Hebrews 6

[makesends]

All I am saying is that God gave us enough to believe in Him, but He didn't provide us with absolute proof that He even exists. I truly believe there is a reason for that. Proving would necessarily get others, perhaps not all, to obey and follow Him while at the same time not honoring or loving Him. That certainly does not seem to be His purpose for creation.

In your scenario, God presented us with enough that WE are capable of making the saving decision, even though we are dead in our trespasses, without faith, without spiritual life, still at enmity with God, unable to please God, and able to produce valid salvific faith on our own volition. Praise be to the humans who can do this. I can't.

 

[JIM]

Thanks. So even you admit he caused it. Hello! If he caused it, then he also, by means of it, necessarily caused what it does.

If you give your child the choice of which ice cream he wants does that mean you caused him to make that choice, and then made him eat the ice cream?

 

[JIM]

In your scenario, God presented us with enough that WE are capable of making the saving decision, even though we are dead in our trespasses, without faith, without spiritual life, still at enmity with God, unable to please God, and able to produce valid salvific faith on our own volition. Praise be to the humans who can do this. I can't.

This is getting way off track. But being dead in trespasses does not mean that you have no physical abilities. Believing what you read in the bible, and believing God and believing in God is a physical ability. To believe or not believe what you read is your choice. The idea that one cannot believe without first being saved is a false doctrine. It derives from the false doctrine of total depravity.

You need to study carefully the conversation between God and Cain in Genesis 4. Cain understood perfectly what God told him. Cain chose to reject it.

 

[Mr GLee]

If you give your child the choice of which ice cream he wants does that mean you caused him to make that choice, and then made him eat the ice cream?

Giving a choice is not creating one. Thou shall surely die . They chose death

 

[makesends]

If you give your child the choice of which ice cream he wants does that mean you caused him to make that choice, and then made him eat the ice cream?

No. But I did cause that he eat it. But in the end, that is irrelevant. I am not God from whom every cause and effect and imagination logically descends causally. But maybe your example helps you understand, if you consider the fact that God knew ahead, when he began it all, every detail that would come as a result of his causing, yet went ahead and created what would result in that effect.

Even if your conception of 'free will' is right, I think you would have to agree that God gave it to you, and thus, if so, it is caused, and, as a result, logically, whatever that 'free will' does, is caused. What I am insisting on, in the end reduces to that.

 

[makesends]

This is getting way off track. But being dead in trespasses does not mean that you have no physical abilities. Believing what you read in the bible, and believing God and believing in God is a physical ability. To believe or not believe what you read is your choice. The idea that one cannot believe without first being saved is a false doctrine. It derives from the false doctrine of total depravity.

You need to study carefully the conversation between God and Cain in Genesis 4. Cain understood perfectly what God told him. Cain chose to reject it.

Not that you don't know this, but believing as the demons do, (who probably well understand even the details better than we do), is a long way from having salvific faith. Don't conflate the two sorts of 'belief'.

I suppose you mean that if Cain understood what God was telling him that Cain's ability to understand was complete and capable of producing faith, but that he chose against it. That doesn't defeat the doctrine of 'Total Depravity'. It demonstrates it. Cain would always go with rejection, because he at heart was an enmity with God.

The doctrine of 'Total Depravity' deals only with the latter --salvific faith. Romans 8 says that the mind according to the flesh will not submit to God's law nor indeed CAN it do so, and that it is unable to please God. The mind MUST be according to the Spirit, in order even to not be at enmity with God. The logical math there is simple. There is also further reason from that context and from the many other similar passages throughout scripture that God himself is the source of salvific faith. It is not on the human strength of will and integrity and factual understanding of what is at stake that salvation by faith depends --it is on the divine strength and integrity and knowledge of the very Spirit of God that we have faith. We believe salvifically by the will of God, not by our will.

And no, I do not argue that we have no will in the matter. Indeed we do choose, but that choice is necessarily a result of that change made within us by the Spirit of God, and not by the will of man. Further, logically, that changed will's choice logically does not cause our salvation, but the faith that changed our will is causal in our salvation.

 

[Eleanor]

No it doesn't. If God really wanted to prove His existence, He could have done that. He didn't. His creation, its very existence, gives very, very strong indication that there was a creator-God. But it is not proof. As I said, faith is key. Jesus words to Thomas well illustrates this: "Have you believed because you have seen me? Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed."

Do you even know, or better yet, believe the Scriptures?

The justice of God holds "without excuse" (Ro 1:19-20) those who do not believe in God because God has amply demonstrated not only his existence, but also his invisible qualities--eternal power and divine nature (Ro 1:20).
Jesus does not contradict that.

Is there a denomination that holds your beliefs?

 

[JIM]

No. But I did cause that he eat it. But in the end, that is irrelevant. I am not God from whom every cause and effect and imagination logically descends causally. But maybe your example helps you understand, if you consider the fact that God knew ahead, when he began it all, every detail that would come as a result of his causing, yet went ahead and created what would result in that effect.

Even if your conception of 'free will' is right, I think you would have to agree that God gave it to you, and thus, if so, it is caused, and, as a result, logically, whatever that 'free will' does, is caused. What I am insisting on, in the end reduces to that.

That is illogical thinking. No matter how you try to frame it, God does not cause anyone to sin.

Jas_1:13 Let no one say when he is tempted, "I am being tempted by God," for God cannot be tempted with evil, and he himself tempts no one.

 

[JIM]

There is also further reason from that context and from the many other similar passages throughout scripture that God himself is the source of salvific faith.

Only in the sense that He has provided His special revelation, His written word. It is up to each to hear Him and believe in Him.

 

[JIM]

Do you even know, or better yet, believe the Scriptures?

Probaby as well or perhaps even better than you.

The justice of God holds "without excuse" (Ro 1:19-20) those who do not believe in God because God has amply demonstrated his existence.
Jesus does not contradict that.

There are many who believe that God exists but do not really believe in God. It is in believing in God saves.

Is there a denomination that holds your beliefs?

I am basically non-denominational. But I think most non-Calvinist denominations come closer to believing as I do than as Calvinists do.

 

[Eleanor]

Probaby as well or perhaps even better than you.

The evidence does not bear that out.

The justice of God holds "without excuse" (Ro 1:19-20) those who do not believe in God because God has amply demonstrated not only his existence, but also his invisible qualities--eternal power and divine nature (Ro 1:20).

There are many who believe that God exists but do not really believe in God. It is in believing in God saves.

For clarity's sake, you must distinguish between believing that God exists, and personal faith/trust in God.
I suggest "believing in the existence of God" and "faith/trust in God."

I am basically non-denominational. But I think most non-Calvinist denominations come closer to believing as I do than as Calvinists do.

Thanks. . .

 

[JIM]

The evidence does not bear that out.

Now I have to say that is funny, really funny, even hilarious. Thanks for the laugh.

 

[Eleanor]

Now I have to say that is funny, really funny, even hilarious. Thanks for the laugh.

Falls somewhat short of a Biblical demonstration of your assertion, without which your assertion has no Biblical merit.

Here's the Biblical demonstration of my assertion.

No it doesn't. If God really wanted to prove His existence, He could have done that. He didn't. His creation, its very existence, gives very, very strong indication that there was a creator-God. But it is not proof. As I said, faith is key. Jesus words to Thomas well illustrates this: "Have you believed because you have seen me? Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed."
Do you even know, or better yet, believe the Scriptures?

The evidence which does not bear that out:

The justice of God holds "without excuse" (Ro 1:19-20) those who do not believe in God because God has amply demonstrated not only his existence, but also his invisible qualities--eternal power and divine nature (Ro 1:20).

 

[Eleanor]

duplicate

 

[JIM]

Falls somewhat short of a Biblical demonstration of your assertion, without which your assertion has no Biblical merit.

With all due respect, that is nothing more than your own personal opinion.

Your own personal opinion that the features (1) those who have once been enlightened, (2) who have tasted the heavenly gift, and (3) have shared in the Holy Spirit, and (4) have tasted the goodness of the word of God and (5) have the powers of the age to come, don't describe one who has been saved is evidence that you really haven't a clue of what salvation is all about. Talk about no biblical merit!!

 

[JIM]

The only people who it is not proof to would be the unregenerate who naturally don't believe the evidence or the witnesses.

The fact that we accept something in faith does not mean we do so blindly or without reason.

I didn't say anything about accepting the bible blindly or without reason. Of course there is reason to believe the Bible and what it says about God, about Jesus Christ, or about the gospel. But that is not proof. If there were proof, then there would be no reason for faith. If you don't understand that, then you do not understand even what faith is.

 

[Arial]

I didn't say anything about accepting the bible blindly or without reason. Of course there is reason to believe the Bible and what it says about God, about Jesus Christ, or about the gospel. But that is not proof. If there were proof, then there would be no reason for faith. If you don't understand that, then you do not understand even what faith is.

If you read my post I said nothing about you. I was talking about faith, and that it is neither blind nor unreasonable.

 

[JIM]

Moving the goalposts.

(At the risk of running off topic: The devil has faith? He believes God exists. There are many people who consider mere existence proof that God exists. I am one of them, but they are not all saved. There are accomplished scientists who think that there has to be a reason for existence; and seeing as how they themselves apparently exist, something caused that they exist. To me, it makes more sense that God should exist than that I should, but here I am, so obviously God does. That's proof enough, quite apart from faith.)

I can prove something relative to where this discussion has run. Science, philosophy, theology, rational thinking and logic all operate on the prevailing nature of causation. 1) We know of nothing except first cause that is not an effect, most effects of which themselves are become also causes of further effects. This is universally axiomatic. You cannot disprove it. It is proof enough that whatever comes this far down the lines of causation are caused. 2) The antithesis is that some things spring into being by themselves, that are not only self-existent (as God is) but self-caused which God is not. He is not caused at all. He IS. WE are not IS. Uncaused choice is self-contradictory nonsense.

I think there are more than a few who are studying the mind and the consciousness of the human being who would disagree with you.

 

[JIM]

No. But I did cause that he eat it. But in the end, that is irrelevant. I am not God from whom every cause and effect and imagination logically descends causally. But maybe your example helps you understand, if you consider the fact that God knew ahead, when he began it all, every detail that would come as a result of his causing, yet went ahead and created what would result in that effect.

And that is at the heart of the false Open Theology.

Even if your conception of 'free will' is right, I think you would have to agree that God gave it to you, and thus, if so, it is caused, and, as a result, logically, whatever that 'free will' does, is caused. What I am insisting on, in the end reduces to that.

No, I would not have to agree with that and I don't. That is the old faulty doctrine of determinism.

 

[Eleanor]

With all due respect, that is nothing more than your own personal opinion.

Your own personal opinion that the features (1) those who have once been enlightened, (2) who have tasted the heavenly gift, and (3) have shared in the Holy Spirit, and (4) have tasted the goodness of the word of God and (5) have the powers of the age to come, don't describe one who has been saved is evidence that you really haven't a clue of what salvation is all about. Talk about no biblical merit!!

Unless it means that you do not grasp the difference between "tasting" (Nu 13:23-25, Lk 8:13) and "eating" (Lk 8d, :15), as the Israelites tasted the fruit of the land, but refused to enter it and eat it (Nu 13-14).