Gary McNees wrote:
> >>
> >>Tell me, every time you sin, is it God causing you to
> >>choose to sin?
> >>
> >>Since you have not free will, I think that this is the
> >>consequence.
> >>
> >
> >
> > Romans 7 explains this nicely.
>
> Look, I agree with Paul, and Peter, and James, and the Bible.
>
> Romans 7 DENIES the Edwardian/Calvinistic theory of the will, that
the
> choice is determined by the desire.
>
No it doesn't. What it illustrates is that the regenerated man has two
inclinations within him. Prior to regeneration he had only one -the
flesh. The flesh satisfies only self. But regeneration re-estabilished
in man the capacity to again love God. The regenerated man now desires
to please God. Prior to regeneration, "there is none who does good,
not even one." Man only had one orientation. All choices were to serve
self. Even when he went to church and dropped money in the offering
plate, self was being served for "none understands." What he didn't
understand was that he was self serving in either seeking to merit some
sort of response from God, or he was hoping someone would see him and
give him a pat on the back, to become a big name amoung men, or a
thousand other selfish reasons. But the goal or object was always
self. Total depravity.

In Rom 7, Paul teaches that just because regenerate man now has a new
orientation, to please God, that didn't mean that man could again seek
to achieve a result using the same presumption he used when he sought
to please God prior to having this new capacity -the flesh. Rather,
just as one must depend upon the empowerment of God to bring one to the
point of belief and to supply him with the enablement to believe,
equally so is it after having been justified, that sanctification
requires a dependence upon God's enablement. "Quench not the Spirit."
"Be being filled with the Spirit." Just as the believer gains his
salvation (justification) by relying upon the work of Christ, even so
he must rely upon the enabling power of the Spirit while he is working
out his salvation (sanctification) in the moment by moment world.

((( s.r.c.b-s is a moderated group. All posts are approved by a moderator. )))
((( Read http://srcbs.org for details about this group BEFORE you post. )))

In article <103.59.16.05.485113000@srcbs.org>, basicallyblues says...
>
>I wrote:
>
>>Without a doubt my statement that "Jesus is Michael" is an implicit
>>Bible teaching
>
>Matthew wrote:
>
>>No, rather, without a doubt, it is NOT taught by the Bible in ANY way,
>>implicit or not.
>
>Wrong.

No, it is you who is wrong, as I have already shown. See below -- AGAIN!

> It is implicitly taught.