How the Gospel Works

[Right Divider]

The heart of the sinner must be changed before he can believe . . .and only God can change hearts and grant the necessary repentance unto salvation.

I can't help but go back to what you've always said about God deciding, on an individual basis, who these people are from before the creation. So is it all just a charade?

 

[Nang]

One last thing, Nang.

Given all of the above, would you agree that one of us is preaching a very wrong gospel?

Despite my opposition to dispensationalism, I do admire the MAD views of God's grace (versus works).

That part is fine, but it is my opinion that your message has been robbed of pertaining to all the scriptures. As I read the O.T. I look and search for Gospel truths that speak of the promise of God's promised Saviour, and it is amazing how He is revealed throughout!

I fear you lose out on much by limiting your gospel to just a very small portion of the Word, and you have resorted to even mechanizing it, by confining it through repetition of just a few verses. There are so many riches to be found in the Gospel/Covenant promises of God, that you prevent others from discovering.

So with me, it is less with calling your message false, as it is my lamenting over how shallow it is, and how much truth that is missing from it. To me it is a strange message, because it is incomplete.

But then, my life's motto is: Matthew 4:4

 

[musterion]

Agreed. I would not interpret Christ's atoning work on the cross as universal, but perhaps applied temporally in some instances.

So you do believe the L.

But there are depths to the cross work of Jesus Christ and other doctrines that must be remembered; such as Justification. Do you believe all souls were justified (forgiven) by Jesus on the cross? Was all death eliminated through His death? Was the power of Satan totally removed from this earth? etc, etc

Paul says the Cross made it possible for any and all who believe the Gospel to be saved, without exception. Calvinism denies this. You are denying it.

The heart of the sinner must be changed before he can believe . . .and only God can change hearts and grant the necessary repentance unto salvation.

Then RD's question still stands unanswered: HOW can a God who cannot lie damn for unbelief those He predestined to be unbelievers?

 

[musterion]

Despite my opposition to dispensationalism, I do admire the MAD views of God's grace (versus works).

That part is fine, but it is my opinion that your message has been robbed of pertaining to all the scriptures. As I read the O.T. I look and search for Gospel truths that speak of the promise of God's promised Saviour, and it is amazing how He is revealed throughout!

I fear you lose out on much by limiting your gospel to just a very small portion of the Word, and you have resorted to even mechanizing it, by confining it through repetition of just a few verses. There are so many riches to be found in the Gospel/Covenant promises of God, that you prevent others from discovering.

So with me, it is less with calling your message false, as it is my lamenting over how shallow it is, and how much truth that is missing from it. To me it is a strange message, because it is incomplete.

But then, my life's motto is: Matthew 4:4

No, sorry, that won't do. Be blunt, because as you correctly said we have only two options here:

1. We are overapplying the Gospel to those God never intended to save. That means we are wrong.

2. You are underapplying the Gospel (in theory if not in practice) by saying only an elect can be saved when God says ALL can be saved. That means you're wrong.

One of those is dead false, and a false gospel. One of them misrepresents the work of Christ and makes God a liar.

(option 3 is flat out universal salvation, which is a nice notion but we both reject as false)

 

[Nang]

So you don't believe in predestination?

I believe in what is called "double predestination." That is, God has decreed and ordered all things.

I've seen you post that God only gives "the elect", as individuals, the faith to believe. The Bible says that faith is required to receive eternal life. So, according to you, God withholds "faith" from those that are condemned to hell and then condemns them to hell for their unbelief.

The answer is found in Adam. Romans 5:12 All humanity has inherited his corrupted human nature. All men are sinners. Romand 3:10-19

God withholds faith and repentance from those who are imputed with sin; which is all the offspring of Adam. Even the Elect were born into this world as children of wrath and dead in sins and trespasses. Ephesians 2:1-5

It is purely by the grace of God that any are saved.

I've seen you post that God chose who will be saved and who will be lost, as individuals, before the world began. Is this not your story anymore?

It is not my "story." It is Paul's teaching to the church at Ephesus. It is the subject of his epistle to that church. It is Holy Scripture. Especially read Ephesians 1:1-14

How can Christ be the Savior of all men if that is the case?

1Tim 4:10 (KJV)​

(4:10) For therefore we both labour and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe. ​

"Specially of those that believe" qualifies the remnant called out of all nations for redemption. These alone WILL believe the Gospel message.

The rest of mankind are left in their unbelief . . .

John 3:16 teaches the same.

 

[Nang]

No, sorry, that won't do. Be blunt, because as you correctly said we have only two options here:

1. We are overapplying the Gospel to those God never intended to save. That means we are wrong.

2. You are underapplying the Gospel (in theory if not in practice) by saying only an elect can be saved when God says ALL can be saved. That means you're wrong.

One of those is dead false, and a false gospel. One of them misrepresents the work of Christ and makes God a liar.

(option 3 is flat out universal salvation, which is a nice notion but we both reject as false)

No, you are now claiming your Gospel is for all. You have reverted to the Universalistic (hypothetical) camp. I would definitely say that is a false gospel.

There is no third option.

As long as you admit that salvation is not universal, then we are discussing sovereignty of wills . . God's will versus mankinds' . . and your gospel message remains as particular as mine.

So when you interpret a verse of Scripture universally, you are in error, plus you deny your own confession of faith, and your own gospel message.

 

[musterion]

No, you are now claiming your Gospel is for all. You have reverted to the Universalistic (hypothetical) camp. I would definitely say that is a false gospel.

Wait a minute. That is not what I'm claiming.

The offer of the gift...the good news... IS INDEED for all. That's what Paul said and I've never said otherwise. That does not mean that all automatically will be saved. THAT is universal salvation, which I reject.

This is where I'm never sure if you just don't know exactly what we believe, or if you do know and are deliberately misstating it, or if you have trouble remembering things. This right here is why you and I have gotten nasty with each other so many times. But since Sherman said stop it...

 

[Clete]

This is where I'm never sure if you just don't know exactly what we believe, or if you do know and are deliberately misstating it, or if you have trouble remembering things. This right here is why you and I have gotten nasty with each other so many times. But since Sherman said stop it...

She is intentionally misstating it. She cannot win a debate against your real position.

 

[Nang]

Wait a minute. That is not what I'm claiming.

O.K. I stand corrected.

The offer of the gift...the good news... IS INDEED for all. That's what Paul said and I've never said otherwise. That does not mean that all automatically will be saved. THAT is universal salvation, which I reject.

I posted earlier: "My Reformed teachers taught me that my Christian responsibility and desire should be to indiscriminately proclaim the Gospel to all, and trust in the power of the Holy Spirit to produce salvific results."

Do you consider this to be different than your motivation for preaching the Gospel? If so, how so?

 

[glorydaz]

The answer is found in Adam. Romans 5:12 All humanity has inherited his corrupted human nature.

I hate it when you people corrupt the Holy Scripture with your own faulty understanding. Sin entered the world....nothing there about a "corrupted human nature". :down:


Nothing you say can be believed when you do this.

 

[Lon]

I'm "hung up" on any person or system that denies that God sent Christ to die for all mankind with no exceptions or distinctions. So you'll forgive me, or not, for being "hung up" on someone who has in his signature "Is Calvinism OK? :up: Yep!" That's no different than having "Is Catholicism OK? :up: Yep!" insofar as both deny the Gospel of the grace of God.

Again, the title was not mine, nor the link. I have a pastor friend I grew up with, not a Calvinist, that preached this message and asked that it be linked by his friends. You are on a crusade. One that doesn't listen. Well, I appreciate you hate this but for me, and if you just▲ read AMR▲
it is a scriptural/logical issue, not Calvinist specific. Literally, we are just scapegoated for 'what is found in scripture' and logically derived. Okay! Great! Tell me your logic and how to handle those very scriptures (kind of sad in a thread not about that, though ). Regardless, do so here, or in another thread. I've been very careful to discuss MAD with you in an intelligent and respectful manner. As well, others have made it a deal breaker as well. I guess I'm the odd-man-in. Talk to me. I simply think you are 'wrong.' Paul says to gently correct. Imho, you are over-reacting to a nonissue. It has not a lot to do with interfering with the gospel (none imho). Rather, it is the scope of the gospel. As I told you in PM with scriptures, even you know it is a narrow way. :doh: You know this. Tell me how you handle this knowledge. What does it mean. Explain it to me.

Now if YOU believe God did NOT limit the death of Christ, meaning you REJECT the "L" of TULIP, then you need to reject Calvinism as a whole. The Monergism quote I posted just above is correct -- it is necessary to the logic of how the Reformed view salvation. If you reject part of that system, logically you should reject ALL of it.

AMR has explained this in threads well, if not to you specifically. He has said repeatedly that the sufficiency is there. If the whole world were to repent, His work is sufficient. That is never what most of us Calvinists are arguing.

In a nutshell and an encapsulated sentence: God would not shed His blood 'for' one He knows isn't going to be saved by Arminian, Calvinist, or even Open Theist standards. Questions before denial: Do you believe in Universal 'salvation?' Are you an Open Theist? Is the Way narrow?

 

[musterion]

O.K. I stand corrected.

Thank you, ma'am.

I posted earlier: "My Reformed teachers taught me that my Christian responsibility and desire should be to indiscriminately proclaim the Gospel to all, and trust in the power of the Holy Spirit to produce salvific results."

Do you consider this to be different than your motivation for preaching the Gospel?

Good question. Yes, it is absolutely different.

If so, how so?

Because I know on the basis of Paul's revelation that ANYONE, without exception, who I share the Gospel with CAN be saved by it.

When you preach, you can't know that. Your adherence to Limited Atonement precludes it.

As I suggested to Lon the other day, no one who believes in Limited Atonement can in good conscience tell everyone he preaches to "You too can be saved!" because odds are that just isn't true. SOMEBODY you preach to is very likely reprobate...the more people you preach to indiscriminately, the more reprobates will hear but can't believe.

Not won't believe, CAN'T believe.

I know you agree with that much because everything I just typed is in line with the logic of TULIP.

But at that point it isn't enough for the 5 pointer to say "I believe in TULIP and I leave the results of the preaching to God...elect...reprobate...His call."

To preach indiscriminately is to preach a lie; not because the saving Gospel is false but because (let's say) 50% of people who hear it have no saving Blood shed for their sins. That's why consistent hyper-Calvinists tend to not even try to evangelize...they don't want to be responsible for creating false converts.

So yeah...we've got entirely different motivations. We HAVE to have --- we've got contradictory doctrines in back of our motivations.

Very good question, thank you for asking.

 

[Right Divider]

I believe in what is called "double predestination." That is, God has decreed and ordered all things.

Wow.... double is TWICE as good.

What if God decreed that people have choices to make regarding acceptance or rejection of His offer of the free gift of His grace?

The answer is found in Adam. Romans 5:12 All humanity has inherited his corrupted human nature. All men are sinners. Romand 3:10-19

God withholds faith and repentance from those who are imputed with sin; which is all the offspring of Adam. Even the Elect were born into this world as children of wrath and dead in sins and trespasses. Ephesians 2:1-5

It is purely by the grace of God that any are saved.

We agree on that and yet we believe that the scripture does NOT make who will be saved and lost a fixed decree before the beginning of the world.

It is not my "story." It is Paul's teaching to the church at Ephesus. It is the subject of his epistle to that church. It is Holy Scripture. Especially read Ephesians 1:1-14

I have read it many times and do not believe that it supports the story that you're trying to tell.

"Specially of those that believe" qualifies the remnant called out of all nations for redemption. These alone WILL believe the Gospel message.

The gospel of the grace of God, sure.

The rest of mankind are left in their unbelief . . .

John 3:16 teaches the same.

Oh.

 

[musterion]

Hello, Lon.

In a nutshell and an encapsulated sentence: God would not shed His blood 'for' one He knows isn't going to be saved

Wait a minute.

What does "one He knows isn't going to be saved" mean?

Are you saying that God, in eternity past, looked forward "down the tunnel of time" to see who will and won't believe the Gospel and based election upon that?

 

[Lon]

EXACTLY RIGHT.

I disagree. The whole word, for instance, needs to hear the gospel. "Why" perhaps later, but it must go out into all the world. There may be no middle ground on specific items pertaining to the gospel, but for me, this bin of all or nothing is too sloppy. We all know, for instance, the Way is narrow and few find it. All of us. Even a Universalists knows few find the Way, he/she discounts the Way is salvation (foolishly unintelligently). For me then: EXACTLY WRONG, by necessity.

No, we're talking about universal atonement, not universal salvation. Those are two very, very different propositions. Please do not confuse them.

Very important: Find out 'why' a Calvinist tends to conflate them. In a nutshell, "Atonement" is limited. Only those "made right" (atoned). Thus, it is limited by that definition: Only those 'right' with God are atoned for.

I said "if."

So 'if' is God still righteous 'if?' Your 'if' implication and statement implies logically, that He is (would be). If so, why in the wide-world are you arguing with Calvinists when you yourself would still see God as Righteous and good?

The real question is, Is the saving Gospel open and valid for any and all who hear it, or only to an elect predestined to believe it? I say all, you say elect.

Fair enough?

Does it matter? Can you or I, however polarized we might be, do a thing about it? A Calvinist is just as under directive to share the gospel with everyone he/she passes. It makes no difference whether that one is going to be saved or not, it is God's directive that that Calvinist share the gospel with him/her. You are convinced people walk away from the gospel based on the idea they are probably 'not' one of those who can be saved. For me, just the opposite. I assume he/she will respond and cannot help responding. The increase is entirely God's. Entirely. When it comes to plants, I don't have a green thumb. When it comes to the gospel, I think I'm no slouch. Greater is He who is within me, and I have endeavored to be ready to give a reason for the hope within me. If you EVER see me ineffectively sharing the gospel with any one person on TOL PLEASE PM me, correct me, or chime in (but I'd appreciate a good word so I can do better). In Him -Lon

 

[Lon]

Hello, Lon.



Wait a minute.

What does "one He knows isn't going to be saved" mean?

Are you saying that God, in eternity past, looked forward "down the tunnel of time" to see who will and won't believe the Gospel and based election upon that?

Okay. It is Arminian, but let's role with it. Later, if you'll allow, I'll further define 'Exhaustive Definite Foreknowledge' and we'll disagree BUT I don't think that conversation necessary at the moment. We are talking about Definite Foreknowledge at least and so it serves logically (and I'll show that as we go). Blessings in Him today, In Him -Lon

 

[glorydaz]

Hello, Lon.



Wait a minute.

What does "one He knows isn't going to be saved" mean?

Are you saying that God, in eternity past, looked forward "down the tunnel of time" to see who will and won't believe the Gospel and based election upon that?

Those in the ELECT ONE. :thumb:

Isaiah 42:1 Behold my servant, whom I uphold; mine elect, in whom my soul delighteth; I have put my spirit upon him: he shall bring forth judgment to the Gentiles.

 

[Nang]

Because I know on the basis of Paul's revelation that ANYONE, without exception, who I share the Gospel with CAN be saved by it.

On the basis of their willful decision, or on the choosing of God?

I know, that when I share the Gospel message, if anyone hears and believes the message, it is because God chose them in Christ for the purpose of redemption.

When you preach, you can't know that. Your adherence to Limited Atonement precludes it.

My lack of omniscience precludes me from knowing who will believe, until they make confession. That has nothing to do with Limited Atonement.

As I suggested to Lon the other day, no one who believes in Limited Atonement can in good conscience tell everyone he preaches to "You too can be saved!" because odds are that just isn't true. SOMEBODY you preach to is very likely reprobate...the more people you preach to indiscriminately, the more reprobates will hear but can't believe.

At least proclaiming the Gospel indiscriminately is not lying to people, telling them God loves all of them, when He doesn't and that God will save them if they give Him permission, when He might not.

In fact, anything like the above is adding to the word of God, unbiblical, and is not the Gospel at all.

To preach indiscriminately is to preach a lie; not because the saving Gospel is false but because (let's say) 50% of people who hear it have no saving Blood shed for their sins.

But that is not what is proclaimed. The first part of the Gospel message is to tell sinners that they sin against the moral standards (Law) of God, and are condemned by doing so. Second part of the Gospel message, is that there is only one escape, and that is to believe that God came in the flesh, fulfilled all the Law without sin on His part, suffered the wrath of God for sin and died the death of His people on the cross, achieving forgiveness for their sins through His shed blood, and resurrected from death to provide those He justified access to everlasting life in heaven with Him.

That's why consistent hyper-Calvinists tend to not even try to evangelize...they don't want to be responsible for creating false converts.

There are several safeguards against creating false conversions, with the language I suggest in the above.

So yeah...we've got entirely different motivations. We HAVE to have --- we've got contradictory doctrines in back of our motivations.

Very good question, thank you for asking.

I think this is very important . . . what are our motivations? What is in our hearts when we share this good news?

Mine is a desire to see others find the release from slavery to sin, death, and the devil, like I found through the resurrection power of the Holy Spirit and the power of the biblical Gospel message in my own life.

I feel no compunction that I have to persuade or sell the audience of the Truth of the message, but simply believe I might witness a Godly conversion of hearts/minds freed by the truths of Holy Scripture.

What about you? What exactly is your motivation to proclaim the Gospel? I would not be surprised to learn we share the same reasons for fulfilling this commission from the Lord.

??

 

[Evil.Eye.<(I)>]

Again, the title was not mine, nor the link. I have a pastor friend I grew up with, not a Calvinist, that preached this message and asked that it be linked by his friends. You are on a crusade. One that doesn't listen. Well, I appreciate you hate this but for me, and if you just▲ read AMR▲
it is a scriptural/logical issue, not Calvinist specific. Literally, we are just scapegoated for 'what is found in scripture' and logically derived. Okay! Great! Tell me your logic and how to handle those very scriptures (kind of sad in a thread not about that, though ). Regardless, do so here, or in another thread. I've been very careful to discuss MAD with you in an intelligent and respectful manner. As well, others have made it a deal breaker as well. I guess I'm the odd-man-in. Talk to me. I simply think you are 'wrong.' Paul says to gently correct. Imho, you are over-reacting to a nonissue. It has not a lot to do with interfering with the gospel (none imho). Rather, it is the scope of the gospel. As I told you in PM with scriptures, even you know it is a narrow way. :doh: You know this. Tell me how you handle this knowledge. What does it mean. Explain it to me.


AMR has explained this in threads well, if not to you specifically. He has said repeatedly that the sufficiency is there. If the whole world were to repent, His work is sufficient. That is never what most of us Calvinists are arguing.

In a nutshell and an encapsulated sentence: God would not shed His blood 'for' one He knows isn't going to be saved by Arminian, Calvinist, or even Open Theist standards. Questions before denial: Do you believe in Universal 'salvation?' Are you an Open Theist? Is the Way narrow?

Romans 5:10 For if while we were enemies we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, now that we are reconciled, shall we be saved by his life

Enemies Lon!

It says that He... Himself Desires that NONE should be Lost! NONE! He taught us to Love Our Enemies! Does that make God a Universalist?

Is the blood of human choice now on God's head... as well? Is Christ Duplicitous?

Lon... He died for ALL! He ressurected for ALL! Not ALL place their hope in Him or accept what He is offering... but.. @Lon... He damn well DIED for even the most hateful... of us. He died for the most wicked of us! He offers salvation to all! Is God now a man that He goes back on His Word? He is our God-Man... and His Love goes far past ours...

Please explain how you... you... Lon... could even suggest that He didn't die for even those that reject Him.

 

[glorydaz]

Mr. Nang :wave: