are as many interpretations as there are people who read the Bible!

You may not believe me when I say this, but I do not approach the bible calvinistically, and often check my thinking by making sure I refrain from any such temptation.
This is probably my biggest beef with Arminians though.
All Arminians come to scripture reading Libertarian free will into everything they read! It is truly astounding Derek.

With the wedding feast parable, I stated that there are two ways of interpreting it. As election, (to the calvinist) and faith, (to the Arminian).

I was thinking that this conversation might be better if we take a trip into election. Do you believe in election?

Am I right to suggest that you view election as a "Plan" or a "Category" or some such impersonal thing.
I get that from your comments below

"This verse is written to a church (plural you). This does not necessarilly have to be about individual unconditional election, though it could be. This is understood by non-Calvinists to mean "you who are in this catagory", "you who have believed" etc."

The reason I bring it up, is that every time in scripture that election is refered to, the direct object is always persons, individuals and never a plan or a group or a category or some such thing. Are you aware of that fact brother?

Mark

[Guest]

Quote:
you will discover the “why” some believe and others do not believe.


Because they "didn't love the truth"? vs. 10.

No one by nature loves the truth, so no! The verse says they "did not receive" the love of the truth.

I was referring to vs 11-13!

Of course this fits in with the fact that God shows mercy to whomever He shows mercy, and to whom He wills, He hardens.
Not receiving is the same as saying not showing mercy, therefore judgement and condemnation, hence hardening etc.

2Th 2:10 and with all deceit of unrighteousness in those who perish, because they did not receive the love of the truth, so that they might be saved.
2Th 2:11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie,
2Th 2:12 so that all those who do not believe the truth, but delight in unrighteousness, might be condemned.

Rom 9:15 For He said to Moses, "I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion."
Rom 9:16 So then it is not of the one willing, nor of the one running, but of God, the One showing mercy.
Rom 9:17 For the Scripture says to Pharaoh, "Even for this same purpose I have raised you up, that I might show My power in you, and that My name might be declared throughout all the earth."
Rom 9:18 Therefore He has mercy on whom He will have mercy, and whom He will, He hardens.

[Guest]

Mark,

I have two questions for you.

1) Suppose that Mark is of the elect and Toby is not elect. Why does God receive more glory by predestining Mark to the elect group and predestining Toby to the reprobate group?

Where have I stated that? I teach that God gets glory either way. I have not stated this concept of "more glory".

2) Suppose that faith is not a gift. (Yes, you have to at least try to imagine this!)

But it is.
It is something that is "granted" (Php 1:29). It is a part of salvation and (Eph 2:8) says it is a gift received.

Php 1:29 For to you it is given on behalf of Christ not only to believe on Him, but also to suffer for His sake,
Eph 2:8 For by grace you are saved through faith, and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God,

Even repentance is a grace given.

Act 11:18 When they heard these things, they were silent and glorified God, saying, Then God has also granted repentance to life to the nations.


Now, in order to answer you.

Based on your understanding and experience of faith, would you boast in your faith if it is not a gift? In other words, is faith being a gift the only thing that prevents you from boasting?

Of course.
If faith is something I bring to the table so to speak (instead of something I have been enabled to humbly receive), then I should be patted on the back and boast.

The fact most Arminians do not do that is their saving grace!
Although I have spoken with some who quite openly boasted and talked down to others who had not quite got what they have.

Please realise exactly what I am saying.
I am not accusing Arminians in general of boasting.
I am saying that their theology if it were consistent, would lead to such an accusation. But Arminians generally speaking, live with this inconsistency. Why or how, I can only take an educated guess.
It is a human tradition, and they are very hard to shake off!

Mark

[Guest]

Homer,

I hope you don't mind my chiming in here.

You wrote:
"You have completely misunderstood what I said. I said "absent a miracle", i.e., without a miracle (regeneration), the gospel is impotent according to the Calvinist doctrine".

Not withstanding which group says what with regard to regeneration, what the Word has to say on the subject of regeneration in the Gentiles seems pretty clear. In a manner of speaking, the Gospel is impotent absent a "miracle" in the hearts of those whom God forenew, called, chose, etc.
Consider the Parable of the Sower, good seed being broadcast as representing the Gospel and the various kinds of soil it lands upon. Whatever else it says, who is the One working? And, soil cannot change its nature anymore than we in and of ourselves can change our hearts.
It does take a miracle Homer, for you and I to recieve a "new heart".

Consider also Paul's words with regard to Gentile salvation:

Eph. 2 As for you, you were dead... vs3..by nature objects of wrath..vs 4
BUT because of His great love (not by your faith at this point) God who is rich in mercy..vs 5 MADE US ALIVE WITH CHRIST EVEN WHEN WE WERE DEAD...(this is the beginning of regeneration).. it is by GRACE you have been saved...7 in order ..He might show the INCOMPARABLE RICHES OF HIS GRACE..8 for it is BY GRACE that you HAVE BEEN SAVED THROUGH FAITH ( faith is the result of being made alive not its cause) AND THIS IS NOT FROM YOURSELVES, IT IS THE GIFT OF GOD...9 NOT BY WORKS..10
we are GODS WORKMANSHIP...
11 Therefore (what is it there fore?) Remember...you who are Gentiles..
12 that AT THAT TIME YOU WERE SEPERATE FROM CHRIST, EXCLUDED
from CITIZENSHIP in Israel, and FOREINGNERS to THE COVENANTS ...
WITHOUT HOPE...and...WITHOUT GOD in the world...

Now brother, that's a miricle in my book. It all starts at regeneration.

Peace in Him,
Bob

[Guest]

Mark,

God, in His grace, has indeed granted that we have the opportunity and ability both to believe and to repent. This is one aspect of His "manifold (or multifaceted) grace" (1 Pet.4:10).

Another aspect of His grace is His general goodness to all men, like when He sends sunshine and rain on the unjust as well as the just. It is this general goodness that leads some to repentance (Rom.2:4). Such forms of grace are not necessarily the grace of regeneration. The latter is not general grace. It is a particular grace, without which, a man will not be saved. Humility is a prerequisite for receiving particular grace (Prov.3:34/ James 4:6 / 1 Peter 5:5).

Humble people, even if they do what is right, do not desire to boast. If I were to do a generous or heroic act, one might suggest that boasting would be a consistent thing for me to do. However, boasting would be a very inconsistent thing for a humble person to do. The fact that I did something that I ought to have done does not require (or even justify) boasting--especially if the good thing I did was morally required of me.

Remember Luke 17:10
"So likewise you, when you have done all those things which you are commanded, say, 'We are unprofitable servants. We have done [only] what was our duty to do."

As a child, I was taught that authorities should be respected. I did not hate policemen, nor curse my parents, nor shoot my teachers. Some people have done these things, but I did not. However, it never crossed my mind, when I returned home each day from school, to boast within myself that I had gone through another day without stabbing my school principal. I could have been worse, but I felt no special congratulations to be due me for not having done so.

Ever since my children were born, I have fed and cared for them. I could have done otherwise, since it was in my power to do so. However, I have not spent one second of my life thinking that I ought to be congratulated for doing what parents are morally required to do. I don't even feel a need to be thanked by my children for doing what even most heathen parents do for their children, though I could have done a worse thing.

Likewise, if I had committed a grievous crime, and was apprehended by the police, if I were to go along meekly with them to jail, without further resistance, would I think it a thing to boast of, that I did not commit additional crimes in resisting arrest?

Consider now the sinner, who becomes aware that has offended the highest Authority in the universe, that his "number is up," that God had tracked him down and apprehended him, and that further "kicking against the goads" will harm no one but himself. Suppose, under these circumstances, that this man makes a full surrender and agrees to whatever the terms of his arrest may be. And for this surrender (which is what repentance and faith are), he is thereafter granted a totally undeserved pardon. What kind of man would go about taking credit for his own pardon, and boasting that he had shown great virtue in surrendering at gunpoint?

A person who would take the occasion to boast every time he did what he was required to do (when he could have done otherwise) is a man of exceptional arrogance. Even non-Christians generally show greater humility (and good sense) than this. It concerns me that you do not know this intuitively, and you think that you would be required to boast if you were to make the right choice without being forced by Sovereign Providence to do so.

You say that you would yourself be compelled to boast if you had made the choice on your own to surrender to Christ. This reveals that you are a stranger to the concept of humility. You seem to be saying that humility must be forced upon you by the mental conviction that, in your flesh, you were as bad as you could possibly be, and that you never made a choice except for those that were abominable to God. I see humility as a chosen attitude that only has value in cases where you might have had occasion to boast, but it never crossed your mind to do so (or, if it did, your rejected the idea).

Pride is the supreme affront to God, and men can and must humble themselves under the mighty hand of God (Ex.10:3/ 2 Chron.7:14; 34:27/ Matt.18:4; 23:12). When men humble themselves, God lifts them up (James 4:10/ 1 Pet.5:6).

[Guest]

Hi Mark,

I was going to say something about your use of scriptures being "calvinistic" etc, but did not.
There are no such scriptures in that sense, nor in an Arminian sense!

Scripture interprets scripture, so when you immediately read it as being some kind of "ism" you are not treating scripture with the respect it deserves, mainly upon its own terms.
"Isms" are merely nick names, and usually more often than not, misunderstood by those from differing presupositions.

I was merely pointing out the fact that that particular verse (1 Cor. 15:19) was not something that supported your Calvinistic assertion: ("I am destitute, totally ignorant of the fact and simply do not care, and a person I hate, offers to get me out of this mess once and for all!")

You may not believe me when I say this, but I do not approach the bible calvinistically, and often check my thinking by making sure I refrain from any such temptation.
This is probably my biggest beef with Arminians though.
All Arminians come to scripture reading Libertarian free will into everything they read! It is truly astounding Derek.

I have about as hard a time believing you as you do me brother! You must understand that to non-Calvinists, it appears that every interpretation of a passage that does not conform to reformed theology you seem find " simply amazing" or "astouding". This is "astounding" to the non-Calvinist! Especially one who is simply trying to honestly interpret each text within it's context.

No one by nature loves the truth, so no! The verse says they "did not receive" the love of the truth.

Where does the bible teach that "no one" loves the truth?

2Th 2:10 and with all deceit of unrighteousness in those who perish, because they did not receive the love of the truth, so that they might be saved.
2Th 2:11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie,
2Th 2:12 so that all those who do not believe the truth, but delight in unrighteousness, might be condemned.

Are you saying that God has sent a strong delusion to every person on the planet which He reverses or something through regeneration? Apparently He had not as of the writing of this verse, becuase it's in the future tense.

Here we have people who do not "receieve (refuse to accept) the love of the truth", do not "believe the truth" and "delight in unrighteousness". Where is the part that says this is an irreversable condition that a person is powerless to turn away from?

Am I right to suggest that you view election as a "Plan" or a "Category" or some such impersonal thing.
I get that from your comments below

I'll get to you later on this one.

God bless,

[Guest]

It concerns me that you do not know this intuitively, and you think that you would be required to boast if you were to make the right choice without being forced by Sovereign Providence to do so.

Thanks for your concern, but you seem to be missing the polemic of the situation, and indeed the context it was said in.

The point again is a simple one, and one the scripture affirms over and over Steve. If salvation was something we do, as in faith leading to "regeneration", which is explicitly what I am referring to, then boasting is a valid attribute connected with that position.

If it was "I" who being dead in sin, was able to exercise "my" free will to have faith, without the Holy Spirit enabling me to do so, then it follows that "I" would have some boast in the matter.

No matter how humble I may perceive myself to be, at the end of the day, it would be true of me to compare myself to unbelievers and proclaim that I did something that they did not do. Such would be a true statement no matter how humble I may or may not be.

You say that you would yourself be compelled to boast if you had made the choice on your own to surrender to Christ. This reveals that you are a stranger to the concept of humility.

That does not follow Steve, but again I find it interesting at least, that you would personalise this issue yet again.

You will notice in my arguments I do not do that. I speak about implications to bad theology and generalise my accusations, (except for the Open Theist here at your board to which I do not shrink away from my assertions)

But you state "you are a stranger to the concept of humility".
That is based upon what exactly?

The funny thing is Steve, whilst I constantly allow for the possible inconsistency in Arminians, you do not extend the same courtesy! This is telling.

I do hope you take these inconsistencies to heart, especially if you are dealing in counselling other Christians, which I do not know if that is a part of your ministry or not, Is it?

No, what you are not yet grasping is my premise, which states that if faith precedes regeneration, then there is certainly a claim for boasting. And such a boast, would be legitimate, even scripture backs up the notion.

The Apostle Paul when speaking of his own background, was able to boast in the flesh of his own Jewishness, and if such a thing had any credibility to the point he was making, he himself could legitimately boast about the matter. Paul was all of those things and his boast from that perspective was in fact true.

You seem to confuse a legitimate distinction between boasting in what is true, and confusing that with being humble or living a life of humility.

Even scripture tells us that if we must boast, then let us boast in one thing only, that we know Him.

I can just see someone like yourself standing there when Paul spoke of his impeccable lineage or the time he wished others would imitate him, that some would be there psychoanalyzing, him and issuing the charge that he is a stranger to the concept of humility!

Please Steve, you can do better than this, honestly.

I have often said that the man who speaks much on humility is really the man least acquainted with it. Thankfully Paul only stated the subject negatively a couple of times, but I have become weary reading the writings of other Christians who are forever harping upon the subject and pointing out the lack of humility in others.
It smacks of self aggrandizement.

Part of the problem of course, is that "self" is a major theme in Arminianism.

I mean, lets be honest here. If a man can really exercise his free will and produce faith leading to regeneration as you so erroneously advocate, then the sky is the limit, right!

Where do you think the doctrine of sinless perfectionism came from Steve? Certainly not Calvinism, but is inherent to Arminianism.
That doctrine to me smacks of the least humility in light of what the Bible really teaches about sanctification.

Steve, you may be one of the humblest guys before men, and such I will easily grant, but before God is another matter entirely.

The fact you believe and teach others that your faith led to regeneration is a blight against the Holy Spirit Steve. A sin. A rather serious misunderstanding of true humility before the God who enables sinners to repent and believe the gospel.

Mark