Calvinism and God's love for the cosmos.

[Ransom]

Death is never non existence. Sproul once stated that "spiritually dead people are still biologically alive." . . . Ephesians 2:1-2 -You hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins: WHEREIN in times past ye WALKED - Thus the spiritual death of sinner is a state of active opposition against God." If we are truly dead and can't do anything then why is he walking around? The mistake is to assume physical death in which we depart from out body is the same as spiritual death. It is not. Spiritually dead people can still walk around. A dead body and being dead are two different things.

No one is claiming that those who are dead in sin (or blind, or imprisoned, or enslaved) are literally those things and incapable of walking around freely. Obviously, these are figures of speech. To critique the biblical idea of spiritual death by pointing out that the spiritually dead person can still walk around, is to miss the point--either by ignoring the fact of the metaphor entirely, or implying that since it is a metaphor, it doesn't really mean anything.

When we say that a man is spiritually dead (or dead in sins, to borrow the Pauline phrase), we mean that with respect to spiritual things, he is "dead," because he is unable to contribute anything that would move him an inch closer to salvation. But a man dead in sin is still alive in the flesh, which is why he still loves sin and has no desire to turn from it. That is the natural condition of the natural man: he "does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him" (1 Cor. 2:14). It is only by the power of the Holy Spirit the natural man, dead in sin, can be made dead to sin and alive in Christ. The natural man is dead to God and alive in the flesh; he loves the things of the flesh and hates the things of God. The regenerated man is alive to God and dead to the flesh; he loves the things of God and hates the works of the flesh.

 

[Anon1379]

Death is never non existence. Sproul once stated that "spiritually dead people are still biologically alive." . . . Ephesians 2:1-2 -You hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins: WHEREIN in times past ye WALKED - Thus the spiritual death of sinner is a state of active opposition against God." If we are truly dead and can't do anything then why is he walking around? The mistake is to assume physical death in which we depart from out body is the same as spiritual death. It is not. Spiritually dead people can still walk around. A dead body and being dead are two different things.

No one is claiming that those who are dead in sin (or blind, or imprisoned, or enslaved) are literally those things and incapable of walking around freely. Obviously, these are figures of speech. To critique the biblical idea of spiritual death by pointing out that the spiritually dead person can still walk around, is to miss the point--either by ignoring the fact of the metaphor entirely, or implying that since it is a metaphor, it doesn't really mean anything.

When we say that a man is spiritually dead (or dead in sins, to borrow the Pauline phrase), we mean that with respect to spiritual things, he is "dead," because he is unable to contribute anything that would move him an inch closer to salvation. But a man dead in sin is still alive in the flesh, which is why he still loves sin and has no desire to turn from it. That is the natural condition of the natural man: he "does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him" (1 Cor. 2:14). It is only by the power of the Holy Spirit the natural man, dead in sin, can be made dead to sin and alive in Christ. The natural man is dead to God and alive in the flesh; he loves the things of the flesh and hates the things of God. The regenerated man is alive to God and dead to the flesh; he loves the things of God and hates the works of the flesh.

So was Cornelius saved before Peter came in acts 10? Peter preached a message of repentance to the man, who was giving alms and was praying to God. He would not have preached Christ to him, of he was already saved. As Donald Grey Barnhouse one said "Total Depravity does not mean there is no good in man, but that there is no good in man which can satisfy God." When Paul was shipwrecked the natives treated him kindly. Romans 2:14-15 states that a lost man can do good, but it can't satisfy God. Luke 6:33 states the same. Matthew 7:11 states that we can give good gifts. A deed can be good no matter the motive. You are right there is nothing a spiritually dead man can do to save himself. However he can ask God to save Him. If im about to die and ask a doctor to save me, and he does. Is it the doctor who saves me or do I save myself?

Sent from my ONEPLUS A5000 using Tapatalk

 

[Twisted]

If I'm about to die and ask a doctor to save me, and he does. Is it the doctor who saves me or do I save myself?

He's doing what you ask.

Unless you think that while dying in your bed, that some doctor barges into your home, finds you, and heals you without your request or consent.

 

[HammondCheese]

If I'm about to die and ask a doctor to save me, and he does. Is it the doctor who saves me or do I save myself?

He's doing what you ask.

Unless you think that while dying in your bed, that some doctor barges into your home, finds you, and heals you without your request or consent.

According to guys like Sproul, the doctor has to regenerate you before he gives you the faith to call him on the phone and ask for treatment. [emoji848]

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

 

[Twisted]

If I'm about to die and ask a doctor to save me, and he does. Is it the doctor who saves me or do I save myself?

He's doing what you ask.

Unless you think that while dying in your bed, that some doctor barges into your home, finds you, and heals you without your request or consent.

According to guys like Sproul, the doctor has to regenerate you before he gives you the faith to call him on the phone and ask for treatment. [emoji848]

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

So does this mean the doctor heals you before you even know you're sick?  WoW!!

 

[Twisted]

If I'm about to die and ask a doctor to save me, and he does. Is it the doctor who saves me or do I save myself?

He's doing what you ask.

Unless you think that while dying in your bed, that some doctor barges into your home, finds you, and heals you without your request or consent.

According to guys like Sproul, the doctor has to regenerate you before he gives you the faith to call him on the phone and ask for treatment. [emoji848]

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

So does this mean the doctor heals you before you even know you're sick?  WoW!!

But this doctor isn't very good.  He knows there are sick and dying people in his neighborhood, but he just goes on vacation.

 

[HammondCheese]

If I'm about to die and ask a doctor to save me, and he does. Is it the doctor who saves me or do I save myself?

He's doing what you ask.

Unless you think that while dying in your bed, that some doctor barges into your home, finds you, and heals you without your request or consent.

According to guys like Sproul, the doctor has to regenerate you before he gives you the faith to call him on the phone and ask for treatment. [emoji848]

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

So does this mean the doctor heals you before you even know you're sick?  WoW!!

But this doctor isn't very good.  He knows there are sick and dying people in his neighborhood, but he just goes on vacation.

Well, this doctor advertised with billboards all over town with his name and phone number for all to see... But, little did they know, he had already made a list of all the future patients he would be willing to treat.

And with his advanced IP phone system which, thanks to Caller ID and his database of predetermined patients, he was able to filter out calls from any non-elect sick people trying to call him for help.  The billboards were nothing more than a front... As were his request for his patients to go into all the city and refer patients to him.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

 

[Ransom]

So was Cornelius saved before Peter came in acts 10? Peter preached a message of repentance to the man, who was giving alms and was praying to God. He would not have preached Christ to him, of he was already saved.

Cornelius is described as one who "feared God" and was "well spoken of by the whole Jewish nation" (Acts 10:2,22). "God-fearer" was an idiom for a Gentile who was sympathetic to Judaism and practiced some aspects of it, but was not necessarily a full convert. So no, when Peter first met Cornelius, he wasn't saved.

As Donald Grey Barnhouse one said "Total Depravity does not mean there is no good in man, but that there is no good in man which can satisfy God." [etc.]

I don't disagree with this, so I don't see what you are arguing against. "Total depravity" doesn't mean everyone is as evil as he can be or constitutionally incapable of morally good acts. It means no part of the total person has escaped corruption by sin. "Total" in this doctrine means extensive, not intensive.

You are right there is nothing a spiritually dead man can do to save himself. However he can ask God to save Him. If im about to die and ask a doctor to save me, and he does. Is it the doctor who saves me or do I save myself?

A spiritually dead man, which is to say, a man who is unregenerated or in the flesh, is hostile to God and wants nothing to do with him (Rom. 8:7). Why would God's sworn enemy ask him to save him?

 

[Ransom]

Unless you think that while dying in your bed, that some doctor barges into your home, finds you, and heals you without your request or consent.

This is a bad analogy, on two counts. First, a doctor does not necessarily require consent to save your life, under what is known as the doctrine of necessity. If he found you dying in bed, even if he can't obtain your request or know your wishes, he would be in the right to save your life.

Second, the necessity of medical consent presupposes that the relationship between doctor and patient is one of moral equals. I am not God's equal. He does not need my consent to do as he wishes.

 

[Twisted]

Unless you think that while dying in your bed, that some doctor barges into your home, finds you, and heals you without your request or consent.

This is a bad analogy, on two counts. First, a doctor does not necessarily require consent to save your life, under what is known as the doctrine of necessity. If he found you dying in bed, even if he can't obtain your request or know your wishes, he would be in the right to save your life.

Second, the necessity of medical consent presupposes that the relationship between doctor and patient is one of moral equals. I am not God's equal. He does not need my consent to do as he wishes.

Amazing that doctors will do what God won't.

 

[Anon1379]

This is a bad analogy, on two counts. First, a doctor does not necessarily require consent to save your life, under what is known as the doctrine of necessity. If he found you dying in bed, even if he can't obtain your request or know your wishes, he would be in the right to save your life.

Which is why i believe God will save Babies and those who do not have the ability to ask God

Second, the necessity of medical consent presupposes that the relationship between doctor and patient is one of moral equals. I am not God's equal. He does not need my consent to do as he wishes.

Mate, you are missing my point. My point is not that the doctor and human are equal. My point is that if I ask a doctor to save me and he does, I am not saving myself. 

 

[Anon1379]

Death is never non existence. Sproul once stated that "spiritually dead people are still biologically alive." . . . Ephesians 2:1-2 -You hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins: WHEREIN in times past ye WALKED - Thus the spiritual death of sinner is a state of active opposition against God." If we are truly dead and can't do anything then why is he walking around? The mistake is to assume physical death in which we depart from out body is the same as spiritual death. It is not. Spiritually dead people can still walk around. A dead body and being dead are two different things.

No one is claiming that those who are dead in sin (or blind, or imprisoned, or enslaved) are literally those things and incapable of walking around freely. Obviously, these are figures of speech. To critique the biblical idea of spiritual death by pointing out that the spiritually dead person can still walk around, is to miss the point--either by ignoring the fact of the metaphor entirely, or implying that since it is a metaphor, it doesn't really mean anything.

When we say that a man is spiritually dead (or dead in sins, to borrow the Pauline phrase), we mean that with respect to spiritual things, he is "dead," because he is unable to contribute anything that would move him an inch closer to salvation. But a man dead in sin is still alive in the flesh, which is why he still loves sin and has no desire to turn from it. That is the natural condition of the natural man: he "does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him" (1 Cor. 2:14). It is only by the power of the Holy Spirit the natural man, dead in sin, can be made dead to sin and alive in Christ. The natural man is dead to God and alive in the flesh; he loves the things of the flesh and hates the things of God. The regenerated man is alive to God and dead to the flesh; he loves the things of God and hates the works of the flesh.

Also if you say a dead man can't accept Christ,  then a dead man also can't reject Christ, and therefore can't be blamed for not doing so.  Death means separation from God.  Death is not reffering to the dead body.

 

[Tarheel Baptist]

Death is never non existence. Sproul once stated that "spiritually dead people are still biologically alive." . . . Ephesians 2:1-2 -You hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins: WHEREIN in times past ye WALKED - Thus the spiritual death of sinner is a state of active opposition against God." If we are truly dead and can't do anything then why is he walking around? The mistake is to assume physical death in which we depart from out body is the same as spiritual death. It is not. Spiritually dead people can still walk around. A dead body and being dead are two different things.

No one is claiming that those who are dead in sin (or blind, or imprisoned, or enslaved) are literally those things and incapable of walking around freely. Obviously, these are figures of speech. To critique the biblical idea of spiritual death by pointing out that the spiritually dead person can still walk around, is to miss the point--either by ignoring the fact of the metaphor entirely, or implying that since it is a metaphor, it doesn't really mean anything.

When we say that a man is spiritually dead (or dead in sins, to borrow the Pauline phrase), we mean that with respect to spiritual things, he is "dead," because he is unable to contribute anything that would move him an inch closer to salvation. But a man dead in sin is still alive in the flesh, which is why he still loves sin and has no desire to turn from it. That is the natural condition of the natural man: he "does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him" (1 Cor. 2:14). It is only by the power of the Holy Spirit the natural man, dead in sin, can be made dead to sin and alive in Christ. The natural man is dead to God and alive in the flesh; he loves the things of the flesh and hates the things of God. The regenerated man is alive to God and dead to the flesh; he loves the things of God and hates the works of the flesh.

Also if you say a dead man can't accept Christ,  then a dead man also can't reject Christ, and therefore can't be blamed for not doing so.  Death means separation from God.  Death is not reffering to the dead body.

Rejecting Christ isn't always an action.
Now, you say regeneration is based on man and man's decision.
I would say, regeneration, like everything else in the universe, is based on God and God's purpose.

Of course, we're talking being spiritually dead. To be lost (spiritually dead) is to be a slave to sin until regeneration.

 

[Ransom]

Amazing that doctors will do what God won't.

Which proves nothing, except a) you amaze easily, and b) your God is too small and human.

Ethics rules are for regulating the actions of sinful, fallible creatures. God has no need of them. He is not a sinner who will act unethically, nor a fallible human being who will do the wrong thing by mistake.

 

[Ransom]

Mate, you are missing my point. My point is not that the doctor and human are equal. My point is that if I ask a doctor to save me and he does, I am not saving myself.

And you are missing mine. The patient--the natural man--won't ask the doctor to save him, because he hates the doctor. The doctor may be the only person who can cure his disease. But the patient will still go to the naturopathic quack selling miracle cures, even though it will kill him.

 

[Ransom]

Also if you say a dead man can't accept Christ,  then a dead man also can't reject Christ, and therefore can't be blamed for not doing so.  Death means separation from God.  Death is not reffering to the dead body.

Either you are a natural man, serving the flesh and opposed to God, or you are a spiritual man, serving God and opposing the flesh. But there is no neutral ground. Christ is Lord; he commands absolute submission. To be indifferent to him is to be opposed to him.

 

[HammondCheese]

Also if you say a dead man can't accept Christ,  then a dead man also can't reject Christ, and therefore can't be blamed for not doing so.  Death means separation from God.  Death is not reffering to the dead body.

Either you are a natural man, serving the flesh and opposed to God, or you are a spiritual man, serving God and opposing the flesh. But there is no neutral ground. Christ is Lord; he commands absolute submission. To be indifferent to him is to be opposed to him.

You are correct in the natural man vs. the spiritual man, but what you refer to as a non-existent "neutral ground" is actually more of a bridge that can only be crossed through the quickening of the Holy Spirit and the Word of God without attributing the resurrection of that man to anyone but God yet is offered to all men who believe on Christ... 

Man is capable of nothing but faith and belief in Him... And that is the righteousness of faith through imputation.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

 

[Ransom]

You are correct in the natural man vs. the spiritual man, but what you refer to as a non-existent "neutral ground" is actually more of a bridge

There is no bridge. "Prevenient grace" is a false doctrine, Catholic boy.

 

[Anon1379]

Mate, you are missing my point. My point is not that the doctor and human are equal. My point is that if I ask a doctor to save me and he does, I am not saving myself.

And you are missing mine. The patient--the natural man--won't ask the doctor to save him, because he hates the doctor. The doctor may be the only person who can cure his disease. But the patient will still go to the naturopathic quack selling miracle cures, even though it will kill him.

Did Cornelius hate God? Cornelius was man who was lost but God answered his prayer. Then Peter come gives the Gospel and he gets saved. You are right, the natural does not seek God on his own. God has to make the first step, whether through preaching, Creation, hardship, etc. God will always make the first step. However once He does that it is up to us on whether or not we can accept Him.

Sent from my ONEPLUS A5000 using Tapatalk

 

[Anon1379]

Also if you say a dead man can't accept Christ,  then a dead man also can't reject Christ, and therefore can't be blamed for not doing so.  Death means separation from God.  Death is not reffering to the dead body.

Either you are a natural man, serving the flesh and opposed to God, or you are a spiritual man, serving God and opposing the flesh. But there is no neutral ground. Christ is Lord; he commands absolute submission. To be indifferent to him is to be opposed to him.

I'm going off of your example. You stated a dead man can't accept Christ. Going off of that a dead man can't reject Christ either. Either change your analogy or understand that spiritually dead is not the same as a dead body.

Sent from my ONEPLUS A5000 using Tapatalk