Are the five points Biblical or man made?

1st...God's Eternal Decree

Our God is in heaven; he does whatever pleases him.

Psalm 115:3

And he changes the times and the seasons; he removes kings, and sets up kings.

Dan. 2:21

The Most High rules in the kingdom of men, and gives it to whomsoever he will, and sets up over it the basest of men. . . . And all the inhabitants of the earth are reputed as nothing; and he does according to his will in the army of heaven, and among the inhabitants of the earth, and none can stay his hand, or say unto him, What are you doing?"

Dan. 4:17, 35

Whatever the LORD pleases, He does, In heaven and in earth, in the seas and in all deeps.

Psalm 135:6

The lot is cast into the lap, but its every decision is from the LORD

Proverbs 16:33

Many are the plans in a man's heart, but it is the LORD's purpose that prevails.

Proverbs 19:21

Man's steps are ordained by the LORD, How then can man understand his way?

Proverbs 20:24

The king's heart is like channels of water in the hand of the LORD; He turns it wherever He wishes.

Proverbs 21:1

Man's days are determined; you have decreed the number of his months and have set limits he cannot exceed.

Job 14:5

"It is I who have declared and saved and proclaimed, And there was no strange god among you; So you are My witnesses," declares the LORD, " And I am God.

"Even from eternity I am He, And there is none who can deliver out of My hand; I act and who can reverse it?"

Isaiah 43:12-13

I form the light and create darkness, I bring prosperity and create disaster; I, the LORD , do all these things.

Isaiah 45:7

Declaring the end from the beginning, And from ancient times things which have not been done, Saying, 'My purpose will be established, And I will accomplish all My good pleasure';

Isaiah 46:10

Who is there who speaks and it comes to pass, Unless the Lord has commanded it? Is it not from the mouth of the Most High That both good and ill go forth?

Lamentations 3:37-38

also we have obtained an inheritance, having been predestined according to His purpose who works all things after the counsel of His will,

Ephesians 1:11

for though the twins were not yet born and had not done anything good or bad, so that God's purpose according to His choice would stand, not because of works but because of Him who calls,

Romans 9:11

who has saved us and called us with a holy calling, not according to our works, but according to His own purpose and grace which was granted us in Christ Jesus from all eternity,

2 Timothy 1:9


Many more can be given

 

TD verses....

 

There's a lot of confusion caused by the difference between the "Flesh" and the "Spirit" or "soul", or you could say the "mind" of man.

All flesh is condemned without exception, and with an irreversible condemnation,

obviously that condemnation doesn't apply to "souls" or no soul could be saved.

Ge 3:19 for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return.

Adam/Eve were told to multiply "after their own kind", having gone from "Spirit to blood" as the medium which kept them alive, after they sinned, all children would be born after their own kind, with Blood rather than "Spirit".

And this "flesh" (dust) will die and return to the dust.

Where does the soul fit in??

Satan told Adam/Eve if they ate their eyes would be opened and they would "KNOW" Good and evil,

Jesus said if you were blind (eyes not open) you wouldn't have any sin.

Joh 9:41 Jesus said unto them, If ye were blind, ye should have no sin: but now ye say, We see; therefore your sin remaineth.

Where there is no law, either through ignorance or too young, sin is not imputed,

The soul isn't condemned until it becomes aware of sin (knows good/evil) and deliberately transgresses the law.

But here's the point, the soul is born into a body of sin condemned from birth, but the soul isn't condemned with the flesh until it's "KNOWLEDGABLE" of the law and commits a sin.

Just as a "saved soul" is separate from the "body of sin" (flesh) in which it still resides, the "soul" (mind) can oppose the "lust (mind) of the flesh",

I think everyone is aware of the daily war between the flesh/Soul (mind) to "keep the commandments".

The soul/mind can have ideas/opinions that different with the flesh, one sin condemns the soul, but it does not inhibit the ability of the soul/mind to disagree with the "lust of the flesh".

Ro 7:18 For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing: for to will is present with me; but how to perform that which is good I find not.

Ro 7:24 O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death?

25 I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin.


Man, in his sinful body, still has the "MENTAL" capacity to know good/evil and choose between the two,

Of course "FAITH" in any god other than Jesus and "GOD" won't "CHOOSE" to save you. (Grace through Faith, in Jesus)

Man having Faith not given by God is evident throughout the world.

"Total depravity", that is the inability of man's soul/mind to disagree with the flesh, is not supported by scripture.

 

And which ones prove that, given the context? Probably none. Seriously, as one who believes in TD, I just wish the prooftexters would do some homework.

 

Who can't do what???? What's the context, dude?

Seriously, talk to me about this. That's Paul's rhetorical purpose here?

 

BaptistBob, While we're waiting on James's answer to your context question, how about giving us your take on all those verses?

They seem pretty plain to me.

 

All 21? :laugh: I already addressed a number fo them last week, and I certainly will address more if there is actual conversation going on. I have a life, so I don't respond to lists. However, I do respond to conversations involving some verses qouted as evidence.

Me too. That's why I asked the question.

Why would someone list verses that apparently prove the opposite of their position? Genesis 1:1-Revelation 22:21

 

I know you are on this kick to label me a pelagian, and I have already addressed that.
".....we are born neither good or bad, but with a capacity for either and as without virtue, so without vice and....." Is NOT "pretty much" what I said. I supplied the true definition of what a sinner is, not the definition forced on to it by Augustine.

Again, you believe in TD (as defined by your system, not the Bible)...catholics also believe in this...I guess you are pretty much a catholic then

You need some new material...

 

I thought the "The great Ambrose himself..." comment was the checkmate.

When I saw that I knew the debate was over. I mean, like, dude, if the guy was great, then we better high-tail it outta here.

 

Huh? Roman Catholicism explicitly denies the Reformed view of Total Depravity (A.K.A Total Inability). The Catechisms state that because of Adam we are "inclined to sin", NOT slaves to sin. We have "free will" according to the Roman system.

If you remember your history lessons, the Roman Catholic Church actually commissioned a man to write a refutation of Luther's "Bondage of the Will", which was actually a refutation of the Papist's teachings on Free will.

The Roman Catholics are actually very much in line with your own view of depravity.

 

Augustine wasn't catholic?

 

As I presume you are aware, Augustine died LONG before the Church became "Roman Catholic". And the Roman Catholic Church INTERPRETS Augustine completely differently than evangelicals.

 

If that is the case, what need is there to baptize infants in the same manner as the Presby's?

 

I couldnt wait for Jarthur sorry

Just like Romans 8:5-10, I would say the letter is written to believers and unbelievers. He talks as if he is talking to a believer, but I'm sure he knows that these words will be heard by unbelievers in Corinth. Similar to one preaching in a church today. He preaches as if he is preaching to the church, but unbelievers are present and his hope is for them to be saved.

either way my question has always been-

why does it matter the context on these particular verses? Whether to a believer or unbeliever the natural person is spiritually discerned whether a believer not walking in the Spirit or an unbeliever whose never been born of God.

 

1st if you would have taken the time to read the post, you would have known that the 1st list was not DT at all., which going by your reply that captured a quote of my post says you indeed did not read it.

 

Hello BBob,

I agree that context is key my friend. or...dude.

This passage is talking about becoming right with God. The verse before may help you understand more about the context..

I hope you don't need any more help with this one.

Can a leopard change his spots?

Next....

Paul is contrasting the Believer who lives according to the Spirit and the natural man that lives after the flesh. Those that are born of the Spirit have the mind of the Spirit. Those that are in the flesh CAN NOT...are NOT ABLE to follow Gods law. It does not say that are unwilling. It clearly says that they can not.

So when the Bible says...."Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest."....The non-Believe cannot come because he is a master to sin.

The context in is the end of a thought where Paul tells how we get understanding. It is revealed to believers by the Spirit. In verses 11 it tells how only God knows about God and Holy Spirit, who is God is the one that KNOWS about God and verse 13 tells us that Holy Spirit teaches us the believer about God.

Then we have verse 14 that says....natural man cannot understand the things of God. They are DEAD!!!!!!

Read my book on John on this one...

Please see note above..

 

Just pointing out what I have seen in the last 2-3 years, that your words are just like another. And they are.

Pelagian was kicked from the church because he denied OS. That is the facts.

All of the church agrees with Augustine on this.
Following the long Christian tradition, Wesley believed that human beings have original sin, .........

I can show you some quotes from James Arminius that are STRONGER than most Calvinist on this subject. Now, I should add that the church is divided on how OS is removed.

The only other groups that deny OS is people like...The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints .

You have no idea what you are talking about. Read church history.

 

If you believe what they say...yes.

However, anyone that has read just a little of church history would never ask this.

 

you like that dude thing don't ya?

Ambrose was one of only a few that spoke of Grace in that time. You can about him in a good church history book.

 

indeed

You only would reject this, if you come to the text with an agenda.