PDA

View Full Version : Lcms



Rlhuckle
04-04-07, 01:24 PM
Wildboar claimed:

"As for the, "Is there a church which is faithful enough for me to attend?" question, I believe that for most the answer is yes. Although I am not a member, I believe that the LCMS for instance would be faithful enough for me to attend if other options were not available and you can find an LCMS church in most places in the country."

I found the following on the LCMS website as part of a pamphlet that describes their beliefs regarding the Gospel.


"How do we receive this great salvation in our lives today? How do we personally receive the forgiveness Christ won for the entire world? How does what happened on the cross nearly 2,000 years ago flow into our lives today? Here too there is very good news.God,through His Gospel, offers us forgiveness and help against sin in more than one way. God is surpassingly rich in His grace.He gives His Gospel to us through His Word,through Baptism,through the Sacrament of the Altar,and through confession and absolution."

Isn't this Sacramentalism (with an allusion to universal atonement thrown in)?

"The Sacrament of Holy Baptism is water included in Godís command and combined with Godís Word; or as St.Paul says in Holy Scripture, ďThe washing of water with the word.Ē Through Baptism,we are made partakers of Christís death and resurrection. Therefore,we know that Baptism works forgiveness of sins,rescues from death and the devil,and gives eternal life to all who believe.Since Baptism is connected to the Word and promise of God, it is truly a life-giving water, rich in graceóa washing of the new birth in the Holy Spirit."

Isn't this baptismal regeneration?


"Christ has provided a special application of the Gospel through confession and absolution.Confession is admitting our sins to God and receiving His forgiveness from our pastor, as from God Himself,not doubting,but firmly believing that by it our sins are forgiven before God in heaven.Thus,by divine
ordinance, Christ Himself has entrusted absolution to his Christian church and commanded us to absolve one another from sins."

Isn't this the same as Romanism?

"The Lordís Supper is the true body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ,under the bread and wine, instituted by Christ Himself, for us Christians to eat and to drink. In the Lordís Supper,Christís body and blood are given to us as our treasure and gift which sustains our faith and life in Him. If you are heavy-laden and feel your weakness, go joyfully to the Sacrament and receive refreshment,comfort and strength."

Isn't this transubstantiation, albeit somewhat veiled?

"The forgiveness Christ won for the world on the cross is applied to us personally by God through His Word and Sacraments."

Again, isn't this universal atonement and Sacramentalism?

Is the LCMS "faithful enough" (undefined by Wildboar in regards to any biblical standard) and should it be considered doctrinally correct or have I totally misunderstood their pamphlet, which is intended for those who are interested in understanding their doctrinal positions?

wildboar
04-04-07, 03:08 PM
I by no means view the LCMS as perfect and neither do I agree with all of their doctrinal statements. However I do believe the Gospel is there--at least as we find it laid out in Scriptures, perhaps not as we find it on this forum. I would encourage you to attend such a church before passing judgment. I would also encourage you to look at what seems to be the underlying motivation behind it all. Lutheranism is decidedly anti-rationalistic. They seek to take the Bible for what it says and when there is mystery to leave it that way. In that sense we should all have the same trusting child-like faith--something that I see as lacking in this very post. I'll try to answer your specific objections.


"How do we receive this great salvation in our lives today? How do we personally receive the forgiveness Christ won for the entire world? How does what happened on the cross nearly 2,000 years ago flow into our lives today? Here too there is very good news.God,through His Gospel, offers us forgiveness and help against sin in more than one way. God is surpassingly rich in His grace.He gives His Gospel to us through His Word,through Baptism,through the Sacrament of the Altar,and through confession and absolution."

Isn't this Sacramentalism (with an allusion to universal atonement thrown in)?

You say sacramentalism as if its a four-letter word. In the great commission Jesus said that disciples are made through baptism. It is not through baptism without the word or baptism without the Spirit but it is through baptism. Historically the church has always taught some type of sacramentalism--not sacerdotalism as the papists teach and not sacramentarianism as the anabaptists teach.

You are correct in saying that the Lutherans do not teach a limited atonement as the Canons of Dort do. This is something I disagree with them on. However, a universal atonement is another matter and must be defined. I think it is telling that in this pamphlet in regards to the atonement they have not really said anything more than what Scripture has already said and you are already accusing them of false teaching.

John 1:29 The next day John saw Jesus coming toward him, and said, "Behold! The Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world!



"The Sacrament of Holy Baptism is water included in Godís command and combined with Godís Word; or as St.Paul says in Holy Scripture, ďThe washing of water with the word.Ē Through Baptism,we are made partakers of Christís death and resurrection. Therefore,we know that Baptism works forgiveness of sins,rescues from death and the devil,and gives eternal life to all who believe.Since Baptism is connected to the Word and promise of God, it is truly a life-giving water, rich in graceóa washing of the new birth in the Holy Spirit."

Isn't this baptismal regeneration?

Historically the church has always taught some form of baptismal regeneration. Our rationalism keeps us from believing. We stand with Naaman and refuse to engage in such a lowly thing like baptism. We're too good for it. 1 Peter 3:21 teaches differently.


"Christ has provided a special application of the Gospel through confession and absolution.Confession is admitting our sins to God and receiving His forgiveness from our pastor, as from God Himself,not doubting,but firmly believing that by it our sins are forgiven before God in heaven.Thus,by divine
ordinance, Christ Himself has entrusted absolution to his Christian church and commanded us to absolve one another from sins."

Isn't this the same as Romanism?


Nope, not really. Roman Catholic confession requires the person to try to name every sin that the person has committed and often perscribes different ways of doing penance. In private Lutheran confession, the person tells the pastor the sins that are really troubling him/her and the minister then pronounces forgiveness based upon the work of Christ. In public confession the minister pronounces those who are repentant and have faith as being forgiven by God based upon God's Word.


"The Lordís Supper is the true body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ,under the bread and wine, instituted by Christ Himself, for us Christians to eat and to drink. In the Lordís Supper,Christís body and blood are given to us as our treasure and gift which sustains our faith and life in Him. If you are heavy-laden and feel your weakness, go joyfully to the Sacrament and receive refreshment,comfort and strength."

Isn't this transubstantiation, albeit somewhat veiled?

Nope. Lutherans do not teach that the bread and wine cease to be bread and wine. They do not teach that the bread and wine transform into something else. They teach that the body and blood of Christ are consumed with the bread and wine. They take Jesus' words at face value. The basic argument that Luther uses is that if you hand someone a purse with a 100 dollars in it, you could very likely say "Here is a 100 dollars" without mentioned the purse. Nobody would say "No, that's a purse." They have decided to take what Jesus says for what it says rather than trying to rationalize it. The Reformed objection and my own problem with this is that it seems to present a Christological error in which Christ's body ceases to be truly human since it occupies many places at one time. But they choose to leave the issue a mystery.


"The forgiveness Christ won for the world on the cross is applied to us personally by God through His Word and Sacraments."

Again, isn't this universal atonement and Sacramentalism?

Not as far as this statement goes, this statement repeats what Scripture says.

Whammer
04-04-07, 05:24 PM
Roger........I for one think your conclusions are right.
The universal atonement is a doctrine I hate......it is such a devilish shot at Jesus as THE faithful high priest. It seeks to tarnish the beauty of Jesus in many many ways.........the words in scripture like "reconcile", "redeemed", "propitiated", etc, in their contexts all get changed and credit starts going to man for salvation.
Baptismal regeneration is another doctrine I hate........another "glory stealing" doctrine of men that gives man another thing to do to add to the work of Christ.
I think these doctrines fit in to Gal. 1:1-9, that kind of false gospel which is really not the gospel of scripture.
I know these things have been discussed on the forum many times......and Chuck, I realise there is nothing I could say that would persuade you differently.......so I will say no more here.

Rlhuckle
04-05-07, 11:55 AM
I by no means view the LCMS as perfect and neither do I agree with all of their doctrinal statements. However I do believe the Gospel is there--at least as we find it laid out in Scriptures, perhaps not as we find it on this forum. I would encourage you to attend such a church before passing judgment. I would also encourage you to look at what seems to be the underlying motivation behind it all. Lutheranism is decidedly anti-rationalistic. They seek to take the Bible for what it says and when there is mystery to leave it that way. In that sense we should all have the same trusting child-like faith--something that I see as lacking in this very post. I'll try to answer your specific objections.



You say sacramentalism as if its a four-letter word. In the great commission Jesus said that disciples are made through baptism. It is not through baptism without the word or baptism without the Spirit but it is through baptism. Historically the church has always taught some type of sacramentalism--not sacerdotalism as the papists teach and not sacramentarianism as the anabaptists teach.

You are correct in saying that the Lutherans do not teach a limited atonement as the Canons of Dort do. This is something I disagree with them on. However, a universal atonement is another matter and must be defined. I think it is telling that in this pamphlet in regards to the atonement they have not really said anything more than what Scripture has already said and you are already accusing them of false teaching.

John 1:29 The next day John saw Jesus coming toward him, and said, "Behold! The Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world!




Historically the church has always taught some form of baptismal regeneration. Our rationalism keeps us from believing. We stand with Naaman and refuse to engage in such a lowly thing like baptism. We're too good for it. 1 Peter 3:21 teaches differently.



Nope, not really. Roman Catholic confession requires the person to try to name every sin that the person has committed and often perscribes different ways of doing penance. In private Lutheran confession, the person tells the pastor the sins that are really troubling him/her and the minister then pronounces forgiveness based upon the work of Christ. In public confession the minister pronounces those who are repentant and have faith as being forgiven by God based upon God's Word.



Nope. Lutherans do not teach that the bread and wine cease to be bread and wine. They do not teach that the bread and wine transform into something else. They teach that the body and blood of Christ are consumed with the bread and wine. They take Jesus' words at face value. The basic argument that Luther uses is that if you hand someone a purse with a 100 dollars in it, you could very likely say "Here is a 100 dollars" without mentioned the purse. Nobody would say "No, that's a purse." They have decided to take what Jesus says for what it says rather than trying to rationalize it. The Reformed objection and my own problem with this is that it seems to present a Christological error in which Christ's body ceases to be truly human since it occupies many places at one time. But they choose to leave the issue a mystery.



Not as far as this statement goes, this statement repeats what Scripture says.

Thank you for your explanations to my questions. I now better understand your position--and the position of the LCMS. Forgive me if I put my child-like faith in Christ and not in men and their mysteries.

Dorcas
04-05-07, 03:03 PM
You say sacramentalism as if its a four-letter word. In the great commission Jesus said that disciples are made through baptism. It is not through baptism without the word or baptism without the Spirit but it is through baptism. Historically the church has always taught some type of sacramentalism--not sacerdotalism as the papists teach and not sacramentarianism as the anabaptists teach.

Icky, icky! *shudders*
Don't we love a good verse out of context. There is no way you can seriously assert that Christ teaches that His disciples are made through baptism!?! My bible (all 27 of them) has the word THEREFORE -- clearly teaching that they are made because of the authority of Christ. Baptizing is a subordinate clause, telling them what to do, not the how or why of what they are doing.

Matthew 28:18-20 And Jesus came up and spoke to them, saying, "All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth. "Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age."

People can argue all day long about what exactly this verse means, whether it applies to us today, and whether baptism is something we ought to do, but your interpretation is unacceptable. You are probably right that historically someone calling themselves "the church" has always taught this gross error, because people have always tried to add to the pure Gospel.

Acts 6:7 "The word of God kept on spreading; and the number of the disciples continued to increase greatly in Jerusalem, and a great many of the priests were becoming obedient to the faith."

Acts 14:21-22 "After they had preached the gospel to that city and had made many disciples, they returned to Lystra and to Iconium and to Antioch, strengthening the souls of the disciples, encouraging them to continue in the faith, and saying, "Through many tribulations we must enter the kingdom of God."

Even in the few other places that speak of "making disciples", it directly connected to the Word of God / Gospel. (and not even another mention of baptism) And its interesting that the Bible doesn't speak of people this way after the book of Acts. More often they are defined by their faith ("believers" or "faithful"), their status before God ("saints" / set-apart) or by their fellowship (the "assembly" or "brothers"). If your interpretation were true, instead of calling them the Faithful, why not just call them The Baptized?

wildboar
04-06-07, 04:24 AM
Icky, icky! *shudders*
Don't we love a good verse out of context. There is no way you can seriously assert that Christ teaches that His disciples are made through baptism!?! My bible (all 27 of them) has the word THEREFORE -- clearly teaching that they are made because of the authority of Christ. Baptizing is a subordinate clause, telling them what to do, not the how or why of what they are doing.

Matthew 28:18-20 And Jesus came up and spoke to them, saying, "All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth. "Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age."


The participles are grammatically connected to the main verb in the sentence. They are a further explanation of "make disciples." It is through baptism and teaching that disciples are made according to this verse.

Washington Kid
08-04-07, 07:51 PM
Could someone tell me if I am correct in that the LCMS: #1: does not believe in double predestination...............#2: believes in a universal atonement; that Christ's atonement IS SUFFICIENT for all if they only believe..................#3: are Amyrauldins......................#4:believe in sub-substantiation..........................#5: make their members sign a statement before they partake of the "sacrament" (their wording)- that they are not "living" (remaining) in any known sin. Thanks..............................KK:cool:

Whammer
08-04-07, 10:07 PM
Could someone tell me if I am correct in that the LCMS: #1: does not believe in double predestination...............#2: believes in a universal atonement; that Christ's atonement IS SUFFICIENT for all if they only believe..................#3: are Amyrauldins......................#4:believe in sub-substantiation..........................#5: make their members sign a statement before they partake of the "sacrament" (their wording)- that they are not "living" (remaining) in any known sin. Thanks..............................KK:cool:

Hey Craig, I think this link was given in another thread, I just couldnt find that thread, but the link http://www.lcms.org/ is the official website for them. I dont know any lutheran synod/church that does not deny double predestiantion.....that doesnt mean the beast doesnt exist, I have never heard or seen it myself. I also would not even call most them amyrauldians, most dont even hold the "4 point stance", it is maybe "1 point" at most. Their views on the atonement stand in contrast to the truth of particular redemption, I guess it would be easier for you to read what they say rather than me disagreeing with them again:)
But as I made my mind clear on the "poll" about the whore.......you know that I consider the lcms just another part of that........
Anyway.......(I know I'm being repetitive) its so good to have you interacting with all of us again!

gerhard
08-05-07, 04:28 AM
Could someone tell me if I am correct in that the LCMS: #1: does not believe in double predestination...............

The LCMS's only confessional standard is the Book of Concord (BOC) which includes the Augsburg Confession, Smalcald Articles, Luther's Catechisms, and the Formula of Concord (FOC). The FOC, SD, Election, para. 81, teaches that God does not prepare any man for condemnation.


#2: believes in a universal atonement; that Christ's atonement IS SUFFICIENT for all if they only believe..................

The FOC, SD, Election, para. 28, teaches that Christ's blood atones for the whole world's sins whether men believe it or not.


#3: are Amyrauldins......................

I think there are similarities (e.g., total depravity, unconditional election, universal atonement). I have heard that Amyrauldins believe that God passes by some men. The Book of Concord standard would not accept that teaching. Regarding irresistible grace and infallible preservation, there may also be differences.


#4:believe in sub-substantiation..........................

I'm not sure what is meant by sub-substantiation. The FOC, SD, Holy Supper, para. 14, teaches that Christ's body and blood are substantially present, offered, and received with the bread and wine. Con and trans substantiation are rejected.


#5: make their members sign a statement before they partake of the "sacrament" (their wording)- that they are not "living" (remaining) in any known sin.

The only requirement of the BOC standard is that communicants be first "instructed, examined, and absolved" (Apology to the Augsburg Confession, Of Human Traditions, para. 40). Note: Baptism would normally precede Absolution (Augsburg Confession, XII).

Washington Kid
08-05-07, 05:36 AM
Thank you Bryan and Dan- my questions have been answered! I used to live in Oregon, and I had very close friends who confessed to believe the gospel end up at a LCMS congregation. They could not answer my questions. My judgment ("he that is spiritual judgeth all things" I Cor 2:15) is that their confession denies the gospel; therefore they are part of the whore. But one must realize that as a radical non-compromiser of the gospel, I believe 99.9% of congregations are part of the whole; for a congregation which does not preach the gospel is part of the whore.......................................KK:coo l:

Saint Nicholas
08-05-07, 06:43 PM
Thank you Bryan and Dan- my questions have been answered! I used to live in Oregon, and I had very close friends who confessed to believe the gospel end up at a LCMS congregation. They could not answer my questions. My judgment ("he that is spiritual judgeth all things" I Cor 2:15) is that their confession denies the gospel; therefore they are part of the whore. But one must realize that as a radical non-compromiser of the gospel, I believe 99.9% of congregations are part of the whole; for a congregation which does not preach the gospel is part of the whore.......................................KK:coo l:

Yes my brother. The Gospel and nothing but the Gospel is the only basis and validity for the Ekklesia. Without the Gospel, nothing else matters. People everyday join fellowships and churches. But for what? If there is no Gospel, than Jesus is no more than a pop-icon and teacher of moral living to them. And I agree, they are part of the whore who preach a false Gospel.

Your brother,
Nicholas :)

gerhard
08-09-07, 10:23 AM
I used to live in Oregon, and I had very close friends who confessed to believe the gospel end up at a LCMS congregation. They could not answer my questions.

In general, laymen may join LCMS congregations by confessing Luther's Small Catechism only. Luther's Small Catechism does not directly and specifically address your questions. However, all LCMS congregations and ministers must confess, without exception, the entire Book of Concord which does directly and specifically answer all your questions.


My judgment ("he that is spiritual judgeth all things" I Cor 2:15) is that their confession denies the gospel; therefore they are part of the whore. But one must realize that as a radical non-compromiser of the gospel, I believe 99.9% of congregations are part of the whole; for a congregation which does not preach the gospel is part of the whore.......................................KK:coo l:

What are the essentials that must be taught and what must not be taught?

Whammer
08-09-07, 06:42 PM
What are the essentials that must be taught and what must not be taught?

I guess to start simply, it is essential to understand that there is only one Creator. Everything that exists outside Himself is His creation. He did not duplicate Himself, so there is nothing like Him in creation. All things are expressions of His wisdom and power, and the things He makes are not Him. Everything that has an existence in creation, is defined By Him. We know this Creator to be Jesus.......John 1:1-3, Col. 1:15-20, Heb. 1:1-3, John 14:9.
Most people I know deny this doctrine,and, off the top of my head, I cant think of any popular confession drawn up by men, that does not deny it.
There is much in the mind of God that we at this time dont know much about, we may speculate from such words as those of Jesus in Matt. 11:21-24, but I myself dont think I have words enough to do God the justice He deserves, be that as it is, God is the only One I know who can simply "speak" His mind, and it is......it is what He says it is, nothing more and nothing less.:)

Washington Kid
08-09-07, 07:44 PM
Hi Dan! You asked: what should and what not should be taught? Dan, I judge everything according to the gospel. The gospel I believe in is salvation conditioned on Christ's righteousness imputed plus nothing. ANY teaching of a universal notion becomes another gospel. Example: if, as the LCMS states that Christ's blood was shed for all who ever lived, then if a sinner is saved, what saved that person? Certainly, it COULD NOT be Christ's righteousness imputed plus nothing. If a person is not saved, why was that person not saved? If, as the LCMS states, that Christ's blood was shed for all, then it must be blood shed PLUS SOMETHING else for the sinner to be saved. If it is Christ's blood PLUS SOMETHING then THAT SOMETHING must become a work; and then is therefore no more grace but works. It therefore is another gospel. If another gospel, it should only be taught to be abhorred. To put it into perspective: in your profile you say that God wants all people to be saved. If God wants all to be saved; but they all do not become saved: there is a power above God becasue God didn't get what he wanted; namely that He cannot save all although He wants to. The God of the Bible is sovereign; and He has already saved His people from their sins. ANY universalistic notions of Christ's atonement perverts the gospel, and should only be taught to be abhorred. I hope I answered your question Dan. If not: continue........................KK

Saint Nicholas
08-09-07, 07:55 PM
Very well put my brother. I totaly agree! The very foundation and essence of the ekklesia is the Gospel of Jesus Christ. It is Jesus Christ whom the Father has sent to save His people from their sins. Not with a potential atonement as the heretics preach, but with a real and effectual atonement of sin................Nicholas :)

Whammer
08-09-07, 09:05 PM
Yes, to go along with Craig and Nick's accurate/correct thoughts is 2 Tim. 1:8-10, Eph. 7-10, Rom. 9:11. The gospel, wrapped up and summed up in Jesus, comes from the eternal nature of God. We also touch on the eternal nature of justification.......EJ here.
I think in this thread and the thread this one came out of, it is clear that the lmcs jesus/gospel is a different thing than the Jesus/gospel presented here on this forum. May those who have ears to hear what the Spirit says........HEAR!:)

gerhard
08-11-07, 02:56 AM
I hope I answered your question Dan.

Yes, but I have some followup questions. Is your teaching a doctrine of scripture alone or is man's reason necessary for its development? If man's reason is necessary, how can there be any confidence that correct conclusions have been reached? Was not man's reason corrupted in the fall?

Whammer
08-11-07, 06:22 AM
Yes, but I have some followup questions. Is your teaching a doctrine of scripture alone or is man's reason necessary for its development? If man's reason is necessary, how can there be any confidence that correct conclusions have been reached? Was not man's reason corrupted in the fall?

1 Cor 2:14-16, 1 Cor 3:20 in the context of the 1st 4 chapters, Rom. 12:1-2. If we here just had "naked reason" to go on and were un-enlightened, then your statement above would have some merit. As it is, 2 Cor. 4:7-13..........since we have The Spirit and believe........we speak!:)

Bob Higby
08-11-07, 06:00 PM
Gerhard: Is your teaching a doctrine of scripture alone or is man's reason necessary for its development? If man's reason is necessary, how can there be any confidence that correct conclusions have been reached? Was not man's reason corrupted in the fall?

EVERYONE defending ANY position of churchian dogma has asked the same question on this forum. The assumption is that anyone questioning the confessions of a certain denominational tradition is depending on reason, whereas those who FOLLOW such denominational tradition in its entirety are depending on faith.

Faith in what? That a certain person or group of men in the past were led innerrantly by God in the notions that they framed!!

Luther was the champion of liberty of conscience and the priesthood of every believer. To this day, no denomination has yet come into line with HIS conclusions in a way that truly honors the enlightenment he received from the Holy Spirit. YES, the truth is logical and has to be reasoned out in harmony with the WHOLE of God's revelation in scripture! I have yet to see where the Lord asks us to assassinate our brains and simply submit to a past council of men without evaluating their doctrine in light of the gospel.

Man's reason is restored in regeneration, along with all other faculties. We don't depend on it in isolation, however, it functions in harmony with Holy Spirit enlightenment annexed to the truth of the gospel revealed in scripture!

Washington Kid
08-12-07, 12:08 PM
Hi Dan: you asked me to answer your question that you quote in post #17 & where Bob answered in #19: Man's reason was corrupted in the fall, resulting in what is called "TOTAL DEPRAVITY"; which I believe is the sinners inability to know Christ by himself. Since the fall, the totally depraved man has invented all types of religions to try and restore oneself to God. This is described in Rom 10:3 " FOR THEY BEING IGNORANT OF GOD'S RIGHTEOUSNESS, AND GOING ABOUT TO ESTABLISH THEIR OWN RIGHTEOUSNESS, HAVE NOT SUBMITTED THEMSELVES UNTO THE RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD". But, as Bob said man's reasoning is restored in regeneration. God takes the depraved mind and converts it ( Ezekiel 36:25 -27 ) and gives that mind the mind of Christ ( I Corinthians 2:16 ). Dan if we can prove ourselves to amongst God's elect ( II Peter 1:10 ), we can have total confidence that even though it is our mind that is reasoning, that it is God who is teaching our mind ( John 6:45 ). And He teaches us what the total depraved mind cannot; that Christ is the only righteousness that God accepts, and that righteousness is revealed in the TRUE GOSPEL ( Rom 1:16,17 ) whereby the elect sinner trusts in Christ's rightousness ALONE for their salvation ( Gal 6:14 ). A person who believes that Christ's blood was shed for all cannot believe this; for if Christ shed His blood for all, then who or what makes the difference between saved and lost; between heaven and hell? Certainly not Christ's righteousness alone, but it must be something the sinner does ( then you are stuck back @ Rom 10:3 ). But Christ shed His blood for the ELECT ONLY purchasing their salvation ( Acts 20:28 ). Hope this answered your question for me; if not continue...................KK:cool:

gerhard
08-13-07, 09:44 PM
Robert R. Higby opines,

EVERYONE defending ANY position of churchian dogma has asked the same question on this forum. The assumption is that anyone questioning the confessions of a certain denominational tradition is depending on reason, whereas those who FOLLOW such denominational tradition in its entirety are depending on faith.

Faith in what? That a certain person or group of men in the past were led innerrantly by God in the notions that they framed!!

LCMS's BOC also denies the inerrancy of any human writing including the BOC itself in FOC, Epitome, Rule and Norm, Para. 1, 2.

Robert R. Higby continues,

Luther was the champion of liberty of conscience and the priesthood of every believer. To this day, no denomination has yet come into line with HIS conclusions in a way that truly honors the enlightenment he received from the Holy Spirit. YES, the truth is logical and has to be reasoned out in harmony with the WHOLE of God's revelation in scripture! I have yet to see where the Lord asks us to assassinate our brains and simply submit to a past council of men without evaluating their doctrine in light of the gospel.

Man's reason is restored in regeneration, along with all other faculties. We don't depend on it in isolation, however, it functions in harmony with Holy Spirit enlightenment annexed to the truth of the gospel revealed in scripture!

Kentucky Kid follows up,

Hi Dan: you asked me to answer your question that you quote in post #17 & where Bob answered in #19: Man's reason was corrupted in the fall, resulting in what is called "TOTAL DEPRAVITY"; which I believe is the sinners inability to know Christ by himself. Since the fall, the totally depraved man has invented all types of religions to try and restore oneself to God. This is described in Rom 10:3 (http://bible.5solas.org/bible.php?view=1&restrict=0&keywords=&startbook=0&endbook=0&references=0&andor=0&ascdesc=0&highlight=1&createchaps=1&abrv=1&book=rom&chapter=10&verse1=3&verse2=&version=kjv) " FOR THEY BEING IGNORANT OF GOD'S RIGHTEOUSNESS, AND GOING ABOUT TO ESTABLISH THEIR OWN RIGHTEOUSNESS, HAVE NOT SUBMITTED THEMSELVES UNTO THE RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD". But, as Bob said man's reasoning is restored in regeneration. God takes the depraved mind and converts it ( Ezekiel 36:25 -27 (http://bible.5solas.org/bible.php?view=1&restrict=0&keywords=&startbook=0&endbook=0&references=0&andor=0&ascdesc=0&highlight=1&createchaps=1&abrv=1&book=eze&chapter=36&verse1=25&verse2=&version=kjv) ) and gives that mind the mind of Christ ( I Corinthians 2:16 (http://bible.5solas.org/bible.php?view=1&restrict=0&keywords=&startbook=0&endbook=0&references=0&andor=0&ascdesc=0&highlight=1&createchaps=1&abrv=1&book=1co&chapter=2&verse1=16&verse2=&version=kjv) ). Dan if we can prove ourselves to amongst God's elect ( II Peter 1:10 (http://bible.5solas.org/bible.php?view=1&restrict=0&keywords=&startbook=0&endbook=0&references=0&andor=0&ascdesc=0&highlight=1&createchaps=1&abrv=1&book=2pe&chapter=1&verse1=10&verse2=&version=kjv) ), we can have total confidence that even though it is our mind that is reasoning, that it is God who is teaching our mind ( John 6:45 (http://bible.5solas.org/bible.php?view=1&restrict=0&keywords=&startbook=0&endbook=0&references=0&andor=0&ascdesc=0&highlight=1&createchaps=1&abrv=1&book=joh&chapter=6&verse1=45&verse2=&version=kjv) ). And He teaches us what the total depraved mind cannot; that Christ is the only righteousness that God accepts, and that righteousness is revealed in the TRUE GOSPEL ( Rom 1:16,17 (http://bible.5solas.org/bible.php?view=1&restrict=0&keywords=&startbook=0&endbook=0&references=0&andor=0&ascdesc=0&highlight=1&createchaps=1&abrv=1&book=rom&chapter=1&verse1=16&verse2=&version=kjv) ) whereby the elect sinner trusts in Christ's rightousness ALONE for their salvation ( Gal 6:14 (http://bible.5solas.org/bible.php?view=1&restrict=0&keywords=&startbook=0&endbook=0&references=0&andor=0&ascdesc=0&highlight=1&createchaps=1&abrv=1&book=gal&chapter=6&verse1=14&verse2=&version=kjv) ). A person who believes that Christ's blood was shed for all cannot believe this; for if Christ shed His blood for all, then who or what makes the difference between saved and lost; between heaven and hell? Certainly not Christ's righteousness alone, but it must be something the sinner does ( then you are stuck back @ Rom 10:3 (http://bible.5solas.org/bible.php?view=1&restrict=0&keywords=&startbook=0&endbook=0&references=0&andor=0&ascdesc=0&highlight=1&createchaps=1&abrv=1&book=rom&chapter=10&verse1=3&verse2=&version=kjv) ). But Christ shed His blood for the ELECT ONLY purchasing their salvation ( Acts 20:28 (http://bible.5solas.org/bible.php?view=1&restrict=0&keywords=&startbook=0&endbook=0&references=0&andor=0&ascdesc=0&highlight=1&createchaps=1&abrv=1&book=act&chapter=20&verse1=28&verse2=&version=kjv) ). Hope this answered your question for me; if not continue

How can we prove ourselves to be amongst God's elect? By our good works? By our reason? Won't our depraved mind deceive us into believing our sinful works are good and that our reason has been enlighten in regeneration?

You conclude that the believer in universal atonement must believe that the sinner does something to merit his own salvation. Is it not possible to retain monergism in salvation by ascribing the cause of eternal life to both the blood of Christ shed for all men and mercy of God upon the elect? Is the fact that you ignore a logical possibility that conflicts with your summary conclusion an example of the corruption of the human reason?

Greg
08-13-07, 10:46 PM
How can we prove ourselves to be amongst God's elect? By our good works? By our reason? Won't our depraved mind deceive us into believing our sinful works are good...Yes it will, if we have a depraved mind.
...and that our reason has been enlighten in regeneration?This is not possible for someone who is regenerate. It is possible for one who is unregenerate to come to many different conclusions about what is what and so. (this is not meant to be accusatory towards you)
You conclude that the believer in universal atonement must believe that the sinner does something to merit his own salvation. Is it not possible to retain monergism in salvation by ascribing the cause of eternal life to both the blood of Christ shed for all men and mercy of God upon the elect? No it is not. If a man chooses Christ, then it is no longer monergism but polygism (is that a word?). This would put the sovereignty into man's hand. If it is man who chooses, the God is not God.
Romans 9:10 - 26
10 And not only this; but when Rebecca also had conceived by one, even by our father Isaac;
11 (For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth;)
12 It was said unto her, The elder shall serve the younger.
13 As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.
14 What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid.
15 For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion.
16 So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy.
17 For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might shew my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth.
18 Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth.
19 Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will?
20 Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus?
21 Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?
22 What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction:
23 And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory,
24 Even us, whom he hath called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles?
25 As he saith also in Osee, I will call them my people, which were not my people; and her beloved, which was not beloved.
26 And it shall come to pass, that in the place where it was said unto them, Ye are not my people; there shall they be called the children of the living God.
Is the fact that you ignore a logical possibility that conflicts with your summary conclusion an example of the corruption of the human reason?I think it is clear from the text above that the "all" is describing the elect and that there is a group separate from them. If you research the word "all" in the NT you will find some interesting results.

I think it is your logic that is cloudy on this one.

gerhard
08-14-07, 04:45 AM
Yes it will, if we have a depraved mind. . .This is not possible for someone who is regenerate. It is possible for one who is unregenerate to come to many different conclusions about what is what and so.

If the depraved mind and the regenerate mind can reach the same conclusion, how can a person know that he has a regenerate mind?


If a man chooses Christ, then it is no longer monergism but polygism (is that a word?). This would put the sovereignty into man's hand. If it is man who chooses, the God is not God.

Yes, but my original question did not propose any choosing of Christ as a cause of eternal life only the blood of Christ and the mercy of God.


I think it is clear from the text above that the "all" is describing the elect and that there is a group separate from them. If you research the word "all" in the NT you will find some interesting results.

Are you confusing this text with another passage? Is there a paper that discusses the word "all" in the NT from Predestinarian Network viewpoint?

The text you quote appears to support the alternate possibility of my question (i.e., that the mercy of God is a cause of eternal life): "Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy. . ."

Greg
08-14-07, 08:33 AM
If the depraved mind and the regenerate mind can reach the same conclusion, how can a person know that he has a regenerate mind?If a person doesn't know what salt tastes like, how would I describe the taste to them, other than to say it is salty? Also, though the conclusion may be the same in some instances, it never will be consistent in it's conclusions. The unregenerate mind is incapable of being consistent because the regenerate mind is a gift from God.
Yes, but my original question did not propose any choosing of Christ as a cause of eternal life only the blood of Christ and the mercy of God.My apologies, I misread you. If salvation is universal then why aren't all saved? Why would there be any text about the elect after Christ's ascension?
Are you confusing this text with another passage? Is there a paper that discusses the word "all" in the NT from Predestinarian Network viewpoint?This is a short one: http://www.pristinegrace.org/media.php?id=289

This has been referenced many times before on this forum and if you go through the free archives you will find answers to many of these questions that I'm sure will satisfy your desire for the truth.
The text you quote appears to support the alternate possibility of my question (i.e., that the mercy of God is a cause of eternal life): "Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy. . ."Enjoy the journey!

Washington Kid
08-16-07, 09:13 PM
Hi Dan! (Gerhard): I wanted to answer your questions you asked me on post 21 (I don't know how to post them here!). You ask: how can we prove we are amongst God's elect? Using the passage I quoted (II Peter 1:10): "GIVE DILIGENCE TO MAKE YOUR CALLING AND ELECTION SURE". In the original languages, this passage is a legal (forensic) command. It could read "you are commanded to produce a legal guarantee that you are amongst God's elect". But how can we? Only one way: submit to God's legal justification of any sinner: Christ's righteousness imputed plus nothing. To answer your second question in the same post concerning reconciling a universal atonement with Christ's righteousness imputed plus nothing: I would disagree that our disagreement is based on a depraved mind because in regards to salvation my mind is not depraved or corrupted; it is submitted to the righteousness of Christ in the gospel. Dan, where we disagree is not in depravity or corruption; we disagree on the nature and extent of the atonement. May I ask you a question: If Christ died for all the sins of all people- 1) why are those who end up in hell there? 2) did He die in vain for them? I'm trying to explain my difference with you on this. Thank you Dan!...........................KK

gerhard
08-17-07, 05:28 AM
Highlyfavored asks,


If salvation is universal then why aren't all saved? Why would there be any text about the elect after Christ's ascension?

The original question did not postulate universal salvation only universal atonement with eternal life for the elect.

Kentucky Kid opines,


To answer your second question in the same post concerning reconciling a universal atonement with Christ's righteousness imputed plus nothing: I would disagree that our disagreement is based on a depraved mind because in regards to salvation my mind is not depraved or corrupted; it is submitted to the righteousness of Christ in the gospel.

If you rely on the remaking of your mind and your submittal to Christ's righteousness to make your calling and election sure, how is salvation by imputation and not by recreation of your mind and obedience?

Kentucky Kid continues,


Dan, where we disagree is not in depravity or corruption; we disagree on the nature and extent of the atonement. May I ask you a question: If Christ died for all the sins of all people- 1) why are those who end up in hell there? 2) did He die in vain for them?

These are questions I can not answer. Does this mean that I have a depraved mind that is not regenerate? If so, what level of knowledge and obedience is required to make my calling and election sure?

Whammer
08-17-07, 06:06 AM
These are questions I can not answer. Does this mean that I have a depraved mind that is not regenerate? If so, what level of knowledge and obedience is required to make my calling and election sure?

None of us here will be calling you a reprobate for expressing the perceptions of your own mind. Same as you, if we do not believe we hear the truth of the gospel coming from your mouth, we will say so, but so would you.....right? So lets put away any assumptions there might be about you being one of the elect or a reprobate, and get to the truth at hand (if it can be done)
What does substitution mean?
If Jesus Himself was punished in YOUR place, punished for ALL the crimes you committed (including being deceived in unbelief and a blasphemer, 1 Tim. 1:13).......and if Christ's death was acceptable to God in your behalf and His wrath removed(propitiation is done really) and if Christ was raised for your justification, then what my friend do you have to be punished for........if Christ was punished for you, and that ransom was acceptable to our Father?
Keep focused on what Christ accomplished and then how could you say that (if you were ransomed.......redeemed) you will also be paying for sin in the lake of fire? (do those words ransomed, redeemed, bought with a price have any real meaning?)
What does it say that people who were redeemed dwell in the lake of fire? Maybe some would be so bold as to ignore all this and in blindness simply say......."well our choice is the final decisive act for salvation".......if they can continue in such blasphemy uncorrected, then they would bring forth the evidence that they are a reprobate.
But how do you deal with these questions?:)

Washington Kid
08-17-07, 03:38 PM
Hi Dan: to answer your questions: I believe when one is regenerated the mind is taught by God that salvation is by Christ's righteousness imputed alone. The knowledge the mind receives is the fruit or result of Christ's righteousness imputed, not the ground of salvation..........by not answering my questions does not mean you have a depraved mind or are unregenerate: to me it means that a view of universal atonement conflicts with Christ's righteousness imputed as the only ground of salvation. You asked: what level of knowledge must we have to make our calling and election sure: not much- just that Christ's righteousness alone is all our salvation....................which only the elect can believe........everyone else will add something to His work!........................KK:cool:

gerhard
08-19-07, 04:58 AM
Whammer asks,


But how do you deal with these questions?

Continue to study them.

Kentucky Kid opines,


You asked: what level of knowledge must we have to make our calling and election sure: not much- just that Christ's righteousness alone is all our salvation....................which only the elect can believe........everyone else will add something to His work!........................
Wouldn't that be relying our own knowledge base to make our calling and election sure rather than looking to Christ's righteousness alone for salvation? Has anyone in Predestinarian Network questioned the inspiration of 2 Peter?

Washington Kid
08-19-07, 05:32 AM
Hi Dan! Friend, what else do have to know God, but our knowledge base? How else can we know Him, but through the mind? The regenerated mind looks to Christ for all one's salvation; what other faculty do we have beside the mind to look to Christ?........................................... .......KK

Whammer
08-19-07, 01:11 PM
,



Continue to study them.

?

Uh-huh, but were you going to actually interact with the questions themselves?

gerhard
08-20-07, 03:52 AM
Kentucky Kid,


Hi Dan! Friend, what else do have to know God, but our knowledge base? How else can we know Him, but through the mind? The regenerated mind looks to Christ for all one's salvation; what other faculty do we have beside the mind to look to Christ?........................................... .......KK

My question was not how we know God but how we make our calling and election sure. Are you saying they are the same thing? Besides the mind, people have bodies and souls. Could the body and soul look to Christ when the unknowledgeable mind does not?

Whammer,


Uh-huh, but were you going to actually interact with the questions themselves?

Yes, but I don't wish to post anything that is contrary to Network teaching or anything that is outside the scope of this thread.

Whammer
08-20-07, 07:04 AM
Whammer,



Yes, but I don't wish to post anything that is contrary to Network teaching or anything that is outside the scope of this thread.

I dont think if you answered my questions you would step outside the scope of the thread, but the rest of your answer.......fair enough:cool:

Saint Nicholas
08-20-07, 09:22 PM
Gerhard wrote:


My question was not how we know God but how we make our calling and election sure. Are you saying they are the same thing? Besides the mind, people have bodies and souls. Could the body and soul look to Christ when the unknowledgeable mind does not?

How do you make your calling and election sure? This should be your real concern. I am not at all suggesting that you are seeking opinions as a basis of your faith, however you alone stand or fall on the basis of your own regenerate personal convictions toward Christ and the Gospel.

I am fully confident of my election with absolute assurance. And if you need to ask how someone knows that, would that not suggest you have doubts to your election? Please do not get me wrong here. I am not rendering a verdict as to your election or non-election.

If someone was to ask me what a mango tasted like, would that not suggest that someone has not tasted a mango. All of the words of description I may render about the mango will not create the reality of actually tasting it.

Spiritually speaking, when the elect have tasted the TRUE BREAD OF LIFE [JESUS CHRIST], AND HAVE DRANK OF THE LIVING WATER [HOLY SPIRIT] , They need not ask someone else what Christ and the Holy Spirit are like. They know!




Yes, but I don't wish to post anything that is contrary to Network teaching or anything that is outside the scope of this thread.

Why not? disagreement is a starting point of dialogue. And we encourage honest dialogue.

Nicholas :)

gerhard
08-21-07, 03:24 AM
How do you make your calling and election sure? This should be your real concern. I am not at all suggesting that you are seeking opinions as a basis of your faith, however you alone stand or fall on the basis of your own regenerate personal convictions toward Christ and the Gospel.

I am fully confident of my election with absolute assurance. And if you need to ask how someone knows that, would that not suggest you have doubts to your election? Please do not get me wrong here. I am not rendering a verdict as to your election or non-election.

If someone was to ask me what a mango tasted like, would that not suggest that someone has not tasted a mango. All of the words of description I may render about the mango will not create the reality of actually tasting it.

Spiritually speaking, when the elect have tasted the TRUE BREAD OF LIFE [JESUS CHRIST], AND HAVE DRANK OF THE LIVING WATER [HOLY SPIRIT] , They need not ask someone else what Christ and the Holy Spirit are like. They know!

Actually, I'm raising these questions in the context of original topic (i.e., how the LCMS might differ from the Network in the practices of the ekklesia). The LCMS FOC, SD, Election, para. 73-75, refers to Holy Ghost impelling the elect to obedience with the Spirit bearing witness to the elect.


And since the Holy Ghost dwells in the elect, who have become believers, as in His temple, and is not idle in them, but impels the children of God to obedience to God's commands, believers, likewise, should not be idle, and much less resist the impulse of God's Spirit, but should exercise themselves in all Christian virtues, in all godliness, modesty, temperance, patience, brotherly love, and give all diligence to make their calling and election sure, in order that they may doubt the less concerning it, the more they experience the power and strength of the Spirit within them. For the Spirit bears witness to the elect that they are God's children, Rom. 8, 16. And although they sometimes fall into temptation so grievous that they imagine they perceive no more power of the indwelling Spirit of God, and say with David, Ps. 31, 22: I said in my haste, I am cut off from before Thine eyes, yet they should, without regard to what they experience in themselves, again [be encouraged and] say with David, as is written ibidem, in the words immediately following: Nevertheless Thou heardest the voice of my supplications when I cried unto Thee.
And since our election to eternal life is founded not upon our godliness or virtue, but alone upon the merit of Christ and the gracious will of His Father, who cannot deny Himself, because He is unchangeable in will and essence, therefore, when His children depart from obedience and stumble, He has them called again to repentance through the Word, and the Holy Ghost wishes thereby to be efficacious in them for conversion; and when they turn to Him again in true repentance by a right faith, He will always manifest the old paternal heart to all those who tremble at His Word and from their heart turn again to Him, as it is written, Jer. 3, 1: If a man put away his wife, and she go from him and become another man's, shall he return unto her again? Shall not that land be greatly polluted? But thou hast played the harlot with many lovers; yet return again to Me, saith the Lord.


Do you see a difference between what you have posted and this LCMS view?

You have raised concerns regarding the inspiration of James. 2 Peter has also been a disputed text historically. Does 2 Peter 1:10 deny Sola Fide?



Why not? disagreement is a starting point of dialogue. And we encourage honest dialogue.


I appreciate your generous offer and will consider it. However, I'm concerned that entering into debate with the Network will hinder my goal of understanding consistent Calvinism.

Brandan
08-21-07, 04:28 AM
However, I'm concerned that entering into debate with the Network will hinder my goal of understanding consistent Calvinism.
There isn't much to it... Here are the following propositions that you must understand to understand our position.

God PREDESTINED EVERYTHING - That means EVERYTHING that happens was predetermined by God (including evil, sin, and anything that is perceived as bad).

All those who are elect were saved BEFORE the foundation of the world in God's predetermination. They were seen as Righteous in Christ. They have ALWAYS been viewed as perfectly righteous.

The Gospel is an announcement of this righteousness in Christ to the world. To an elect individual, it is an announcement that the individual is righteous. To the reprobate it is further condemnation because God hates them. The elect do nothing to receive this joy. It is through simple mental assent to Gospel propositions they are justified in their consciences. Their state before God did not change, only their realization of the truth did.

----

There are of course more nuances, but that in a nutshell covers it. Let me know if you have questions about what I just stated. I think it's very simple. - Brandan

Calvinator
08-21-07, 12:02 PM
However, I'm concerned that entering into debate with the Network will hinder my goal of understanding consistent Calvinism.
To understand High Grace Calvinism, it hinges on two basic principals. First, man is totally spiritually dead. He can do nothing. His faith, belief and understanding are given to him by God. Even regeneration is solely a work of the Spirit of God outside the will of man. Second, God's absolute and complete sovereignty over all things. I mean people, places and things. these two principals are clearly taught throughout the Word of God.

Now, all you have to do is stay consistent to these two principals and do not deviate from them as you go through the doctrines of Soteriology, you should stay consistent with High Grace Calvinism.

Most professing Christians say they believe God is sovereign, but they do not really believe that. They deviate from these two principals in their Soteriology. They say that God is sovereign, but I guess they don't believe that He operates in His sovereignty.

John:)

gerhard
08-21-07, 06:07 PM
The Gospel is an announcement of this righteousness in Christ to the world. To an elect individual, it is an announcement that the individual is righteous. To the reprobate it is further condemnation because God hates them. The elect do nothing to receive this joy. It is through simple mental assent to Gospel propositions they are justified in their consciences. Their state before God did not change, only their realization of the truth did.

Is regeneration/hardening directly or indirectly connected to the announcement of the gospel? Is regeneration/hardening the realization of the truth by the elect/reprobate?

Washington Kid
08-21-07, 06:15 PM
Amen Brandan: The only true God is the God of ABSOLUTE PREDESTINATION! What a comfort to the elect!.......I heartily recommend a book: ABSOLUTE PREDESTINATION by Jerome Zanchius............KK

Brandan
08-21-07, 06:52 PM
Is regeneration/hardening directly or indirectly connected to the announcement of the gospel? Yes. It's directly connected to Gospel propositions. Regeneration culminates in the knowledge of the full-corn gospel and leads to glorification.

From a blog entry I wrote:
http://blog.5solas.org/2005/09/14/the-epistemological-work-of-the-holy-spirit/

I now also propose that regeneration is also epistemological, and not a metaphysical process. The conditional primitive baptists teach that men are privatisticly or metaphysically regenerated and may not have any knowledge of any Gospel propositions before conversion. Classical calvinists teach that regeneration occurs right at conversion - that regeneration is dependent upon knowledge of the Gospel. I disagree with both teachings! I believe that regeneration is a process that takes place in the life of the elect individual sometimes long before they are converted. But it is not a metaphysical process. It is an epistemological process. The Holy Spirit reveals pieces of the truth before revealing the full corn gospel of justification by GRACE alone without conditions. For example, how can one know what salvation is unless of course he knows what sin is? How can one know who Christ is unless He understands who God is, and how can one understand who God is unless they know what His attributes are? Regeneration isnít just single event!
...
The hand of the Lord is upon His people from before they are born through their entire lives even before conversion. His love for them is unending, and He is in the process of preparing them for Gospel conversion their whole lives before they are actually converted to the truth in its Gospel fullness.

gerhard
08-23-07, 06:00 AM
Yes. It's directly connected to Gospel propositions. Regeneration culminates in the knowledge of the full-corn gospel and leads to glorification.

From a blog entry I wrote: "...The Holy Spirit reveals pieces of the truth before revealing the full corn gospel of justification by GRACE alone without conditions. For example, how can one know what salvation is unless of course he knows what sin is? How can one know who Christ is unless He understands who God is, and how can one understand who God is unless they know what His attributes are? Regeneration isn’t just single event!"

If the regeneration is a process and dependent on the accumulation of knowledge of gospel, how can the elect be purely passive therein (Gospel Standard Articles of Faith, XII)? Wouldn't the elect's reason interact with previously imparted knowledge to reach conclusions independent of the work of the Holy Spirit?

Can elect infants, having been exposed to the announcement of the gospel, be regenerate before they acquire the knowledge of language?

Is hardening of the reprobate dependent on their accumulation of knowledge of gospel and their mind's interaction with that knowledge?

Can reprobate infants, having been exposed to the announcement of the gospel, be hardened before they acquire the knowledge of language?

Greg
08-23-07, 06:35 AM
If the regeneration is a process and dependent on the accumulation of knowledge of gospel, how can the elect be purely passive therein (Gospel Standard Articles of Faith, XII)? Wouldn't the elect's reason interact with previously imparted knowledge to reach conclusions independent of the work of the Holy Spirit?

Can elect infants, having been exposed to the announcement of the gospel, be regenerate before they acquire the knowledge of language?

Is hardening of the reprobate dependent on their accumulation of knowledge of gospel and their mind's interaction with that knowledge?

Can reprobate infants, having been exposed to the announcement of the gospel, be hardened before they acquire the knowledge of language?
Rom 9:9-13, (KJV)
9 For this is the word of promise, At this time will I come, and Sarah shall have a son.
10 And not only this; but when Rebecca also had conceived by one, even by our father Isaac;
11 (For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth;
12 It was said unto her, The elder shall serve the younger.
13 As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.

Brandan
08-23-07, 06:53 AM
Why are you asking about regeneration so much? Regeneration is a result of salvation - not the cause. Remember that...

God's people are brought to a knowledge of the truth as a BENEFIT of Christ's work for them. It is a result of an imputed righteousness (imputed in eternity). There was never a moment in time when Christ's righteousness was not put to their account - even before the cross because God sees everything at once - indeed He determined everything at once, and what happens in time is happening according EXACTLY to His determination.

Your question:
Wouldn't the elect's reason interact with previously imparted knowledge to reach conclusions independent of the work of the Holy Spirit? Nobody is free from the work of the Holy Spirit. Every single thought is directed BY the Holy Spirit - even in reprobate people. Every thought is predetermined by God - there can be no conclusions reached independently of the work of the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit works to create proper and truthful thoughts in the elect and works to to deceive the reprobate for God does not WANT the reprobate to know the truth and indeed they NEVER WILL know the truth of the Gospel.


Can elect infants, having been exposed to the announcement of the gospel, be regenerate before they acquire the knowledge of language?It doesn't matter. ALL elect infants will be brought to knowledge of truth. Even if they did not acquire the knowledge of language, and passed from this world, they would be with their Lord as the love of God toward His elect people is not dependent upon their knowledge of Him. Remember, regeneration is a BENEFIT of eternal salvation - not the cause.


Is hardening of the reprobate dependent on their accumulation of knowledge of gospel and their mind's interaction with that knowledge?The reprobate NEVER will accumulate any knowledge of the Gospel. Knowledge of the Gospel as TRUTH is only given to the elect. The reprobate will never believe the Gospel as truth.

However, the presentation of the Gospel message to reprobate men is indeed part of the hardening process - all of life is in fact part of the hardening process - every good thing that comes to the reprobate is for the purpose of storing of more and more wrath that will be brought upon that person.

Psalms 92:5-7 O LORD, how great are thy works! and thy thoughts are very deep. {6} A brutish man knoweth not; neither doth a fool understand this. {7} When the wicked spring as the grass, and when all the workers of iniquity do flourish; it is that they shall be destroyed for ever:

Joshua 11:20 For it was of the LORD to harden their hearts, that they should come against Israel in battle, that he might destroy them utterly, and that they might have no favour, but that he might destroy them, as the LORD commanded Moses.

Please read the letter I wrote to a church I once attended when I departed: http://blog.5solas.org/2005/09/28/letter-of-departure-to-all-the-members-of-grace-baptist-chapel-in-st-louis-mo/

Have a good day.

Brandan

gerhard
08-24-07, 02:31 AM
Darth Gill asks,


Why are you asking about regeneration so much? Regeneration is a result of salvation - not the cause. Remember that...

The topic of the thread is how the LCMS might differ from the Network in the practices of ekklesia. Regeneration is discussed in the Network's Gospel Standard Articles of Faith.


We believe that the work of regeneration is not an act of man's free will and natural power, but that it springs from the operation of the mighty, efficacious and invincible grace of God.

. . .the work of regeneration, or new birth, is the sovereign work of God, and His work only, the sinner being as passive therein as in his first birth, and previously thereto dead in trespasses and sins.

Darth Gill continues.


Nobody is free from the work of the Holy Spirit. Every single thought is directed BY the Holy Spirit - even in reprobate people. Every thought is predetermined by God - there can be no conclusions reached independently of the work of the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit works to create proper and truthful thoughts in the elect and works to to deceive the reprobate for God does not WANT the reprobate to know the truth and indeed they NEVER WILL know the truth of the Gospel.

Isn't every single thought of the elect throughout their life until their death impure (Gospel Standard Articles of Faith, XXI)? If so, is it an ongoing work of the Holy Spirit to create impurity of thought within the elect? Or does impurity of thought spring from the corruption that remains within the elect after the regeneration process begins?

Are you in agreement with the Gospel Standard Articles of Faith that the sinner is passive in regeneration? If so, does the Holy Spirit actively prevent the sinner's inherent impurity of thought from corrupting his reason such that only proper and truthful conclusions are reached in the regeneration process?

Darth Gill opines,


It doesn't matter. ALL elect infants will be brought to knowledge of truth. Even if they did not acquire the knowledge of language, and passed from this world, they would be with their Lord as the love of God toward His elect people is not dependent upon their knowledge of Him. Remember, regeneration is a BENEFIT of eternal salvation - not the cause.

If it doesn't matter, why do the Gospel Standard Articles of Faith reject as blasphemous, "the person baptised is or can be regenerated in, by or through baptism, much less, if possible, by infant sprinkling."? Why can't baptism be part of the regeneration process for elect children and/or adults? Isn't the Trinitarian formula of baptism an announcement of the gospel?

Bob Higby
08-25-07, 09:50 AM
Why can't baptism be part of the regeneration process for elect children and/or adults?

1. All scriptures used to support such a notion refer not to water but to Holy Spirit baptism. It is man that has attempted to change the meaning of the NT to exalt water as the PRIMARY baptism over and above that of the Holy Spirit.

2. Either God works entirely sovereign in salvation grace independent of all works of men--or He subjects (subordinates) His sovereign act of salvation grace to physical ordinances of men. It has to be one way or the other.

3. Tying regeneration to physical things is idolatry. If the water is involved in regeneration, why wait for a confession of the gospel of an adult to baptize? It may be that God will use the water of baptism to make the unbelieving adult believe! But on the negative side of things, this notion of regeneration tied to water causes all sorts of doubt among the non-baptized as to the certainty of their salvation. That sort of doubt, again, arises from the demonic idolatry of connecting salvation with physical things.

God presents the truth of the gospel in scriptural propositions; THESE are what we are to proclaim to the lost. God does not save in conjunction with symbolic parables; He saves in conjunction with the Word of the Gospel.

gerhard
08-25-07, 04:01 PM
Why can't baptism be part of the regeneration process for elect children and/or adults?

1. All scriptures used to support such a notion refer not to water but to Holy Spirit baptism. It is man that has attempted to change the meaning of the NT to exalt water as the PRIMARY baptism over and above that of the Holy Spirit.

The LCMS's BOC rejects the mechanistic view of baptism you describe. It teaches that the Holy Spirit works regeneration through baptism when and where it pleases God (Augsburg Confession, V).


2. Either God works entirely sovereign in salvation grace independent of all works of men--or He subjects (subordinates) His sovereign act of salvation grace to physical ordinances of men. It has to be one way or the other.

If baptism was instituted by Christ, how can it be a physical ordinance of men? And, if instituted by Christ, how can baptism be a work of men or anything other than His sovereign act of salvation grace?


3. Tying regeneration to physical things is idolatry.

Darth Gill has tied regeneration to knowledge of the truth. Wouldn't that be idolatry of the human intellect?


If the water is involved in regeneration, why wait for a confession of the gospel of an adult to baptize? It may be that God will use the water of baptism to make the unbelieving adult believe!

Could it not be that God will use the water of baptism to harden the unbelieving adult in his unbelief? In any event, should a Christian baptize an adult he has not been called to baptize?


But on the negative side of things, this notion of regeneration tied to water causes all sorts of doubt among the non-baptized as to the certainty of their salvation. That sort of doubt, again, arises from the demonic idolatry of connecting salvation with physical things.

Why should the non-baptized believer doubt the certainty of his salvation or that God, without men, can accomplish his baptism of water and the Spirit whenever and wherever He pleases?

Isn't there more danger of demonic idolatry when the believer is led by false teaching to look within himself for evidence of regeneration rather than to the gifts of God?

Whammer
08-25-07, 06:03 PM
If baptism was instituted by Christ, how can it be a physical ordinance of men? And, if instituted by Christ, how can baptism be a work of men or anything other than His sovereign act of salvation grace?


Dan, the OC law was given by Christ to Moses, but it never saved any of the elect. Circumcism was instituted/ordained by God to Abraham, but it never saved anyone from the eternal wrath of God.
God told Moses (Num. 21:8-9) to make a bronze serpent (primarily to be a sign of Messiah John 3:14) and later the people used the same serpent as an object of idolatry 2 Kings 18:4.......you are doing the same thing with water baptism.....taking something ordained by God and using it in an unlawful way.........baptismal regeneration is idolatry and damnable doctrine of devils

gerhard
08-26-07, 03:59 AM
Dan, the OC law was given by Christ to Moses, but it never saved any of the elect. Circumcism was instituted/ordained by God to Abraham, but it never saved anyone from the eternal wrath of God.
God told Moses (Num. 21:8-9) to make a bronze serpent (primarily to be a sign of Messiah John 3:14) and later the people used the same serpent as an object of idolatry 2 Kings 18:4.......you are doing the same thing with water baptism.....taking something ordained by God and using it in an unlawful way.........baptismal regeneration is idolatry and damnable doctrine of devils

Robert Higby opines in the thread The New Covenant that the Mosaic Covenant on Mt. Sinai is the only covenant conditional upon man's works. When Christ said, "Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God" was He establishing a covenant that He would fulfill or that the elect would fulfill?

Whammer
08-26-07, 07:18 AM
Robert Higby opines in the thread The New Covenant that the Mosaic Covenant on Mt. Sinai is the only covenant conditional upon man's works. When Christ said, "Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God" was He establishing a covenant that He would fulfill or that the elect would fulfill?

Bob's post #45, .1, and if you will notice, that condition was never/nor could ever be met, God used Israel over and over and over again to prove it Acts 15:10.
1 Tim. 1:6-7 fits in principle here Dan, and if you, like your lutheran brethren continue to twist the scripture in this matter, it will most certainly work to your destruction as you continue to lessen the value of Christ's work alone in behalf of His elect saints.

Saint Nicholas
08-26-07, 10:38 AM
Dan [gerhard],

It is good that you have questions. You have asked a total of 48 questions (give or take a few if I have mis-counted ) so far on this thread, and have also had responses to your questions.

This forum is designed for honest dialogue. Now it is your turn to add your input as to WHY you disagree or agree with the answers you have been given.

It is pointless in my opinion, for you to continue with your barrage of questions without stating your responses to the answers that you have been given.

Now please state your position, pro or con, as to what you believe to be truth, and why? as pertaining to the responses you have revieved.

This thread is going nowhere, and may be closed if it is fruitless.

??????
Nicholas

Bob Higby
08-26-07, 12:43 PM
When Christ said, "Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God" was He establishing a covenant that He would fulfill or that the elect would fulfill?

Your presupposition is that 'born of water' refers to the act of water baptism, which we wholeheartedly reject. Scripture does not contradict itself on the truth that faith/belief alone is the assurance of justification. The gospel of John throughout uses water to refer to Holy Spirit regeneration (ex. 4:13-15, 7:37-39, 19:34-35). "Water and spirit" in John 3 is "water and wind (pneuma)" which both refer to the regenerating power of the Holy Spirit. Yes, it is the fulfillment of the New Covenant promise to write the law of faith on the heart: HE ALONE fulfills it!

gerhard
08-27-07, 03:09 AM
Dan [gerhard],

It is good that you have questions. You have asked a total of 48 questions (give or take a few if I have mis-counted ) so far on this thread, and have also had responses to your questions.

Some questions were answered; others were not.


This forum is designed for honest dialogue. Now it is your turn to add your input as to WHY you disagree or agree with the answers you have been given.

There has been honest dialogue. I stated my reason for not posting disagreement with Network views. Posting agreement wastes bandwidth.

I will give you some feedback though. I continue to struggle with the doctrine of regeneration in consistent Calvinism. How can relying on recreation of the mind and obedience make our calling and election sure? Isn't this doctrine more inline with Papism or Pelagianism than Monergism, Sola Fide, and Imputational Christianity?

Another Calvinist forum has used the term "inner character change" implying that there is a material difference between the regenerate and non-regenerate man. Is regenerate man imputed righteous by faith alone or made righteous by a change within himself?

Saint Nicholas
08-28-07, 01:47 PM
[quote] I continue to struggle with the doctrine of regeneration in consistent Calvinism.

That is a fair question. Within consistent Calvinism, the basic premise is that regeneration must precede faith. Also, regeneration is a monergistic work of God alone. Now from that point on, there are many inconsistencies within those who are called Calvinists. Speaking for myself, I do not agree with all that Calvin has written and taught.



How can relying on recreation of the mind and obedience make our calling and election sure?

I rely on Christ Alone, through faith alone.


Isn't this doctrine more inline with Papism or Pelagianism than Monergism, Sola Fide, and Imputational Christianity?

If one is relying on his performance [obedience], sacraments, or any other works as a basis of merit to God, then I agree with you. He is no better than a Papist or any other false Christian.


Another Calvinist forum has used the term "inner character change" implying that there is a material difference between the regenerate and non-regenerate man.

There is a change in the regenerate man. HE IS BORN FROM ABOVE!



Is regenerate man imputed righteous by faith alone or made righteous by a change within himself?

This question by far is the best question. Because you so distinctly pointed out the differences between the Pauline message of imputed righteousness [declared righteousness] versus the heretical Augustinian and Roman Catholic position of an infused righteousness [made righteous] as a basis of justification. You are blessed by God for seeing this distinction. Most so-called Calvinists of today are abandoning the Pauline doctrine of imputation by an alien and extrincic righteousness, and going home to their mother [Rome], in favor of an infused righteousness.

Have you read the ecumenical accords:{ Lutherans and Catholics together.} {Evangelicals and Catholics together} {ECT1 and ECT 2}?

Nicholas

gerhard
08-28-07, 10:02 PM
Within consistent Calvinism, the basic premise is that regeneration must precede faith. Also, regeneration is a monergistic work of God alone. Now from that point on, there are many inconsistencies within those who are called Calvinists. Speaking for myself, I do not agree with all that Calvin has written and taught.

Romans 8:30 lists the monergistic order of salvation: predestination, calling, justification, and glorification. Where are regeneration and faith's standing in the order of salvation? Are they associated with justification? If so, how can they occur at different times?


There is a change in the regenerate man. HE IS BORN FROM ABOVE!.

Is he remade in the image of God (i.e., knowledge of God, righteousness, and truth)?



This question by far is the best question. Because you so distinctly pointed out the differences between the Pauline message of imputed righteousness [declared righteousness] versus the heretical Augustinian and Roman Catholic position of an infused righteousness [made righteous] as a basis of justification. You are blessed by God for seeing this distinction. Most so-called Calvinists of today are abandoning the Pauline doctrine of imputation by an alien and extrincic righteousness, and going home to their mother [Rome], in favor of an infused righteousness.

Most modern-day Calvinists are inconsistent in their doctrine. However, my focus is trying to understand how Network Calvinists see righteousness (if any) within the regenerate man.



Have you read the ecumenical accords:{ Lutherans and Catholics together.} {Evangelicals and Catholics together} {ECT1 and ECT 2}?

Yes. These are carely crafted political statements which avoid addressing, much less resolving, the pattern of Papist infused and work righteousnesses used as a basis for justification before God.

Greg
08-28-07, 10:46 PM
Most modern-day Calvinists are inconsistent in their doctrine. However, my focus is trying to understand how Network Calvinists see righteousness (if any) within the regenerate man.Who said we are calvinists? :confused:

Brandan
08-29-07, 05:58 AM
Romans 8:30 lists the monergistic order of salvation: predestination, calling, justification, and glorification. Where are regeneration and faith's standing in the order of salvation? Are they associated with justification? If so, how can they occur at different times?Why do you assume these events must occur in order? How can this be considered a timely action when predestination itself is an eternal decree. Why cannot all these things be eternal (and thus timeless) events not having to occur in chronological order?


Is he remade in the image of God (i.e., knowledge of God, righteousness, and truth)?All the elect are made in the image of God in that they are made with the capacity to know the truth. The reprobate are made in the image of Satan. Regeneration does not change one's status in the eyes of God.


Most modern-day Calvinists are inconsistent in their doctrine. However, my focus is trying to understand how Network Calvinists see righteousness (if any) within the regenerate man.There is NO righteousness in ANY man - regenerate or unregenerate! Righteousness alone is found within Christ, and that righteousness is put to the accounts of the elect from before the foundation of the world.

gerhard
08-29-07, 08:36 PM
Why do you assume these events must occur in order? How can this be considered a timely action when predestination itself is an eternal decree. Why cannot all these things be eternal (and thus timeless) events not having to occur in chronological order?.

They could all be eternal events but I don't understand how a later listed event in Romans 8:30 could precede an earlier listed event. In any event, if justification is connected with regeneration and faith and associated with eternity, would not regeneration and faith also be associated with eternity?



All the elect are made in the image of God in that they are made with the capacity to know the truth. The reprobate are made in the image of Satan. Regeneration does not change one's status in the eyes of God.

Does the capacity to know the truth constitute a material difference between the elect and the reprobate? If so, is this material difference a prevenient cause of regeneration?


There is NO righteousness in ANY man - regenerate or unregenerate! Righteousness alone is found within Christ, and that righteousness is put to the accounts of the elect from before the foundation of the world.

Isn't righteousness a property of the image of God? How can the elect be made in the image of God and not have a personal righteousness?

Brandan
08-30-07, 04:59 AM
They could all be eternal events but I don't understand how a later listed event in Romans 8:30 could precede an earlier listed event. In any event, if justification is connected with regeneration and faith and associated with eternity, would not regeneration and faith also be associated with eternity?Yes. All things are determined in eternity. :)




Does the capacity to know the truth constitute a material difference between the elect and the reprobate?Physically - there is no difference between elect and reprobate. Spiritually - yes, there is a major difference.


If so, is this material difference a prevenient cause of regeneration?Creation does come before full regeneration. But that does not mean this is a cause of regeneration. Just because God created some clay that could be turned into beautiful pottery and God created some clay that could only be useful for destruction does not mean that the clay being created with the capacity to know the truth is a CAUSE of regeneration. The only cause of regeneration is God's sovereign grace. It is the Holy Spirit imparting the individual with the knowledge of salvation.


Isn't righteousness a property of the image of God? How can the elect be made in the image of God and not have a personal righteousness?Do you realize how stupid this sounds? If we are to go further with your argument, then we could just say that we ARE like God in every way! To demonstrate what I mean, could I not ask you the question: "Isn't omniscience a property of the image of God? How can the elect be made in the image of God and not be omniscient?"

Besides, we believe that the elect are made in the image of God BEFORE regeneration. Most religionists will admit that men do not have personal righteousness before regeneration. It is only through regeneration found in their institution do men obtain any sort of personal righteousness in their convoluted minds.

This is the Gospel. Men do not have ANY righteousness. Christ alone is the righteousness for those that believe! Difficult to grasp? Not for those that have been given the ability to know!

gerhard
08-30-07, 03:04 PM
Physically - there is no difference between elect and reprobate. Spiritually - yes, there is a major difference. . .
Creation does come before full regeneration. But that does not mean this is a cause of regeneration. Just because God created some clay that could be turned into beautiful pottery and God created some clay that could only be useful for destruction does not mean that the clay being created with the capacity to know the truth is a CAUSE of regeneration. The only cause of regeneration is God's sovereign grace. It is the Holy Spirit imparting the individual with the knowledge of salvation.

If the elect are created with a capacity for regeneration and the reprobate are not, does that not imply 1) a meritorious cause for the regeneration of the elect, 2) a rejection of Sola Fide as the sole means whereby the elect lay hold of Christ, 3) the elect are created with a capacity for righteousness rather than declared righteous without any worth or worthiness within themselves, and 4) the elect are able to cooperate with the Holy Spirit in regeneration through their inborn capacity to know the truth.


Do you realize how stupid this sounds? If we are to go further with your argument, then we could just say that we ARE like God in every way! To demonstrate what I mean, could I not ask you the question: "Isn't omniscience a property of the image of God? How can the elect be made in the image of God and not be omniscient?"

I was distinguishing between Adam who was made in the image of God(i.e., knowledge of God, righteousness, and truth) and Christ eternally begotten in the express image of God (e.g., omniscient, omnipotent, incapable of unrighteousness, etc.). Of course, the properties of the express image of God exceed the properties of the image of God.


Besides, we believe that the elect are made in the image of God BEFORE regeneration.

A Semi-Pelagianism of the elect?

Brandan
08-30-07, 03:32 PM
If the elect are created with a capacity for regeneration and the reprobate are not, does that not imply 1) a meritorious cause for the regeneration of the electNo. A person predestined to know the truth does not mean that this person earned it.
2) a rejection of Sola Fide as the sole means whereby the elect lay hold of ChristNo. Absolutely not.
3) the elect are created with a capacity for righteousness rather than declared righteous without any worth or worthiness within themselvesHuh? There is no righteousness in the elect before or after regeneration. Declared righteousness to the elect comes at the time of faith. In God's estimation though, because He is eternal and thus timeless, He sees them as righteous in Christ and EVEN GLORIFIED in CHRIST ALWAYS.
4) the elect are able to cooperate with the Holy Spirit in regeneration through their inborn capacity to know the truth. There is no cooperation. Faith is not an action. Faith is a revelation of the truth - no need for "cooperation". Men either "get it" (understand), or they don't.


I was distinguishing between Adam who was made in the image of God(i.e., knowledge of God, righteousness, and truth) and Christ eternally begotten in the express image of God (e.g., omniscient, omnipotent, incapable of unrighteousness, etc.). Of course, the properties of the express image of God exceed the properties of the image of God.Even if the elect had any personal internal righteousness, it would be insignificant to that of Christ's which is imputed to their account! A Godly and infinitely superior righteousness is all I'm really interested in because that's what God says matters - perfect righteousness.

Isa 64:6, (KJV), But we are all as an unclean thing, and all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags; and we all do fade as a leaf; and our iniquities, like the wind, have taken us away.



A Semi-Pelagianism of the elect?I am not denying total depravity. I'm suggesting that to be made in the image of God is you are not made in ETERNAL sin. The elect are made only in temporal sin - that is their sin is covered by the blood of Christ already. The reprobate do not have that advantage! Believing the Gospel does not make you clean in the sight of the Lord. God's people are already perfectly spotless in God's eyes when they are born. They are sinful... yes. But God does not see them as sinners - instead He sees them as perfectly righteous in Christ. He looks upon them as He looks upon Christ - in HIS IMAGE. They have the capacity to know the truth BECAUSE God has determined for them to know the truth. Contrast this with the reprobate man. At birth, the reprobate is looked upon in hatred. This person's entire life of sin which is not atoned for is before God. He has determined each and every evil deed this baby will do, and He will mete out a pound for pound punishment upon this person at the appointed time. There is no capacity for this baby to know the truth because God does not see this person as righteous - because Christ did not shed His blood for this reprobate. This person is not made in the image of God, but in the image of SATAN in that Satan himself was created as an object of God's wrath. As a creature that would only know sin and nothing about God and His Grace. - Brandan

MCoving
08-30-07, 04:16 PM
I am not denying total depravity. I'm suggesting that to be made in the image of God is you are not made in ETERNAL sin. The elect are made only in temporal sin - that is their sin is covered by the blood of Christ already. The reprobate do not have that advantage! Believing the Gospel does not make you clean in the sight of the Lord. God's people are already perfectly spotless in God's eyes when they are born. They are sinful... yes. But God does not see them as sinners - instead He sees them as perfectly righteous in Christ. He looks upon them as He looks upon Christ - in HIS IMAGE. They have the capacity to know the truth BECAUSE God has determined for them to know the truth. Contrast this with the reprobate man. At birth, the reprobate is looked upon in hatred. This person's entire life of sin which is not atoned for is before God. He has determined each and every evil deed this baby will do, and He will mete out a pound for pound punishment upon this person at the appointed time. There is no capacity for this baby to know the truth because God does not see this person as righteous - because Christ did not shed His blood for this reprobate. This person is not made in the image of God, but in the image of SATAN in that Satan himself was created as an object of God's wrath. As a creature that would only know sin and nothing about God and His Grace. - Brandan

So these verses in Genesis are not referring to all mankind but just those who are Gods children? I dont know.. I've always been told that made in the image of God meant something that all humans were made as.. but I never understood what was meant by being made in the image of God. Whether thats physical or having a mind, knowledge, or what... I think this was one of those loop holes in my old religion. Same as when people said they heard from God or just knew what to do, like what College to pick, etc.. finding ways to know Gods Will stuff..

Gen 1:26, (KJV) (http://bible.5solas.org/bible.php?view=1&version=kjv&book=1&chapter=1&verse1=26&verse2=&ascdesc=&abrv=1&strip=0&converge=0&footnotes=0&createchaps=1&compare=0&andor=0&restrict=&startbook=&endbook=&references=&highlight=1&chaplinks=&remove=&keywords=image+of+God), And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.
Gen 1:27, (KJV) (http://bible.5solas.org/bible.php?view=1&version=kjv&book=1&chapter=1&verse1=27&verse2=&ascdesc=&abrv=1&strip=0&converge=0&footnotes=0&createchaps=1&compare=0&andor=0&restrict=&startbook=&endbook=&references=&highlight=1&chaplinks=&remove=&keywords=image+of+God), So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

Mary

Saint Nicholas
08-30-07, 08:46 PM
Ok Dan, [gerhard]

You have asked many questions, and you have received many answers. Also there are plenty of threads for you to read as pertaining to the points you listed below in your profile. Now I am going to ask you a question. Below is part of your profile. Can you please state to the forum audience why you believe the points listed below are true? Share with us your soteriological understanding. Please, if you will, address each point.

Thank You........Nicholas :)




Soteriological Position:
Amyraldianism

Are some men elected to damnation?:
No

Is salvation offered to all who hear the Gospel?:
Yes

God wants all men to be saved?:
Yes

Jesus died for all men?:
Yes

God wanted Adam to fall into sin?:
No

Baptism is required for salvation?:
Yes

Assurance:
I don't know

Thank you again,
Nicholas :)

gerhard
08-31-07, 06:00 AM
Ok Dan, [gerhard]You have asked many questions, and you have received many answers. Also there are plenty of threads for you to read as pertaining to the points you listed below in your profile. Now I am going to ask you a question. Below is part of your profile. Can you please state to the forum audience why you believe the points listed below are true? Share with us your soteriological understanding. Please, if you will, address each point.

Since I have committed not to post anything contrary to Network positions, I don't see how I can comply with your request. However, since the thread is about how LCMS might differ from the Network on the practices of the ekklesia, here is the LCMS view where it might differ from the Network view.

Soteriological Position:
The LCMS upholds universal atonement (FOC SD, Election, Para. 28)
.

Therefore, if we wish to consider our eternal election to salvation with profit, we must in every way hold sturdily and firmly to this, that, as the preaching of repentance, so also the promise of the Gospel is universalis (universal), that is, it pertains to all men, Luke 24, 47. For this reason Christ has commanded that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in His name among all nations. For God loved the world and gave His Son, John 3, 16. Christ bore the sins of the world, John 1, 29, gave His flesh for the life of the world, John 6, 51; His blood is the propitiation for the sins of the whole world, 1 John 1, 7; 2, 2. Christ says: Come unto Me, all ye that labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest, Matt. 11, 28. God hath concluded them all in unbelief, that He might have mercy upon all, Rom. 11, 32. The Lord is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance, 2 Pet. 3, 9. The same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon Him, Rom. 10, 12. The righteousness of God, which is by faith of Jesus Christ, unto all and upon all them that believe, Rom. 3, 22. This is the will of Him that sent Me, that every one that seeth the Son and believeth on Him may have everlasting life, John 6, 40. Likewise it is Christ's command that to all in common to whom repentance is preached this promise of the Gospel also should be offered Luke 24, 47; Mark 16, 15.

Are some men elected to damnation?:
See above

Is salvation offered to all who hear the Gospel?:
See above

God wants all men to be saved?:
See above

Jesus died for all men?:
See above

God wanted Adam to fall into sin?:
The LCMS upholds God's will of Majesty in permitting Adam to fall (Bondage of the Will).


The same answer will be given to those who askóWhy did He permit Adam to fall? And why did He make all of us to be infected with the same sin, when He might have kept him, and might have created us from some other seed, or might first have cleansed that, before He created us from it?ó
God is that Being, for whose will no cause or reason is to be assigned, as a rule or standard by which it acts; seeing that, nothing is superior or equal to it, but it is itself the rule of all things. For if it acted by any rule or standard, or from any cause or reason, it would be no longer the will of GOD. Wherefore, what God wills, is not therefore right, because He ought or ever was bound so to will; but on the contrary, what takes place is therefore right, because He so wills. A cause and reason are assigned for the will of the creature, but not for the will of the Creator; unless you set up, over Him, another Creator.
Baptism is required for salvation?:
The LCMS states that Baptism is necessary to salvation (Augsburg Confession, Art. IX).

Assurance:
The LCMS teaches that the Spirit bears witness (FOC, SD, Election, Para. 74, 75).


For the Spirit bears witness to the elect that they are God's children, Rom. 8, 16. And although they sometimes fall into temptation so grievous that they imagine they perceive no more power of the indwelling Spirit of God, and say with David, Ps. 31, 22: I said in my haste, I am cut off from before Thine eyes, yet they should, without regard to what they experience in themselves, again [be encouraged and] say with David, as is written ibidem, in the words immediately following: Nevertheless Thou heardest the voice of my supplications when I cried unto Thee. And since our election to eternal life is founded not upon our godliness or virtue, but alone upon the merit of Christ and the gracious will of His Father, who cannot deny Himself, because He is unchangeable in will and essence, therefore, when His children depart from obedience and stumble, He has them called again to repentance through the Word, and the Holy Ghost wishes thereby to be efficacious in them for conversion; and when they turn to Him again in true repentance by a right faith, He will always manifest the old paternal heart to all those who tremble at His Word and from their heart turn again to Him, as it is written, Jer. 3, 1: If a man put away his wife, and she go from him and become another man's, shall he return unto her again? Shall not that land be greatly polluted? But thou hast played the harlot with many lovers; yet return again to Me, saith the Lord.

Calvinator
08-31-07, 08:02 AM
These questions were not asked of my, but I wanted to chime in and answer these questions in my own words.

gerhard, your post comes across a little evasive to me.

Soteriological Position:

High Supreme Sovereign Grace.


Are some men elected to damnation?:

God has determined from the beginning who He would redeem and who He will not and the final resting place of the righteous and the final resting place of the wicked, who will have no rest. this decision is according to the will of God and purpose and has nothing to do any foreseen actions of the sinner.


Is salvation offered to all who hear the Gospel?:

Some preach a gospel that they will offer to everyone that they preach to. God does not offer the gospel to anyone. God gives the gospel to His elect and the elect don't have the choice to reject it. They receive it, because it is given to them. The reprobate reject it, because it is not given to them. The good news is the gospel and that gospel is that God has saved His people from their sins.


God wants all men to be saved?:

If "all men" is defined as every single person, then the answer is no. If "all men" is defined as Revaluation 5:9, then the answer would be yes.

Rev 5:9 And they sung a new song, saying, Thou art worthy to take the book, and to open the seals thereof: for thou wast slain, and hast redeemed us to God by thy blood out of every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation;


Jesus died for all men?:

Jesus died for all those given to Him by the Father.

Rev 5:9 And they sung a new song, saying, Thou art worthy to take the book, and to open the seals thereof: for thou wast slain, and hast redeemed us to God by thy blood out of every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation;


God wanted Adam to fall into sin?:
Yes. God has decreed all things, whatsoever comes to pass. God created man and put him in the garden of Eden along with the tree of knowledge of good and evil and told Adam not to eat from that tree. when God told Adam not to eat from the tree of knowledge of good and evil, He made a law knowing full well that this law would be broken and that Adam would fall and all the sin and misery that would follow. God does with purpose. This was His purpose. It was more than knowing what would happen. It was His design.


Baptism is required for salvation?:

The only thing that is required for baptism is a steak in your favorite marinade before grilling.:)

gerhard
09-03-07, 05:25 AM
gerhard, your post comes across a little evasive to me.

I could only use official LCMS confessions in my response. I was pushing the limit by quoting Bondage of the Will which is included in the BOC but only by reference.

I may have oversimplified differences in Soteriological position and related questions but I believe that atonement is the key difference between consistent LCMS and Network confessors. We could go into more detail if you wish.

As far as baptism being required for salvation, I would have perferred a clearer LCMS citation. I believe, logically, a consistent LCMS confessor would uphold the fact that God will accomplish a baptism of water and of the Spirit for each and every one of the elect. However, I am limited to the actual content of the LCMS confessions.

On the subject of God wanting Adam to fall into sin. I believe your post has identified a subtle yet important difference between the LCMS and the Network position:


God has decreed all things, whatsoever comes to pass. God created man and put him in the garden of Eden along with the tree of knowledge of good and evil and told Adam not to eat from that tree. when God told Adam not to eat from the tree of knowledge of good and evil, He made a law knowing full well that this law would be broken and that Adam would fall and all the sin and misery that would follow. God does with purpose. This was His purpose.

The LCMS confessor of Bondage of the Will would not presume to know God's purpose in permitting the fall but acknowledges that it is right:


God is that Being, for whose will no cause or reason is to be assigned, as a rule or standard by which it acts; seeing that, nothing is superior or equal to it, but it is itself the rule of all things. For if it acted by any rule or standard, or from any cause or reason, it would be no longer the will of GOD. Wherefore, what God wills, is not therefore right, because He ought or ever was bound so to will; but on the contrary, what takes place is therefore right, because He so wills.

Jesus' Boy
09-04-07, 07:10 PM
Amen Brandan: The only true God is the God of ABSOLUTE PREDESTINATION! What a comfort to the elect!.......I heartily recommend a book: ABSOLUTE PREDESTINATION by Jerome Zanchius............KK

I have this book, i'll plan to read it this week.

Chris
Jesus is Lord!