John UK wrote:
Joe, a 'just man' has imputed righteousness, which leads to righteous living.

#2 The ministry of Peter to him was for the purpose that he and his house should be SAVED.

John UK wrote:
If a person does not believe in Jesus, they will remain in darkness, but if they believe in Jesus, they will not remain in darkness. Cornelius was still in darkness, as is evident.

John UK wrote:
And as I began to speak, the Holy Ghost fell on them, as on us at the beginning.

Salvation was prophesied to be poured out and upon the elect. We find the fulfillment in Acts, of the Spirit being poured out and upon. That is salvation. As for the indwelling of the Spirit, that is in regards to "the presence of Christ" In the O.T. the presence of God was to be found at eh mercy seat in the tabernacle and the temple. Now the mercy seat is in heaven. So how does God dwell in our presence now? He dwells in our temple via the Holy Spirit.

Do not confuse indwelling of the Holy Spirit with salvation. One must have his heart washed clean and regenerated before Christ can reside there, in the person of the Holy Spirit.

DJC49 wrote:
And what of Paul's joining in on "keeping the Law" in Acts 21:24,26?

John UK wrote:
The apostle Paul had no such hypocrisy, and he is the perfect example of how God's Spirit can transform a man, making him holy by faith (justified) and holy by nature, because of the indwelling Spirit of God.

I am chief! The verb is in the present indicative, just as are all the verbs in Romans 7 14-25 "But I AM carnal...O wretched man that I AM! Who will deliver me from this body of death? O wretched man that I AM!...I thank God--through Jesus Christ our Lord!

2 Cor 12:7 And lest I should be exalted above measure by the abundance of the revelations, a thorn in the flesh was given to me, a messenger of Satan to buffet me, lest I be exalted above measure. Concerning this thing I pleaded with the Lord three times that it might depart from me. And He said to me, "My GRACE is sufficient for you, for My strength is made perfect in weakness." Therefore most gladly I will rather BOAST in my INFIRMATIES, that the power of Christ may rest upon me.

John UK wrote:
Quite agree. And I would also add this:
Peter's self-confidence was manifest before he was baptised with the Spirit, so for one who had not yet received the Spirit, he showed remarkable bravery.

Gal 2:11 Now when Peter had come to Antioch, I withstood him to his face, because he was to be blamed; for before certain men came from James, he would eat with the Gentiles; but when they came, he withdrew and separated himself, FEARING those who were of the circumcision. And the rest of the Jews also played the HYPOCRITE with HIM, so that even Barnabas was carried away with their hypocrisy. But when I saw that they were not straightforward about the truth of the gospel, I said to Peter before them all, "If you, being a Jew, live in the manner of Gentiles and not as the Jews, why do you compel Gentiles to live as Jews?

Why does man always try to impute some type of enabled righteousness into the nature of man?

You guys are fixated on the works of man, even after he receives the Spirit.

Candle lit wrote:
"Will you leave also?" to which the response was, "Lord where would we go?" "You have the keys to eternal life."

John 6:63 "It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh profits nothing. The words that I speak to you are spirit, and they are life. But there are some of you who do not believe." For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were who did not believe, and who would betray Him. And He said, "Therefore I have said to you that no one can come to Me unless it has been granted to him by My Father." From that time many of His disciples went back and walked with Him no more.

And as for going with you wherever you go regardless of the persecution. That was Peter's mantra. And what became of this haughty attitude of mans ability to follow Christ into all persecution?

John UK wrote:
I can't believe that, Roger.
Besides, there are those who address the Lord in most reverent terms, yet disobey him.
And there are those who address him as Jesus, who obey him implicitly.
Of course there are those who address him as Jesus who are not even converted.
And there are those who address him reverently who actually do obey him as Lord.
I watched a documentary on the Amish of Pennsylvania last night. It was very instructive as to how they live in darkness with very strict rules like how you hold your trousers (pants) up using suspenders, or painting your buggy a certain shade of grey. Do it wrong and you get shunned, even excommunicated.
It was nice to see interviews with two of the company who had got a hold of an English Bible, had read it, and believed it (as opposed to the Amish rules) and seemingly were soundly converted. Oh the joy and peace in the faces of these men, as they were set free from rules, regulations and legalism, to serve the living Jesus, their Lord and Saviour.
Looking unto Jesus, the author and finisher of our faith.

Mike wrote:
I've seen 2 answers so far to the question I asked back then: Was the rich young man one of the elect? (Matthew 19:16-24)
Both answers were no. Anyone else have thoughts on it?

Only the Holy Spirit, whom is of the same essence as Christ addresses our Lord as Jesus apart from unbelievers.

A good work on this can be found if you scroll down to the 15th paragraph

Mike wrote:
Can a man who has no moral ability be considered a moral being?

God has to change mans moral ability to accept the harsh circumstances of inability to atone for his own sin. God has to show man that he is totally unable to please God by anything that he is doing.

kenny wrote:
If I had to sit and listen to Robert Schuller lisp through a sermon I would want to shoot myself, too.

Manson had her back to the cross and told the guests, “Oh, guess what? One of our windows blew out.”

But the tourists, who were facing the cross, informed her that the man had just shot himself, she said."

John UK wrote:
DJC49, if you are saying that there is 'saving faith' and also a 'non-saving faith' then would the non-saving faith be a gift from God?
I'm still pondering about the centurion. If he was exercising true saving faith in Christ and his ability, then what was it that made this so great, even greater than the faith of Jews, to whom Jesus was sent?

Man does have the ability to trust in things such as science, people, history and god. But man does not have the moral ability to place trust in the objective person and work of Christ. Man does have the capacity to trust in a god, and his own acts of piety and repentence, but that is not saving faith. The moral ability (and or will) of man to place trust in the person of Christ as his substitute, and upon the finished work on the cross, and trust in His promise to raise us from the grave is a gift from God.

This moral ablility itself is a resurrection from death.

Barry from Ky. wrote:
John Y, Just a quick question. Why do you think Jesus got baptisted by John the Baptist. And, why did God in Heaven decide at that very moment in time to recognize His Son on earth. Anyone please feel free to give me their answer. Thanks.

On Sunday morning I was teaching Sunday school before the worship service. Suppose I said, I have brought coffee and donuts for everyone. Then I said that I wanted every man to clean up after himself. And then I noticed that no one could eat the horseradish flavoured donuts. And then I said, whosover will could take the horseradish flavoured donuts home for their kids.

We know this. I have not brought coffee and donuts for every single person living in the world. We know that I did not expect every man in the world to clean up after eating their donuts. People still had the ability to eat the horseradish flavoure donuts, but no one was willing, because they don't like horseradish. And we know that no one took the horseradish flavoured donuts home for their children.

The epistles are addressed to believers. A specific group of people. Whenever these passages for "all, everyone, every man" are used in Scripture it is specific to a certain group of people. "To the Saints in Rome" etc.

DJC49 wrote:
Now when exactly is a man given this ability to come?
From what I understand you saying, man can NOT come; however, there arrives a point in time when he CAN come. When and how does this happen? And to WHOM does is happen? Whosoever?

Luke 3:6 And all flesh shall see the salvation of God...21 Now when all the people were baptized, it came to pass, that Jesus also being baptized, and praying, the heaven was opened.

Matt 3:5 Then went out to him Jersalem, and all of Judea, and all the region around about Jordan. And were baptized of him in the Jordan, confessing their sins.

Now did all flesh see the salvation of God, even the american indians in 33 AD?

Now did all the Saducees, Pharisees, Herod and the Romans come down to the Jordan to be baptized by John?

Mike wrote:
"Can" implies ability. Now man *can* come.

Now there are those that accuse Reformed folk for building their theology based upon logic, not Scripture.

The idea that "Can implies ability" is the logic that the free willie's rely upon to build their entire systematic framework of theology. But the only place in the Scriptures that support a "prevenient grace" (grace that preceeds to every man) is Genesis 6:3 "And the Lord said, My Spirit whall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh;"

Sacha Liszt wrote:
I am a Socialist and sadly you're mistaken.

Those who agree the the principals of socialism share each others wealth equally amongst themselves.

Those who agree to commune together in a community and share the fruit of each ones labours and burdens equally amongst themselves.

Take note here though! I wrote, To Those who agree. That is 100% of all those who AGREE! If some other people want to share each one's wealth and burdens, good for them. But if they want to share other peoples wealth against their will, well then, that is THEFT!

Calvinist Understanding wrote:
Roge
I made one post on the 2/2/09 and it had nothing to do with the subject of faith being a gift!
Do you just enjoy making it all up?
Rather than refer me to a post, quote my words where I said that man can believe without help from the Holy Spirit. What I have been arguing against is that faith is a new faculty, or a new ability that man did not possess before. I have never disputed that the direction of this ability is changed by the Holy Spirit in conversion so that it can be directed towards God.

John UK wrote:
To differentiate between God and other spirits, I can call him the Great Spirit, as opposed to lesser spirits.

God the Father = Spirit
God the Son = Spirit/Spiritual Flesh
God the Holy Ghost = Spirit
When we are saved, we become one spirit with Christ, hence Paul's exhortation never to fornicate.

"I can call him the Great Spirit?"

Is that the name that He has given us to describe Him? I believe He uses the name "Holy Spirit" which is not greater than the lesser spirits. It is totally unlike any other spririt. Totally uncommon.

"God the Son=Spirit/Spiritural Flesh?"

Making things up as we go along again here?

When we ignore the history of others, we will repeat the same errors that they have made.

John UK wrote:
When the great Spirit who is Jehovah was manifest upon earth in the flesh, he, the great Spirit, took to himself the human flesh, thereby becoming both God and Man. Incomprehensibly made man, but both fully God and fully man. This is a most wonderful mystery which I celebrate always. The Lord Jesus Christ is God manifest in the flesh.

Great Spirit? Have you seen this great spirit? Have you been smoking peyote or something?