• **Notifications**: Notifications can be dismissed by clicking on the "x" on the righthand side of the notice.
  • **New Style**: You can now change style options. Click on the paintbrush at the bottom of this page.
  • **Donations**: If the Lord leads you please consider helping with monthly costs and up keep on our Forum. Click on the Donate link In the top menu bar. Thanks
  • **New Blog section**: There is now a blog section. Check it out near the Private Debates forum or click on the Blog link in the top menu bar.
  • Welcome Visitors! Join us and be blessed while fellowshipping and celebrating our Glorious Salvation In Christ Jesus.

Jesus teaches that regeneration precedes faith

Carbon

Admin
Joined
May 19, 2023
Messages
5,211
Reaction score
4,038
Points
113
Location
New England
Faith
Reformed
Country
USA
Marital status
Married
Politics
Conservative
63 It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.
65 And he said, Therefore said I unto you, that no man can come unto me, except it were given unto him of my Father.
John 6:63, 65

"All the Father gives me will come to me..." - John 6:37

The words "grant" (v 65) and "give" (v 37) are the same Greek word.


Jesus is teaching, NO ONE can come to faith in him unless the Father grants it, and ALL whom He grants will come ... and that by the regenerating work of the Holy Spirit. This very plain talk spoken in the context of a discussion on faith, leaves no room whatsoever for a synergistic, prevenient grace.
 
Last edited:
I don't find the John 6:37 verse particularly useful because it specifies giving of the person to Christ, not the giving of the Spirit or regeneration. The latter can be inferred, but the clarity of verse 63 is undeniable. The flesh profits nothing and since the unregenerate has only flesh no choise or trust made in that (still sinful and unregenerate) flesh can profit anything. It cannot profit the unregenerate salvation. It cannot profit him/her a change in his/her relationship with God. It cannot profit him God doing anything different. It cannot profit him any change on God's part.

It profits nothing.


So..... while they argue over whether or not "all" means all, or "world" means world, their same demand must force them to accept the flesh profits NOTHING. The word "nothing" means nothing.
 
It doesn't say anything about who God is giving to Jesus, or why.

In other words, there's nothing here to show whether God is(n't) using some criteria to choose. Conditionaliting isn't disproven.
 
Conditionaliting isn't disproven.
lol. :D

Great observation. It can be answered in many ways.

One example would be the precedent of the apostles. Not a single one of the twelve asked to be given to Jesus. Every single one of the was chosen by God and given to Christ without their even knowing either was happening. They were commanded, not asked, to follow Jesus and none of them (with the possible exception of Peter) was told why or for what purpose.

If we stick to the John 6 text, though, we see that Jesus' audience appealed to their "fathers" who ate manna as the basis for their coming to Jesus but Jesus told them it wasn't Moses, but God who gave the life-giving bread in the desert and again in the NT era. They asked Jesus for that "bread" and were rebuffed! It's a strange reply. "You have seen me but you do not believe." Clearly they did believe him. They'd been out looking for him and were surprised to find in the boat at sea's edge. The wanted the bread (both baked and imparted). They'd been seeking him and they begged him for the bread from above and Jesus said, "everyone who beholds the Son and believes in Him will have eternal life," but there they were on the sea's edge and none - despite their faith in God's anointed one and their desire for God's life-giging bread from above - their end was grumbling and arguing, "How can this man give us his flesh to eat?"

Does it sound like they had any Spirit-informed and illuminated understanding?

Even the twelve were puzzled, and when they asked him about what appeared to them to teach cannibalism, Jesus told them,

"Does this cause you to stumble? What then if you see the Son of Man ascending to where He was before? It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh profits nothing; the words that I have spoken to you are spirit and are life. But there are some of you who do not believe. For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were who did not believe, and who it was that would betray Him. and He was saying, “For this reason I have said to you, that no one can come to Me unless it has been granted him from the Father."

Which brings us back to the simple fact not a single one of the twelve believed in Jesus when they were called. They all eventually abandoned him. Even when commended, "Follow me," and they got up and followed him (presumably as some act or degree of obedience their flesh profited them nothing. Nothing can be attributed to their flesh.
 
Every single one of the was chosen by God and given to Christ without their even knowing either was happening. They were commanded, not asked, to follow Jesus and none of them (with the possible exception of Peter) was told why or for what purpose.
Do we really know that, though? You're arguing that because the Bible doesn't tell us about it, it didn't happen. That isn't necessarily true. The Bible tells us that not everything was recorded there.
 
Every single one of the was chosen by God and given to Christ without their even knowing either was happening.
They were chosen for service, not for salvation. There is no connection between the two. In the case of the twelve, Judas is the perfect demonstration of that, as is the choosing of Israel. Just as Romans 9 reveals in somewhat more detail, God can do what He wants with the clay. And that having nothing whatsoever to do with salvation of any single person.
 
Do we really know that, though? You're arguing that because the Bible doesn't tell us about it, it didn't happen. That isn't necessarily true. The Bible tells us that not everything was recorded there.
Welll....

I generally try to adhere to the concept "Where scripture is silent then we should be silent, too," but that does not preclude exegetical inference. There is, also, the argument from silence (argumentum ex silentio), a fallacy that is always to be avoided. We want to abstain from reasoning from what is not said. The Bible tells us everything wasn't recorded for a reason, and I doubt that reason was so we'd have license to take liberties with the text. God inspired and empowered the writers to write what they wrote because that content is what He wanted to remain. It can logically be inferred that which He did not see recorded He did not want recorded and He had His reasons for what was and was not recorded.

But...

What is written in scripture is "necessarily true." Take, for example, the calling of Peter and his brother Andrew. Matthew, which was possibly the first gospel written (I dispute Mark being first) has Jesus walking up to the sea of Galilee and commanding Peter and Andrew to follow him.

Matthew 4:18-22
Now as Jesus was walking by the Sea of Galilee, He saw two brothers, Simon who was called Peter, and Andrew his brother, casting a net into the sea; for they were fishermen. And He *said to them, "Follow Me, and I will make you fishers of men." Immediately they left their nets and followed Him. Going on from there He saw two other brothers, James the son of Zebedee, and John his brother, in the boat with Zebedee their father, mending their nets; and He called them. Immediately they left the boat and their father, and followed Him.

John tells us that Andrew, at least, had already met Jesus.

John 1:35-42
Again, the next day John was standing with two of his disciples, and he looked at Jesus as He walked, and *said, "Behold, the Lamb of God!" The two disciples heard him speak, and they followed Jesus. And Jesus turned and saw them following, and *said to them, "What do you seek?" They said to Him, "Rabbi (which translated means Teacher), where are You staying?" He said to them, "Come, and you will see." So they came and saw where He was staying; and they stayed with Him that day, for it was about the tenth hour. One of the two who heard John speak and followed Him, was Andrew, Simon Peter's brother. He found first his own brother Simon and said to him, "We have found the Messiah" (which translated means Christ). He brought him to Jesus. Jesus looked at him and said, "You are Simon the son of John; you shall be called Cephas" (which is translated Peter).

Andrew then brought Peter to meet Jesus, so the episode at the Sea of Galilee was not their first meeting. Keep in mind Matthew was not there and neither Peter nor Andrew wrote gospels; neither of those two recorded the episode. John was, though. Luke's gospel contains the following - a report gathered through interviews long after the event had occurred.

Luke 5:1-11
Now it happened that while the crowd was pressing around Him and listening to the word of God, He was standing by the lake of Gennesaret; and He saw two boats lying at the edge of the lake; but the fishermen had gotten out of them and were washing their nets. And He got into one of the boats, which was Simon's, and asked him to put out a little way from the land. And He sat down and began teaching the people from the boat. When He had finished speaking, He said to Simon, "Put out into the deep water and let down your nets for a catch." Simon answered and said, "Master, we worked hard all night and caught nothing, but I will do as You say and let down the nets." When they had done this, they enclosed a great quantity of fish, and their nets began to break; so they signaled to their partners in the other boat for them to come and help them. And they came and filled both of the boats, so that they began to sink. But when Simon Peter saw that, he fell down at Jesus' feet, saying, "Go away from me Lord, for I am a sinful man!" For amazement had seized him and all his companions because of the catch of fish which they had taken; and so also were James and John, sons of Zebedee, who were partners with Simon. And Jesus said to Simon, "Do not fear, from now on you will be catching men." When they had brought their boats to land, they left everything and followed Him.

Matthew makes the meeting at the Sea of Galilee read as a deliberate act by Jesus but Luke records it as a happenstance; the crowds forced Jesus into the boats. John was there. John's witness, his testimony, is an eye-witness.

I'm going to depart from the text for a moment and ask you to put yourself in Peter's sandals that day. If you've ever been fishing then you know the heat of the day on your skin, the smell of the sand and dirt and water, the smell of fish both dead and alive. Fishing with a net is much different than fishing with a pole. The former brings in many fish at once with their bodies writhing in fear and desperation as they are dragged out of the water where they can swim and breath. Anyone who has ever scaled a fish know scales go everywhere, and even though they hadn't caught anything the smell of the boats' daily ventures permeated everything within the range of their nostrils.

Hot, sweaty, and smelling like fish.


(to be continued...)
.
 
Part 2:


Tired and frustrated from having fished and caught nothing. That's frustrating enough when fishing for sport - much more so when one's livelihood depends on the catch.

So imagine what it was like for Peter to watch Jesus command fish into the nets and so many fish where previously there had been none that the nets began to tear. Peter certainly wanted fish. He and his fellow fishermen got more than they asked for, so much more they could not physically handle it and so much more psychologically it was overwhelming. No record of him asking. We have Peter standing in the boat (something all fishermen know NOT to do, take a momentary "time out" to survey what is happening before his very eyes and his response has NOTHING to do with the number oof fish.

Please depart, Lord. I am sinful.

Does anyone like the knowledge of their own sinfulness?

Can we manipulate the elements of creation to bring such knowledge to another in so profound a manner that they wish us to leave? Keep in mind the fish weren't asked if they wanted to be summoned, caught, or die for the sake of four men's eventual conversion to Christ ;).


Arguments from silence say, "Because the scripture is silent then X might be true" (even though many leave out the word, "might," and insert "is." The accounts of Peter's conversion there is plenty. It's not silence; it's a wealth of information. This is important because any appeal to silence that ignores what IS stated is something much worse than a mere logical fallacy. It is a denial of scripture. Scripture gives us what God wanted us to have and what God wanted us to have is a written record of what Jesus did and not what went on in the mind, emotions, and will of Peter. While I have asked the setting be imagined beyond what is stated, I could easily have left that out and pointed to the plain, simple, blunt and undeniable fact scripture speaks to what Jesus did and is silent to what Peter did or did not do.

There is a reason for that.

Yes, we could imagine or hypothesize what went on inside Peter's mind, but anything we imagined or hypothesized would be extra-scriptural. Anything we might imagine or hypothesize contrary to what is written MUST be avoided.


Jesus commanded those men. He did not ask a single one of them if they wanted to come, and on at least one occasion the episode appears so psychologically coercive we could rightly wonder whether the matter was fair at all. As a Jew, the existential moment standing on the boat in blunt awareness of his sin is intolerable. He must ask Jesus to leave because he's got to get out of the boat and go see a priest with an animal sacrifice in hand.

Or not.

Which brings me to another, larger, more global point that is very op-relevant: God, and God alone, is the initiator of all His covenants. God did not ask Noah if Noah wanted to be part of God's covenant. Noah was not asked if it was okay for God to kill everyone (but eight people). Noah was not asked if he wanted to be called. Noah was not asked if he wanted to be chosen. Noah was not asked if he wanted to be commanded, or whether he wanted to build a boat and put his family at risk while a flood turned the earth into a kill zone. Noah was chosen, then called, and then commanded and he was not given a choice until after that had happened. The same is true of Abram. The same is true of Isaac, Jacob, Moses, and Israel.

Go study these first meetings and verify what I just wrote. All the opportunities to choose come ONLY after God has already acted. God, and God alone is the initiator in ALL of His covenants. In the covenant with Abram/Abraham, the vision of the fiery furnace amidst the divided carcasses is a covenant between God and God. God is the sovereign for whom the animals were sacrificed, and the fiery furnace is imagery symbolizing God. All Abraham had to do was remove his foreskin 😵, and that came long after his covenant vision. The same proves true of the "Choose today life or death," asked of Israel. Their enslavement, liberation, deadly wandering in the wilderness, the gift of the promised land and their entrance therein had ALL been decided before they had any knowledge of it, much less before any of them were asked to choose. Most of it was decided before any of them were born.

One last point. Synergisms teach God saves if and when a still sinfully dead and enslaved, unregenerate person makes a choice in their flesh, and the synergisms holding that belief do so because the events where sinners choose God are assumed to occur prior to regeneration even though the scripture never say any such thing (an argument from silence). What they do not also ever say is, "I choose now to be regenerated." Plenty of occasions where "I choose to believe in Jesus," most of them occurring without the person having any idea who or what is Jesus. None of them are anywhere reported to say they are choosing regeneration.

So.....
  • All the covenants with God are God initiated, and never a covenant initiated by the sinner or by both God and sinner.
  • Scripture tells us the covenant in and through Christ is wholly monergistic in origin.
  • Jesus commanded his disciples to follow him and scripture is silent about the twelve's thoughts, emotions, and volition (because Jesus is the emphasis and not the twelve).
  • Only after inclusion in the covenant is established are any choices provided and even then obedience is expected.
  • Despite constant disobedience the covenant is maintained by the Sovereign who initiated and not the one chosen, called, and commanded.
  • The flesh profits nothing.

Ask why it is necessary to infer things that aren't written and whether or not any of those inferences conflict with what is plainly stated.
Do we really know that, though?
We know a great deal, and the reason we know what we know is because it is plainly stated AND plainly stated for the purpose of being known and believed.

We get into trouble when we infer things not stated.

Jesus said the flesh profits nothing. He was speaking to an unregenerate audience who had only the flesh. That is what we know because that is what the text tells us. Apart from him we can do nothing. Even Arminius understood that.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
They were chosen for service, not for salvation.
That is factually incorrect. At least eleven of the twelve were saved and while the twelfth's eternal disposition is unknown, his "service and destiny were decided before he was even born.
There is no connection between the two.
Again, that is factually incorrect. Their service was inherently tied to their salvation AND their service existed for the purpose of making known the gospel so that all who would believe (like you and me) would be saved. Even the Old Testament servants are said to be made perfect in us (Hebrews 11:30). There is a direct connection between their service and their salvation.
In the case of the twelve, Judas is the perfect demonstration of that, as is the choosing of Israel.
Only if it is assumed Judas did not find salvation.

There's also a conflict between a comparison between Judas and "Israel," because not all Israel is Israel but all Israel will be saved. The Israel that is Israel will be saved, the Israel that is not Israel will not be saved. Conflating the Israel that is Israel with the Israel that is not Israel is both unscriptural and illogical. So to is conflating Judas with the Israel that is Israel who will be saved.

There is also a conflict conflating service. Comparing service for the purpose of salvation and service for the purpose of destruction is not only a false equivalence, but also self-contradictory. Babylon and Assyria were servants of God. They did not know they were servants, but their knowledge is immaterial. Their existence served God and only God's purpose, and it served God's purpose to destroy generations of disobedience (while preserving a remnant of Israel that was Israel).

So, there are three errors in this post.
Just as Romans 9 reveals in somewhat more detail, God can do what He wants with the clay.
Yep, and the record of scripture is that He does not ask the clay what they want before He forms it and He forms the clay for His purposes regardless of any real or hypothesized protests by the clay.
And that having nothing whatsoever to do with salvation of any single person.
That is incorrect.

What you are suggesting will boil down to one of two options: God put His plan and purpose for creation in the hands of the sinfully dead and enslaved flesh that can profit nothing and thereby made Himself dependent on sin, or it all boils down to coincidence and, again, God is dependent upon the happenstance of sinful flesh that profits nothing for His plan and purpose to succeed.


I will concede one point, if this point is what you might have in mind: Calvary serves two purposes, not one. The very same cross that brings salvation also brings destruction and it does so solely by God's design. The very same Jesus who hung on the cross sacrificially is the very same Jesus, the very same Lord and Savior who will wrathfully judge those denying Calvary. It is all tied to salvation from sin, some for the extending of grace and some for the meting out of just recompense.

Another salient point that is probably already known but may not have been considered in the context of this op, is that salvation is God's not ours. We're the one's getting saved but both we and the salvation asserted by grace are His and no one else's. We do not own our own salvation. Salvation does not serve us, and we do not serve our salvation.




Lastly, I won't respond to content digressing from the op. This op is about the premise the flesh profits nothing and the Spirit and only the Spirit quickening or giving life. It's a simple juxtaposition: the Spirit giving life and the flesh profiting nothing. Any concerns outside of the John 6 text most bear on that single, simple juxtaposition. If they do not then take it up with other posters because I will not participate in hijacking someone else's op. My posts above cover a wide range of scripture, but I brought it all back to the flesh profiting nothing and God as the sole causal agent.
 
Premise 1: God is not influenced by what we do, be it righteous or unrighteous.
  • Job 35:7 If you are righteous, what do you give God, Or what does He receive from your hand? 8 “Your wickedness affects only a man such as you, And your righteousness affects only a son of man [but it cannot affect God, who is sovereign].
  • 1 Corinthians 4:7 "Who maketh thee to differ from another? And what hast thou that thou didst not receive? Now if thou didst receive it, why dost thou glory, as if thou hadst not received it?".
Conclusion: God's causes regeneration which causes of faith in men
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Premise 1: God will determines who is born again John 1:12-13
Premise 2: Man's will does not determine his salvation John 1:12-13
Conclusion: God's causes regeneration which causes of faith in men
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Premise 1: Those who die before age of accountability are regenerated (go to heaven)
Premise 2: Those who die before age of accountability have no will to do anything; God must determine eternal destiny by default
Conclusion: God's causes regeneration which causes of faith in a vast majority of men
Side bar: 95% of those in heaven never heard of Christ (assumes death rates, abortions, % adults saved, etc.)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Premise 1: God eternally knows all things (thus who will be saved)
Premise 2: God cannot gather knowledge from nothing (from nothing nothing comes)
Premise 3: Man was nothing at one time (and before time started) (Aside: hmmm, can something "start" if there is no time?)
Conclusion: God's causes regeneration which causes of faith in men
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Biblical premises:
  • Romans 9:18 So then, He has mercy on whom He wills (chooses), and He hardens [the heart of] whom He wills.
  • Romans 12:3b as God has apportioned to each a degree of faith [and a purpose designed for service]. Note: It is God doing the apportioning
  • 1 Corinthians 2:5 So that your faith might not rest in the wisdom of men (human philosophy), but in the power of God. The power of God is the means by which faith has been generated. Verse 4 being repeated in 1 Thessalonians 1:5 for our good news [regarding salvation] came to you not only in word, but also in [its inherent] power and in the Holy Spirit and with great conviction [on our part].
  • Ephesians 1:3 Blessed and worthy of praise be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly realms in Christ, whereof surely faith is not the least.
  • Eph. 2:8-9
  • Yahda, yahda, yahda (trying to keep it short)
Conclusion: God's causes regeneration which causes of faith in men

* I could go on and on and on *
 
That is factually incorrect. At least eleven of the twelve were saved and while the twelfth's eternal disposition is unknown, his "service and destiny were decided before he was even born.
You are free to believe what you will, but I think Jesus said otherwise:.

In His prayer, Jesus said to God, the Father, "While I was with them, I kept them in your name, which you have given me. I have guarded them, and not one of them has been lost except the son of destruction, that the Scripture might be fulfilled" (John 17:12).
 
63 It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.
65 And he said, Therefore said I unto you, that no man can come unto me, except it were given unto him of my Father.
John 6:63, 65

"All the Father gives me will come to me..." - John 6:37
Yep!! It's called "Conviction of SIN and of Judgement" (John 16:8), and since it's God's WORD to you, it's the foundation of Biblical FAITH (Rom 10:17). However it's the RESPONCE of the individual that determines whether being Born Again of the Holy Spirit occurs or not.
 
You are free to believe what you will,
non sequitur

Everyone is free to believe what they want, including you and me. It is a given that never requires mention.
....but I think Jesus said otherwise:.

In His prayer, Jesus said to God, the Father, "While I was with them, I kept them in your name, which you have given me. I have guarded them, and not one of them has been lost except the son of destruction, that the Scripture might be fulfilled" (John 17:12).
The points I made were just proven, not refuted. Those given to Christ were kept (except the son of destruction). Their being called and chosen is intrinsically tied to their salvation, and one chosen for destruction is still inextricably tied to Calvary. The matter has been decided long before any of them were born (it had been prophesied). Jesus did NOT say other than what I posted. John 17:12 does not contradict John 6:34-36. The flesh profits nothing.

Perhaps you'd care to explain how John 17:12 disproves the plain reading of John 6:63-67 - or better clarify how the John 17 text is relevant to the point made in this opening post.
 
It doesn't say anything about who God is giving to Jesus, or why.

In other words, there's nothing here to show whether God is(n't) using some criteria to choose.
Of course God uses some criteria.
Conditionaliting isn't disproven.
Whatever conditions may exist cannot be of the sinful flesh. The text precludes any and all such inferences when it states the flesh profits nothing. Any and all relevant causality must be attributed to the Spirit because the flesh profits nothing ("nothing" would include all causality) and the Spirit (to the exclusion of the flesh) is necessary for life.
 
Yep!! It's called "Conviction of SIN and of Judgement" (John 16:8), and since it's God's WORD to you, it's the foundation of Biblical FAITH (Rom 10:17). However it's the RESPONCE of the individual that determines whether being Born Again of the Holy Spirit occurs or not.
Please show us, from the Bible, which aspect of a sinner's unregenerate, fleshly nature is willing to turn from sin to God and trust in the Lord Jesus Christ, thanks.

To help you, here is a list of the outworkings of the flesh.

Gal. 5:19-21 (EMTV)
19 Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are: adultery, sexual immorality, uncleanness, lewdness,
20 idolatry, sorcery, hatred, contentions, jealousies, outbursts of wrath, selfish ambitions, dissensions, factions,
21 envies, murders, drinking bouts, revelries, and the like; which I tell you beforehand, just as I also told you in time past, that those who practice such things will not inherit the kingdom of God.

And here is another.

Rom. 3:10-18 (EMTV)
10 Just as it is written: "There is none righteous, no not one.
11 There is none who understands; there is none who seeks God.
12 All have turned aside; together they became unprofitable; there is not one doing kindness, there is not so much as one.
13 Their throat is an opened grave; with their tongues they deceived; the poison of asps is under their lips;
14 Whose mouth is full of cursing and bitterness.
15 Their feet are swift to shed blood;
16 Ruin and misery are in their ways;
17 and the way of peace they did not know.
18 There is no fear of God before their eyes."
 
Please show us, from the Bible, which aspect of a sinner's unregenerate, fleshly nature is willing to turn from sin to God and trust in the Lord Jesus Christ, thanks.
No problem - "self Preservation" is a major "Fleshly nature" issue!!! When the Holy Spirit Convicts of SIN and of JUDGEMENT (John 16:8) - then you KNOW, beyond the shadow of a doubt, that Turning from your SIN, and surrendering to God is an IMPORTANT move. "Conviction of SIN" is God's WORD to YOU (Rom 10:17), and is the foundation of FAITH (trusting His WORD).
 
Of course God uses some criteria.

Whatever conditions may exist cannot be of the sinful flesh. The text precludes any and all such inferences when it states the flesh profits nothing. Any and all relevant causality must be attributed to the Spirit because the flesh profits nothing ("nothing" would include all causality) and the Spirit (to the exclusion of the flesh) is necessary for life.
It would probably be more profitable for me to give my own view, rather than just picking at yours. 😅 Cards on the table...

I think that the condition that God uses for salvation is this - Is the person a part of Israel? Biblically, salvation is "of the Jews" and "all Israel shall be saved."

As it touches pre-destination, I would say that God has sovereignly pre-destined all Israel to be saved. Every descendant of the chosen people is included under their ancestor, Abraham.

However, there is some wiggle-room in my view for free-will. Membership in the pre-destined group - Israel - is somewhat fluid. That is, the natural branches can be broken off of that tree, and wild branches can be grafted in.

It isn't altogether clear to me that this doesn't happen as an act of the will of those who force their way into the group through their belief. The kingdom of heaven is obtained by violence by those who by nature would start OUTSIDE the kingdom, and force their way in...

Matthew 11:12: And from the days of John the Baptist until now the kingdom of heaven suffereth violence, and the violent take it by force.

-Jarrod
 
No problem - "self Preservation" is a major "Fleshly nature" issue!!! When the Holy Spirit Convicts of SIN and of JUDGEMENT (John 16:8) - then you KNOW, beyond the shadow of a doubt, that Turning from your SIN, and surrendering to God is an IMPORTANT move. "Conviction of SIN" is God's WORD to YOU (Rom 10:17), and is the foundation of FAITH (trusting His WORD).
Fleshly, selfish self-preservation does not produce godly repentance and faith in Jesus Christ that works by love!

Question: So, Bob, what was it that saved you?

Bob: It was my selfish response to the gospel! Didn't you know that salvation is by grace through selfish self-preservation, and that of my flesh, so that I can boast?

Try again, Bob, your response is not Christian...

You also did answer my question since "self-preservation" is not one of the attributes of the flesh that the Bible lists (unless you want to put it under "selfish ambition" - the ambition to be saved)
 
Fleshly, selfish self-preservation does not produce godly repentance and faith in Jesus Christ that works by love!
But the FEAR of God does the job nicely. When God lets you know UP FRONT AND PERSONAL, what your true status before Him is, it gets your attention, don'cha know!!!
Question: So, Bob, what was it that saved you?
Calling upon God IN FAITH that He gave (His WORD TO ME) (Eph 2:8,9). What "saved you" (assuming that you've been Born Again of the Holy Spirit)??
 
Back
Top