In Matthew 22:1-14 it states: 1 Jesus spoke to them again in parables, saying, 2 "The kingdom of heaven may be compared to a king who gave a wedding feast for his son. 3 "And he sent out his slaves to call those who had been invited to the wedding feast, and they were unwilling to come. 4 "Again he sent out other slaves saying, `Tell those who have been invited, "Behold, I have prepared my dinner; my oxen and my fattened livestock are all butchered and everything is ready; come to the wedding feast."' 5 "But they paid no attention and went their way, one to his own farm, another to his business, 6 and the rest seized his slaves and mistreated them and killed them. 7 "But the king was enraged, and he sent his armies and destroyed those murderers and set their city on fire. 8 "Then he said to his slaves, `The wedding is ready, but those who were invited were not worthy. 9 `Go therefore to the main highways, and as many as you find there, invite to the wedding feast.' 10 "Those slaves went out into the streets and gathered together all they found, both evil and good; and the wedding hall was filled with dinner guests. 11 "But when the king came in to look over the dinner guests, he saw a man there who was not dressed in wedding clothes, 12 and he said to him, `Friend, how did you come in here without wedding clothes?' And the man was speechless. 13 "Then the king said to the servants, `Bind him hand and foot, and throw him into the outer darkness; in that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.' 14 "For many are called, but few are chosen."
Now we know this has application spiritually to Jesus being sent by the Father and that this has application to spreading the gospel.
1. Why or how did the invited ones not come, how were they unwilling if they were invited.
2. How could the invitation be sent out to whoever they come in contact with if that was not so?
3. How can the called not be chosen?
Kelly Powers
Wednesday, August 15, 2007
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
Matt said...
The Gospel of Luke records a similar wedding feast parable as told by Jesus. I would like to discuss this parallel account along with the Matthew version:
1 Now it happened, as He went into the house of one of the rulers of the Pharisees to eat bread on the Sabbath, that they watched Him closely. 2 And behold, there was a certain man before Him who had dropsy. 3 And Jesus, answering, spoke to the lawyers and Pharisees, saying, "Is it lawful to heal on the Sabbath?" 4 But they kept silent. And He took him and healed him, and let him go. 5 Then He answered them, saying, "Which of you, having a donkey F105 or an ox that has fallen into a pit, will not immediately pull him out on the Sabbath day?" 6 And they could not answer Him regarding these things. 7 So He told a parable to those who were invited, when He noted how they chose the best places, saying to them: 8 "When you are invited by anyone to a wedding feast, do not sit down in the best place, lest one more honorable than you be invited by him; 9 and he who invited you and him come and say to you, 'Give place to this man,' and then you begin with shame to take the lowest place. 10 But when you are invited, go and sit down in the lowest place, so that when he who invited you comes he may say to you, 'Friend, go up higher.' Then you will have glory in the presence of those who sit at the table with you. 11 For whoever exalts himself will be humbled, and he who humbles himself will be exalted." 12 Then He also said to him who invited Him, "When you give a dinner or a supper, do not ask your friends, your brothers, your relatives, nor rich neighbors, lest they also invite you back, and you be repaid. 13 But when you give a feast, invite the poor, the maimed, the lame, the blind. 14 And you will be blessed, because they cannot repay you; for you shall be repaid at the resurrection of the just." 15 Now when one of those who sat at the table with Him heard these things, he said to Him, "Blessed is he who shall eat bread in the kingdom of God!" 16 Then He said to him, "A certain man gave a great supper and invited many, 17 and sent his servant at supper time to say to those who were invited, 'Come, for all things are now ready.' 18 But they all with one accord began to make excuses. The first said to him, 'I have bought a piece of ground, and I must go and see it. I ask you to have me excused.' 19 And another said, 'I have bought five yoke of oxen, and I am going to test them. I ask you to have me excused.' 20 Still another said, 'I have married a wife, and therefore I cannot come.' 21 So that servant came and reported these things to his master. Then the master of the house, being angry, said to his servant, 'Go out quickly into the streets and lanes of the city, and bring in here the poor and the maimed and the lame and the blind.' 22 And the servant said, 'Master, it is done as you commanded, and still there is room.' 23 Then the master said to the servant, 'Go out into the highways and hedges, and compel them to come in, that my house may be filled. 24 For I say to you that none of those men who were invited shall taste my supper.'"
August 15, 2007 2:50 PM
Matt said...
1. Why or how did the invited ones not come, how were they unwilling if they were invited?
MATTS RESPONSE: Of course, the ones invited were the Jews. Why did they not come to the Wedding? They rejected the Messiah and they will never enter into God's rest because of their unbelief, (Heb. 3:19). How were the Jews unwilling? It was by thier unbelief.
2. How could the invitation be sent out to whoever they come in contact with if that was not so?
MATT'S RESPONSE: Actually, the original invitation was only to the Jews. Now (post-atonement in the new covenant) that invitation extends to the lame and the blind of the world (Luke 14:21) and that group would be the elect from among the Gentiles.
3. How can the called not be chosen?
MATT'S RESPONSE: It is possible to be called and not be chosen. I think many unsaved people in the Old Testament were called but not chosen. Judas is one example of a person who was called but not chosen. He was destined to betray Christ to fulfill the scriptures, (John 17:12).
It is interesting that Matthew 22 parable says this: "Then he said to his slaves, `The wedding is ready, but those who were invited were not worthy. Therefore go into the highways, and as many as you find, invite to the wedding.' 10 So those servants went out into the highways and gathered together all whom they found, both bad and good."
Kelly believes this to be a universal invitation to all "bad and good." That would seem to be the case, however, as with most scriptures, there are parallel stories with more important information. Luke gives more details about those who are invited to Wedding Feast. In the Luke account it says, "'Go out quickly into the streets and lanes of the city, and bring in here the poor and the maimed and the lame and the blind." The new invitation extends to the lame and the blind of the world (Luke 14:21). The lame and blind would be the elect. Moreover, the Luke account give this admonition to come to the Wedding Feast: "'Go out into the highways and hedges, and compel them to come in, that my house may be filled," (Luke 14:23). Where is the free will decision to the world? A conversion method by compulsion does not agree with Arminianism. The invitation to the Wedding is resting upon a "free will" decision. It takes a substancial complusion and intervention by God to get people to believe. Surely, compulsion is violation of free will but it is required because the ungenerate heart of man is totally depraved (Gen 6:5, John 3:19). Thus, salvation is a miracle of God without a human decision (John 1:13).
I hope that this helps.
Blessings!
Matt
Matt said...
The Gospel of Luke records a similar wedding feast parable as told by Jesus. I would like to discuss this parallel account along with the Matthew version:
1 Now it happened, as He went into the house of one of the rulers of the Pharisees to eat bread on the Sabbath, that they watched Him closely. 2 And behold, there was a certain man before Him who had dropsy. 3 And Jesus, answering, spoke to the lawyers and Pharisees, saying, "Is it lawful to heal on the Sabbath?" 4 But they kept silent. And He took him and healed him, and let him go. 5 Then He answered them, saying, "Which of you, having a donkey F105 or an ox that has fallen into a pit, will not immediately pull him out on the Sabbath day?" 6 And they could not answer Him regarding these things. 7 So He told a parable to those who were invited, when He noted how they chose the best places, saying to them: 8 "When you are invited by anyone to a wedding feast, do not sit down in the best place, lest one more honorable than you be invited by him; 9 and he who invited you and him come and say to you, 'Give place to this man,' and then you begin with shame to take the lowest place. 10 But when you are invited, go and sit down in the lowest place, so that when he who invited you comes he may say to you, 'Friend, go up higher.' Then you will have glory in the presence of those who sit at the table with you. 11 For whoever exalts himself will be humbled, and he who humbles himself will be exalted." 12 Then He also said to him who invited Him, "When you give a dinner or a supper, do not ask your friends, your brothers, your relatives, nor rich neighbors, lest they also invite you back, and you be repaid. 13 But when you give a feast, invite the poor, the maimed, the lame, the blind. 14 And you will be blessed, because they cannot repay you; for you shall be repaid at the resurrection of the just." 15 Now when one of those who sat at the table with Him heard these things, he said to Him, "Blessed is he who shall eat bread in the kingdom of God!" 16 Then He said to him, "A certain man gave a great supper and invited many, 17 and sent his servant at supper time to say to those who were invited, 'Come, for all things are now ready.' 18 But they all with one accord began to make excuses. The first said to him, 'I have bought a piece of ground, and I must go and see it. I ask you to have me excused.' 19 And another said, 'I have bought five yoke of oxen, and I am going to test them. I ask you to have me excused.' 20 Still another said, 'I have married a wife, and therefore I cannot come.' 21 So that servant came and reported these things to his master. Then the master of the house, being angry, said to his servant, 'Go out quickly into the streets and lanes of the city, and bring in here the poor and the maimed and the lame and the blind.' 22 And the servant said, 'Master, it is done as you commanded, and still there is room.' 23 Then the master said to the servant, 'Go out into the highways and hedges, and compel them to come in, that my house may be filled. 24 For I say to you that none of those men who were invited shall taste my supper.'"
August 15, 2007 2:50 PM
Matt said...
1. Why or how did the invited ones not come, how were they unwilling if they were invited?
MATTS RESPONSE: Of course, the ones invited were the Jews. They rejected the Messiah and they will never enter into God's rest because of their unbelief, (Heb. 3:19).
2. How could the invitation be sent out to whoever they come in contact with if that was not so?
MATT'S RESPONSE: Actually, the original invitation was only to the Jews. Now that invitation extends to the lame and the blind of the world (Luke 14:21) and that group would be the elect from among the Gentiles.
3. How can the called not be chosen?
MATT'S RESPONSE: It is possible to be called and not be chosen. I think many unsaved people in the Old Testament were called but not chosen. Judas is one example of a person who was called but not chosen. He was destined to betray Christ to fulfill the scriptures, (John 17:12).
It is interesting that Matthew 22 parable says this: "Then he said to his slaves, `The wedding is ready, but those who were invited were not worthy. Therefore go into the highways, and as many as you find, invite to the wedding.' 10 So those servants went out into the highways and gathered together all whom they found, both bad and good."
Kelly believes this to be a universal invitation to all "bad and good." That would seem to be the case, however, as with most scriptures, there are parallel stories with more important information. Luke gives more details about those who are invited to Wedding Feast. In the Luke account it says, "'Go out quickly into the streets and lanes of the city, and bring in here the poor and the maimed and the lame and the blind." The new invitation extends to the lame and the blind of the world (Luke 14:21). The lame and blind would be the elect. Moreover, the Luke account give this admonition to come to the Wedding Feast: "'Go out into the highways and hedges, and compel them to come in, that my house may be filled," (Luke 14:23). Where is the free will decision to the world? A conversion method by compulsion does not agree with Arminianism. The invitation to the Wedding is resting upon a "free will" decision. It takes a substancial complusion and intervention by God to get people to believe. Surely, compulsion is violation of free will but it is required because the ungenerate heart of man is totally depraved (Gen 6:5, John 3:19). Thus, salvation is a miracle of God without a human decision (John 1:13).
I hope that this helps.
Blessings!
Matt
Greetings Matt. I see you are busy on the afcministry.blogspot.com with Ham. I want to do as you requested to focus here. I am going to reply to what you have shared thus far. I don't know your life but at times mine is open and at times busy. I plan to reply to what you say within the week of your post, and would be of the same thought with you. I am sure you are busy at times as well. So with that said I will make some replys to your comments.
KP
Kelly's reply to Matt:
1. Why or how did the invited ones not come, how were they unwilling if they were invited?
MATTS RESPONSE: Of course, the ones invited were the Jews. Why did they not come to the Wedding? They rejected the Messiah and they will never enter into God's rest because of their unbelief, (Heb. 3:19). How were the Jews unwilling? It was by thier unbelief.
Kelly: The context of Matthew 22:1-14 is that there was an invitation to a bunch of people, but they rejected it, as you noted. However you said, "How were the Jews unwilling? It was by their unbelief." Well the opposite would be true then, how would they be willing? By their belief! See your argument has nothing to stand on at all, though you don't see that, but in reality it doesn't.
2. How could the invitation be sent out to whoever they come in contact with if that was not so?
MATT'S RESPONSE: Actually, the original invitation was only to the Jews. Now (post-atonement in the new covenant) that invitation extends to the lame and the blind of the world (Luke 14:21) and that group would be the elect from among the Gentiles.
Kelly's reply: Again, you, you, you, I cannot say that enough, you add the word "elect" into this that has no basis at all. It does not matter directly if this was to the Jews, the fact is "the Jews" were given an invitation and they could of accepted it but they did not, thus they rejected it because they were as you said, "unwilling because of their unbelief". Again, if they can be unwilling in regards to their unbelief, then they can be willing based upon their belief. What you said in regards to Luke 14:21 is so unbelievably amazing, I sit here thinking do you really see how off you are by reading into that text something that is not there at all? The context of Matthew and Luke is that the invitation was given and people had the responsibility and availability to accept or reject the invitation. You miss the whole point, they rejected based upon their own belief, not based upon anything predeterminism. Those who believe you add over and over again are the elect and that is why they believe, but again nothing in that text states anything of that at all, nada, nothing, you are the one who adds that.
3. How can the called not be chosen?
MATT'S RESPONSE: It is possible to be called and not be chosen. I think many unsaved people in the Old Testament were called but not chosen. Judas is one example of a person who was called but not chosen. He was destined to betray Christ to fulfill the scriptures, (John 17:12).
Kelly's reply: The point of my question was the fact that God calls people but they reject the call of God based upon them, not upon God. And the same is Biblical and logical, that people accept Jesus based upon what has been revealed of God's truth (The Word, creation, Holy Spirit, angels, preachers, evangelists etc) A person does not come to know God outside of God moving in that persons life, but as the OT and NT clearly states people have the responsibility to accept or reject that message. As to Judas, it is interesting you bring him into this since I believe that actually hurts the case for Calvinism. Jesus said He choose the 12: "You did not choose Me, I choose you, and appointed you, that you should go and bear fruit, and that your fruit should remain, that whatever you ask the Father in My name, He may give to you." (John 15:16 NASB) A few observations from Judas since you brought him up. Jesus said He choose him, appointed him, to bear fruit, and that his fruit should remain. Did Jesus fail? Since this was spoken of the 12, what happened? Unless you have the perspective that Jesus called them, appointed them, to follow Him of choice, this just does not fit the bill at all. Now we know from Scripture that Jesus said Judas was the one to betray Him, but prophecy does not mean predeterminism, but rather that God knows and speaks forth that which is going to take place as it will. Judas was not forced to follow Jesus at first and was not forced to turn on Jesus, he had the capacity to accept or reject. Just for the record not one of any of Jesus' disciples were born again, regenerated inwardly by the Spirit until after the work of the cross and resurrection. (John 7:37-39, John 20:22) So how was it any of them were able to follow, believe, trust, seek, etc in Jesus at all if they were not regenerated? As to Judas, as noted before, it was declared what was going to happen to Judas but that does not mean he was forced to do it. That is a serious error by many who teach this.
Matt said: "Kelly believes this to be a universal invitation to all "bad and good." That would seem to be the case, however, as with most scriptures, there are parallel stories with more important information. Luke gives more details about those who are invited to Wedding Feast. In the Luke account it says, "'Go out quickly into the streets and lanes of the city, and bring in here the poor and the maimed and the lame and the blind." The new invitation extends to the lame and the blind of the world (Luke 14:21). The lame and blind would be the elect. Moreover, the Luke account give this admonition to come to the Wedding Feast: "'Go out into the highways and hedges, and compel them to come in, that my house may be filled," (Luke 14:23). Where is the free will decision to the world? A conversion method by compulsion does not agree with Arminianism."
Kelly's reply: Matt you have some big problems with your understanding of both Matthew and Luke. Now most of this comes from your reformed theology, but I encourage you to step outside of that and consider the Scriptures. Firstly, Jesus is addressing the Jews who first were rejecting Him. The invitation was for them, and they had choice, but they rejected because of their unbelief. Secondly, the invitation then goes out to the Gentiles, that is within reason of the Scriptures. The facts are that the invitation was given and the people had the choice of accepting or rejecting, that is what these Scriptures demonstrate. As to the issue of "compel them to come in" does not mean they were forced against choice, that is horrible to suggest or think. (not directly saying you said that but that is my observation from your words) Here is some thoughts on this verse from some Bible resources.
Luke 14:21–23 When that servant notified his master that the invitation was being rejected right and left, the master sent him out to the city to invite the poor and the maimed and the lame and the blind. “Both nature and grace abhor a vacuum,” said Bengel. Perhaps the first ones invited picture the leaders of the Jewish people. When they rejected the gospel, God sent it out to the common people of the city of Jerusalem. Many of these responded to the call, but still there was room in the master’s house. And so the lord said to the servant to go out into the highways and by-ways, and compel people to come in. This doubtless pictures the gospel going out to the Gentile people. They were not to be compelled by force of arms (as has been done in the history of Christendom), but rather by force of argument. Loving persuasion was to be used in an effort to bring them in so that the master’s house might be filled. (Believers Bible Commentary)
Luke 14:23 The master’s second invitation extended beyond the city limits, encouraging even more people to come to the feast. This may picture the inclusion of Gentiles in God’s salvation (see Is. 49:6). The instruction to compel them to come in does not mean to force people in, but to urge them. As outsiders, the people might not feel comfortable coming. (Nelson's Study Bible)
Luke 14 This parable is a prophecy of the extension of the gospel to those the Pharisees thought unworthy. The “poor and the maimed and the lame and the blind” (v. 21) represent the despised Jews who were not able to observe the traditional laws of ritual purity (sometimes called “the people of the land”), while those outside the city along the “highways and hedges” (v. 23) represent the Gentiles. (New Geneva Study Bible)
Kelly's thoughts: The word "compel" can have the meaning of force but that does not take away the right of choice. For example people in third word countries are being forced to turn from their Christian beliefs, believe other things, and yet many stand firm in the faith. Compel can easily mean with an intent of urgency, to firmly persuade of the importance. No where do we see Jesus when speaking saying a person must be forced to believe His message.
Matt said: "The invitation to the Wedding is resting upon a "free will" decision. It takes a substancial complusion and intervention by God to get people to believe. Surely, compulsion is violation of free will but it is required because the ungenerate heart of man is totally depraved (Gen 6:5, John 3:19). Thus, salvation is a miracle of God without a human decision (John 1:13)."
Kelly's reply: Again Matt you are reading into the text something that is not there at all. You have inserted "elect" time after time, and you now add "man is totally depraved". Where is this in the text? You have to read that into those verses. Seriously, do you not realize this? Is Genesis 6:5 for all generations? Did not Jesus say in Matthew 5:45 that the Father sends the sun and the rain on the "evil and the good"? What about Matthew 12:35, "The good man brings out of his good treasure what is good; and the evil man brings out of his evil treasure what is evil." What about Matthew 22:10, "Those slaves went out into the streets and gathered together all they found, both evil and good; and the wedding hall was filled with dinner guests." Where does Jesus say that all mankind is constantly doing evil and totally depraved? You read that into the Bible because of your reformed traditions of beliefs. But that is not the case. You argue against free will, why is that so bad? God gives the invitation, as Matthew 22 clearly points out, and the people had the choice of accepting but did not, how is that not free will? And when the text says to go all over to whomever, invite them, how is that not free will, choice? It is God who invites, we are the ones who accept or reject.
It is interesting how you quote John 3:19 but not verse 21? Verse 21 says "But he who practices the truth comes to the light, that his deeds may be manifested as having been wrought in God." How can one practice truth spiritually without having the light? It says they practiced the truth and then through that they come to the light. Seems to indicate a process of choices. Same as in verse 19. People are not totally depraved there, again you have to read into that text what you want it to say. It does not say everyone, all mankind, love darkness. You seem to indicate that, but that is Biblically wrong. Since John 3:14-18 demonstrate people have a choice to accept or reject Jesus, and reading verses 19-21 it is clear based upon how they respond to God their process will demonstrate that which is in them, namely truth or deception.
As to John 1:13. I see you have some comments going with Ham so I will not make much of this. However I will comment that the verses before 13 demonstrate that Jesus came into the world but people rejected Him. Those who receive Him, even those who believe, they become children of God. To become something means you were not that something before. To become children of God in simplicity means to become born again, regenerated. That means those people received Jesus, believed, before they were born again, regenerated. That is a huge hole in Calvinism, not according to me, but according to Scripture. You said to Ham, "There is no contradiction between the verses. I can receive a bump on the head and still not ask for it. Where is the "not born of …human decision" when people become a child of God? Those who see a "free will" in verse 12 have a serious problem with verse 13. BTW: what orphan gets to decide what family he can join? It is the adoptive parent who gets to choose, right?" Here is your problem. Jesus came to the people and offered Himself, thus they received Jesus based upon His coming to them and offering Himself. And verse 13 is absolutely right! Salvation is of God, not man! We don't save ourselves, it is not our will or ability, it is God. So when we receive Jesus and "become" a child of God (regenerated), it is based upon God coming to us, not us of our own saving ourselves.
In reference to the person choosing their child in the adoption process, you are correct the child does not get to choose. However, that is not the God of the Bible. You are using your own thoughts to justify something that is not Biblically supported. Jesus extends His gospel to all and based upon the Word of God we respond and thereby become sons and daughters based upon our calling out to Him. That is what John 1 is stating. Where does the apostle John write what you write in his epistles? Where does John state that only those who are regenerated first can believe in his epistles? Where does John write that man has no choice and is totally depraved? I find the opposite. For example in 1 John 5:10-13 the message is not isolated but for anyone.
Back to Matthew 22:1-14...The message is clear, simple, and not that complicated. It is those who are of the reformed position that make things state differently. The facts are God calls out to the Jews and Gentiles, in fact invites them, and they can accept or reject. Those whom accept are the chosen ones, those who don't are the ones who will perish.
Kelly
Matt's reply to Kelly 8/23:
1. Why or how did the invited ones not come, how were they unwilling if they were invited?
MATTS RESPONSE: Of course, the ones invited were the Jews. Why did they not come to the Wedding? They rejected the Messiah and they will never enter into God's rest because of their unbelief, (Heb. 3:19). How were the Jews unwilling? It was by their unbelief.
Kelly: The context of Matthew 22:1-14 is that there was an invitation to a bunch of people, but they rejected it, as you noted. However you said, "How were the Jews unwilling? It was by their unbelief." Well the opposite would be true then, how would they be willing? By their belief! See your argument has nothing to stand on at all, though you don't see that, but in reality it doesn't.
MATTS RESPONSE 8/23: Now here at the wedding feast parable we have the theology of salvation. The context goes a LIMITED group who were invited [i.e the "Jews"] to the second group, i.e. the "lame and the blind," (Luke 14). Then the servants tell the master that there is still room. So, the master extends the invitation to a third group, " 'Go out to the roads and country lanes and make them come in"!!! What does "make them come in" mean? Do the first and second groups get a second chance? Maybe. They refuse the first "free will" decision. Now the need a little Holy Spirit compulsion! Please tell me why God did not stop at the "free will" method of salvation? Why is compulsion or arguments needed in preachign the gospel? Does this violate "free will"? The Greek word is "anagkzo" which means "to compel" or to necessitate, compel, drive to, constrain by force, threats, etc. FYI, the KJV translation count is nine for anagkzo; 5 "compel," and 4 "constrain." So the third group invitation to the wedding feast actually comes by coercion!!! It is by the use of persuasion or force. It is not a "free will" invitation to all people.
2. How could the invitation be sent out to whoever they come in contact with if that was not so?
MATT'S RESPONSE: Actually, the original invitation was only to the Jews. Now (post-atonement in the new covenant) that invitation extends to the lame and the blind of the world (Luke 14:21) and that group would be the elect from among the Gentiles.
Kelly's reply: Again, you, you, you, I cannot say that enough, you add the word "elect" into this that has no basis at all. It does not matter directly if this was to the Jews, the fact is "the Jews" were given an invitation and they could of accepted it but they did not, thus they rejected it because they were as you said, "unwilling because of their unbelief". Again, if they can be unwilling in regards to their unbelief, then they can be willing based upon their belief.
MATTS RESPONSE 8/23: Again, you ignore the limitations of your examples and proof texts. People with hard hearts are willing to remain in unbelief. Why is that? Is it because unbelief comes naturally to them. Why is that? It is because unbelief is the condition from their birth. Think about this. Do people who are born into this world have to ask to be born? Of course not. Then what makes you think that people can ask for their second spiritual birth? This is the analogy that Jesus uses on Nicodemus in John 3! Remember Jesus said " 6 Flesh gives birth to flesh, but the Spirit gives birth to spirit," John 3:6. You must struggle with the context and the relationship of natural birth to the spiritual birth. However, my theological view see God in the first birth as well as the second. This Reformed position fits well with John 3 much better than your contrived "free will" view.
KP Said: What you said in regards to Luke 14:21 is so unbelievably amazing, I sit here thinking do you really see how off you are by reading into that text something that is not there at all? The context of Matthew and Luke is that the invitation was given and people had the responsibility and availability to accept or reject the invitation. You miss the whole point, they rejected based upon their own belief, not based upon anything predeterminism. Those who believe you add over and over again are the elect and that is why they believe, but again nothing in that text states anything of that at all, nada, nothing, you are the one who adds that."
MATTS RESPONSE 8/23: The parable is not as cut and dried as you think. The Jews and the others who received the invitation were ALL born in the condition which rejected Christ based upon their depravity and some predeterminism. [If before the cross people were born a Hittite they would have lived and died a Hittite]. Even if we accept that in the New Testament that the invitation goes to all, it does fall upon deaf ears. Jesus said to them, "It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick. I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners." Those that do not believe in sin are not called by Christ. Those people who are not called by Christ remain dead in their trespasses and sins. It is God who opens the hearts and minds (Jer 31:13-34) and gives the gift of faith (Rom 12:3) to his predestined elect (these are biblical words that have meaning!!!).
3. How can the called not be chosen?
MATT'S RESPONSE: It is possible to be called and not be chosen. I think many unsaved people in the Old Testament were called but not chosen. Judas is one example of a person who was called but not chosen. He was destined to betray Christ to fulfill the scriptures, (John 17:12).
Kelly's reply: The point of my question was the fact that God calls people but they reject the call of God based upon them, not upon God. And the same is Biblical and logical, that people accept Jesus based upon what has been revealed of God's truth (The Word, creation, Holy Spirit, angels, preachers, evangelists etc) A person does not come to know God outside of God moving in that persons life, but as the OT and NT clearly states people have the responsibility to accept or reject that message. As to Judas, it is interesting you bring him into this since I believe that actually hurts the case for Calvinism. Jesus said He choose the 12: "You did not choose Me, I choose you, and appointed you, that you should go and bear fruit, and that your fruit should remain, that whatever you ask the Father in My name, He may give to you." (John 15:16 NASB) A few observations from Judas since you brought him up. Jesus said He choose him, appointed him, to bear fruit, and that his fruit should remain. Did Jesus fail? Since this was spoken of the 12, what happened? Unless you have the perspective that Jesus called them, appointed them, to follow Him of choice, this just does not fit the bill at all. Now we know from Scripture that Jesus said Judas was the one to betray Him, but prophecy does not mean predeterminism, but rather that God knows and speaks forth that which is going to take place as it will. Judas was not forced to follow Jesus at first and was not forced to turn on Jesus, he had the capacity to accept or reject."
MATTS RESPONSE 8/23: Did you notice the "you did not choose me" in John 15:16? When you say, "Jesus said He choose him, appointed him, to bear fruit, and that his fruit should remain. Did Jesus fail? Since this was spoken of the 12, what happened?" Jesus chose 11 elect and one depraved. Guess who was who! Those disciples are the best example of Reformed theology in the New Testament!
KP said, "Just for the record not one of any of Jesus' disciples were born again, regenerated inwardly by the Spirit until after the work of the cross and resurrection. (John 7:37-39, John 20:22) So how was it any of them were able to follow, believe, trust, seek, etc in Jesus at all if they were not regenerated?"
MATTS RESPONSE: Wrong. "Jesus answered [to the disciples], 'A person who has had a bath needs only to wash his feet; his whole body is clean. And you are clean, though not every one of you." 11 For he knew who was going to betray him, and that was why he said not every one was clean. The disciples were spiritually clean in John 13:10 and Judas remained non-elect and unregenerated.
KP said, "As to Judas, as noted before, it was declared what was going to happen to Judas but that does not mean he was forced to do it. That is a serious error by many who teach this."
MATTS RESPONSE 8/23: Did I say God forced Judas to betray Jesus? I never said that! Judas betrayed Jesus because it was in his nature to betray people especially for money. Do you think that Judas ever accepted Christ and was saved? Please explain this about Judas' responsibility to accept Christ and his rejection of Christ.
Matt said: "Kelly believes this to be a universal invitation to all "bad and good." That would seem to be the case, however, as with most scriptures, there are parallel stories with more important information. Luke gives more details about those who are invited to Wedding Feast. In the Luke account it says, "'Go out quickly into the streets and lanes of the city, and bring in here the poor and the maimed and the lame and the blind." The new invitation extends to the lame and the blind of the world (Luke 14:21). The lame and blind would be the elect. Moreover, the Luke account give this admonition to come to the Wedding Feast: "'Go out into the highways and hedges, and compel them to come in, that my house may be filled," (Luke 14:23). Where is the free will decision to the world? A conversion method by compulsion does not agree with Arminianism."
Kelly's reply: Matt you have some big problems with your understanding of both Matthew and Luke. Now most of this comes from your reformed theology, but I encourage you to step outside of that and consider the Scriptures. Firstly, Jesus is addressing the Jews who first were rejecting Him. The invitation was for them, and they had choice, but they rejected because of their unbelief. Secondly, the invitation then goes out to the Gentiles, that is within reason of the Scriptures. The facts are that the invitation was given and the people had the choice of accepting or rejecting, that is what these Scriptures demonstrate. As to the issue of "compel them to come in" does not mean they were forced against choice, that is horrible to suggest or think. (not directly saying you said that but that is my observation from your words) Here is some thoughts on this verse from some Bible resources.
MATTS RESPONSE 8/23: Is it horrible to believe Luke 14:23 and use force on people as the parable explains???
KP's Bengel reference:
Luke 14:21–23 When that servant notified his master that the invitation was being rejected right and left, the master sent him out to the city to invite the poor and the maimed and the lame and the blind. “Both nature and grace abhor a vacuum,” said Bengel. Perhaps the first ones invited picture the leaders of the Jewish people. When they rejected the gospel, God sent it out to the common people of the city of Jerusalem. Many of these responded to the call, but still there was room in the master’s house. And so the lord said to the servant to go out into the highways and by-ways, and compel people to come in. This doubtless pictures the gospel going out to the Gentile people. They were not to be compelled by force of arms (as has been done in the history of Christendom), but rather by force of argument. Loving persuasion was to be used in an effort to bring them in so that the master’s house might be filled. (Believers Bible Commentary).
MATTS RESPONSE: Again, I like the idea of conpulsion in salvation. Bengel said "they were not to be compelled by force of arms (as has been done in the history of Christendom), but rather by force of argument." Of course. The argument that the blood of Christ saves sinners. How do you convince people dead in their trespasses and sins? You cannot. They do not want to hear or argue. Only the elect will hear the arguments of the salvations and come to Christ.
KP's New Geneva Study Bible reference:
Luke 14:23 The master’s second invitation extended beyond the city limits, encouraging even more people to come to the feast. This may picture the inclusion of Gentiles in God’s salvation (see Is. 49:6). The instruction to compel them to come in does not mean to force people in, but to urge them. As outsiders, the people might not feel comfortable coming. (Nelson's Study Bible)
Luke 14 This parable is a prophecy of the extension of the gospel to those the Pharisees thought unworthy. The “poor and the maimed and the lame and the blind” (v. 21) represent the despised Jews who were not able to observe the traditional laws of ritual purity (sometimes called “the people of the land”), while those outside the city along the “highways and hedges” (v. 23) represent the Gentiles. (New Geneva Study Bible)
Kelly's thoughts: The word "compel" can have the meaning of force but that does not take away the right of choice. For example people in third word countries are being forced to turn from their Christian beliefs, believe other things, and yet many stand firm in the faith. Compel can easily mean with an intent of urgency, to firmly persuade of the importance. No where do we see Jesus when speaking saying a person must be forced to believe His message.
MATTS RESPONSE 8/23: Is nobody forced to believe the message of the gospel? Let's see, the woman at the well was confronted by Jesus by supernaturally revealing her secret past sins, Saul [the Apostle Paul] saw Christ and was supernaturally blinded and thrown on the ground; Lydia had her heart opened by God (Acts 16:14), all those that heard Peter's message were supernaturally prick in their hearts (Acts 2:26), etc. How many more divine interventions for salvation do you want???
Matt said: "The invitation to the Wedding is resting upon a "free will" decision. It takes a substancial complusion and intervention by God to get people to believe. Surely, compulsion is violation of free will but it is required because the ungenerate heart of man is totally depraved (Gen 6:5, John 3:19). Thus, salvation is a miracle of God without a human decision (John 1:13)."
Kelly's reply: Again Matt you are reading into the text something that is not there at all. You have inserted "elect" time after time, and you now add "man is totally depraved". Where is this in the text? You have to read that into those verses. Seriously, do you not realize this? Is Genesis 6:5 for all generations?
MATTS RESPONSE 8/23: Turning the table, where does it say Gen. 6:5 is not for today?
KP Said: Did not Jesus say in Matthew 5:45 that the Father sends the sun and the rain on the "evil and the good"?
MATTS RESPONSE 8/23: Yes. Jesus said this but it does not endorse your position of "free will" nor does it provide a case for man's responsibility in salvation.
KP said: What about Matthew 12:35, "The good man brings out of his good treasure what is good; and the evil man brings out of his evil treasure what is evil."
MATTS RESPONSE 8/23: The "good man" is regenerate and the "evil man" is not. What is so hard to understand about this verse?
KP said: What about Matthew 22:10, "Those slaves went out into the streets and gathered together all they found, both evil and good; and the wedding hall was filled with dinner guests." Where does Jesus say that all mankind is constantly doing evil and totally depraved?
MATTS RESPONSE: See Luke 14. Do you think that evil people will come to the wedding? Of course the evil will be regenerated, right? Luke's version better details of the invitations and to what groups. The call to "evil and good" still fits the elect. They were evil before their conversion and then they become good in their regenerated condition.
KP said: "You read that into the Bible because of your reformed traditions of beliefs. But that is not the case. You argue against free will, why is that so bad? God gives the invitation, as Matthew 22 clearly points out, and the people had the choice of accepting but did not, how is that not free will? And when the text says to go all over to whomever, invite them, how is that not free will, choice? It is God who invites, we are the ones who accept or reject."
MATTS RESPONSE 8/23: My view is this: It is God who invites. It is God who supernaturally changes the heart of stone to a heart of flesh. It is God who gives the gift of salvation. It is God who cleanses sin away. It is God who elects and adopts to his family without a decision from man (John 1:13).
MATTS RESPONSE: It is interesting how you quote John 3:19 but not verse 21? Verse 21 says "But he who practices the truth comes to the light, that his deeds may be manifested as having been wrought in God." How can one practice truth spiritually without having the light? It says they practiced the truth and then through that they come to the light. Seems to indicate a process of choices. Same as in verse 19. People are not totally depraved there, again you have to read into that text what you want it to say. It does not say everyone, all mankind, love darkness. You seem to indicate that, but that is Biblically wrong. Since John 3:14-18 demonstrate people have a choice to accept or reject Jesus, and reading verses 19-21 it is clear based upon how they respond to God their process will demonstrate that which is in them, namely truth or deception."
MATTS RESPONSE: Can unbelievers practice the truth? Of course, not. It follows that "he who practices the truth" and "comes to the light" is a believer. "He" is mentioned in verse 18, "He that believeth on him is not condemned" and in verse 20 the generic "he" becomes "everyone": "For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved." Those people do "good" are believers. Earlier, Jesus said they are ones who are born again or actually "born from above." They are brought in "by God"; by his assistance, and gracious influence, without which men can do nothing.
KP said: As to John 1:13. I see you have some comments going with Ham so I will not make much of this. However I will comment that the verses before 13 demonstrate that Jesus came into the world but people rejected Him. Those who receive Him, even those who believe, they become children of God. To become something means you were not that something before. To become children of God in simplicity means to become born again, regenerated. That means those people received Jesus, believed, before they were born again, regenerated. That is a huge hole in Calvinism, not according to me, but according to Scripture.
You said to Ham, "There is no contradiction between the verses. I can receive a bump on the head and still not ask for it. Where is the "not born of …human decision" when people become a child of God? Those who see a "free will" in verse 12 have a serious problem with verse 13. BTW: what orphan gets to decide what family he can join? It is the adoptive parent who gets to choose, right?"
KP said, "Here is your problem. Jesus came to the people and offered Himself, thus they received Jesus based upon His coming to them and offering Himself. And verse 13 is absolutely right! Salvation is of God, not man! We don't save ourselves, it is not our will or ability, it is God. So when we receive Jesus and "become" a child of God (regenerated), it is based upon God coming to us, not us of our own saving ourselves."
MATTS RESPONSE: You cry out "Salvation is of God, not man!" but only after verse 12 which you say man receives Jesus by making what? A human decision!!! Is a human decision in receiving Christ or not? You have butchered the verse and diced the context to fit your preconceived theological view. If there is "no human decision" in becoming a child of God, let's end this conversion right now. That is the context.
KP said: "In reference to the person choosing their child in the adoption process, you are correct the child does not get to choose. However, that is not the God of the Bible. You are using your own thoughts to justify something that is not Biblically supported. Jesus extends His gospel to all and based upon the Word of God we respond and thereby become sons and daughters based upon our calling out to Him. That is what John 1 is stating."
MATTS RESPONSE 8/23: You cannot be farther from the truth.
KP said: Where does the apostle John write what you write in his epistles? Where does John state that only those who are regenerated first can believe in his epistles?
MATTS RESPONSE 8/23: John 1:13. John 15:16. Where else does John need to spell it out to you?
KP said: "Where does John write that man has no choice and is totally depraved?"
MATTS RESPONSE: John 3:19.
KP said: "I find the opposite. For example in 1 John 5:10-13 the message is not isolated but for anyone."
MATTS RESPONSE: This is lengthy but look at the references to believers who are called "whosoever", "every one", "we", "us" and sometimes "he." Kelly, look hard at verse 19.
"Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God: and every one that loveth him that begat loveth him also that is begotten of him. 2 By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God, and keep his commandments. 3 For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments: and his commandments are not grievous. 4 For whatsoever is born of God overcometh the world, If we receive the witness of men, the witness of God is greater: for this is the witness of God which he hath testified of his Son. 10 He that believeth on the Son of God hath the witness in himself: he that believeth not God hath made him a liar; because he believeth not the record that God gave of his Son. 11 And this is the record, that God hath given to us eternal life, and this life is in his Son. 12 He that hath the Son hath life; and he that hath not the Son of God hath not life. 13 These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may know that ye have eternal life, and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God. 14 And this is the confidence that we have in him, that, if we ask any thing according to his will, he heareth us: 15 And if we know that he hear us, whatsoever we ask, we know that we have the petitions that we desired of him. 16 If any man see his brother sin a sin which is not unto death, he shall ask, and he shall give him life for them that sin not unto death. There is a sin unto death: I do not say that he shall pray for it. 17 All unrighteousness is sin: and there is a sin not unto death. 18 We know that whosoever is born of God sinneth not; but he that is begotten of God keepeth himself, and that wicked one toucheth him not. 19 And we know that we are of God, and the whole world lieth in wickedness. 20 And we know that the Son of God is come, and hath given us an understanding, that we may know him that is true, and we are in him that is true, even in his Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God, and eternal life. 21 Little children, keep yourselves from idols. Amen," 1 John 5:1-4,14.
Kelly, do you see that John is writing to believers? What does verse 19 mean to you???
KP said: Back to Matthew 22:1-14...The message is clear, simple, and not that complicated. It is those who are of the reformed position that make things state differently. The facts are God calls out to the Jews and Gentiles, in fact invites them, and they can accept or reject. Those whom accept are the chosen ones, those who don't are the ones who will perish.
MATTS RESPONSE 8/23: The message is clear…only the elect will respond to the coercion of the message. The bulk of the hard hearted Pharisees will never be converted unless Christ softens and converts them. Salvation is supernatural and a gift. The first physical birth is a gift and so is the second supernatural birth from above.
Matt
Final comments to Matt:
MATTS RESPONSE 8/23: Now here at the wedding feast parable we have the theology of salvation. The context goes a LIMITED group who were invited [i.e the "Jews"] to the second group, i.e. the "lame and the blind," (Luke 14). Then the servants tell the master that there is still room. So, the master extends the invitation to a third group, " 'Go out to the roads and country lanes and make them come in"!!! What does "make them come in" mean? Do the first and second groups get a second chance? Maybe. They refuse the first "free will" decision. Now the need a little Holy Spirit compulsion! Please tell me why God did not stop at the "free will" method of salvation? Why is compulsion or arguments needed in preachign the gospel? Does this violate "free will"? The Greek word is "anagkzo" which means "to compel" or to necessitate, compel, drive to, constrain by force, threats, etc. FYI, the KJV translation count is nine for anagkzo; 5 "compel," and 4 "constrain." So the third group invitation to the wedding feast actually comes by coercion!!! It is by the use of persuasion or force. It is not a "free will" invitation to all people.
Kelly's reply: We have shifted from Matthew 22 to Luke 14 it seems to make an argument against free will. As stated from my previous comments the invitation was given to people to respond to, not to be forced. Since you have a reformed way of thinking that is the way you want this verse to read from Luke 14:23. Even within your own given reference for what compel means you said "necessitate, drive to", which would be a high importance. The seriousness of the message for salvation is one that is life or death, and the point of which Jesus was stressing is do not be lazy, do not take for granted this invitation! Now you said this is "not a free will invitation to all people", and within this immediate context that would be correct. Since they were not told to go to Africa, China, etc, you got me there. However, the point from the start of this discussion on Matthew 22 was the fact that people were given a choice to respond to the invitation or reject it, hence choice-response-choose-accept-believe-trust-etc. You have not demonstrated from Matthew 22 this to be inaccurate, nor from Luke 14.
MATTS RESPONSE 8/23: Again, you ignore the limitations of your examples and proof texts. People with hard hearts are willing to remain in unbelief. Why is that? Is it because unbelief comes naturally to them. Why is that? It is because unbelief is the condition from their birth. Think about this. Do people who are born into this world have to ask to be born? Of course not. Then what makes you think that people can ask for their second spiritual birth? This is the analogy that Jesus uses on Nicodemus in John 3! Remember Jesus said " 6 Flesh gives birth to flesh, but the Spirit gives birth to spirit," John 3:6. You must struggle with the context and the relationship of natural birth to the spiritual birth. However, my theological view see God in the first birth as well as the second. This Reformed position fits well with John 3 much better than your contrived "free will" view.
Kelly's reply: John 3 though is not within the context of Matthew 22 nor Luke 14 actually proves you wrong again. The fact of Jesus addressing Nicodemus in John verses 14-18 demonstrates that people have choice, responsibility, to accept or reject the message of Jesus. Moses lifted up the bronze serpent and all who "looked" to it were delivered, and Jesus likens the same to all who "look" or believe in Him will be delivered. Your attempt to present where people are born in this world does nothing other than show you are reaching for anything to prove your point but not within the context.
MATTS RESPONSE 8/23: The parable is not as cut and dried as you think. The Jews and the others who received the invitation were ALL born in the condition which rejected Christ based upon their depravity and some predeterminism. [If before the cross people were born a Hittite they would have lived and died a Hittite]. Even if we accept that in the New Testament that the invitation goes to all, it does fall upon deaf ears. Jesus said to them, "It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick. I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners." Those that do not believe in sin are not called by Christ. Those people who are not called by Christ remain dead in their trespasses and sins. It is God who opens the hearts and minds (Jer 31:13-34) and gives the gift of faith (Rom 12:3) to his predestined elect (these are biblical words that have meaning!!!).
Kelly's reply: I echo my comments again and again, you add time after time "elect, elect, elect". I remember the saying, "cry wolf", and we should have a new one called "its the elect" always no matter what the text says! You have added again new scriptures into the discussion that are not within Matthew 22. First you present "I have not come to call the righteous but the sinners", from Matthew 9. Then you have added Jer. 31 and Rom. 12. Each of these are not in reference to the discussion of Matthew 22. I am amazed I even has to say this since you seen so stuck on context, but so be it. I could easily reply with all sorts of Scriptures to what you have said but I what will that do? I could reply in depth to what you have said here but I wont. However I will make a brief comment. Jer. 31 is in reference to the New Covenant, and when someone accepts Christ, they become a part of that, not before! As to Rom. 12:3 gift of faith for salvation? Is that what it says? That has to do with people who have come to Christ, not about them receiving a gift of faith to accept Christ, my goodness! Rom. 12:4-8 is addressing spiritual callings and gifts for those who are of the body, so the gift of faith is for ministry not salvation, that would be within that context.
MATTS RESPONSE 8/23: Did you notice the "you did not choose me" in John 15:16? When you say, "Jesus said He choose him, appointed him, to bear fruit, and that his fruit should remain. Did Jesus fail? Since this was spoken of the 12, what happened?" Jesus chose 11 elect and one depraved. Guess who was who! Those disciples are the best example of Reformed theology in the New Testament!
Kelly's reply: This is somewhat sad and funny. Jesus choose 11 elect and one depraved, oh my! The discples did not understand Jesus and at times did not agree with what Jesus was saying about His death, resurrection. Remember Peter? Thomas? None of them were spiritually born again until the Spirit was given after the resurrection, John 20:22. You said the disciples were the best example of reformed theology for the New Testament, hmmm...
MATTS RESPONSE: Wrong. "Jesus answered [to the disciples], 'A person who has had a bath needs only to wash his feet; his whole body is clean. And you are clean, though not every one of you." 11 For he knew who was going to betray him, and that was why he said not every one was clean. The disciples were spiritually clean in John 13:10 and Judas remained non-elect and unregenerated.
Kelly's reply: Being clean in regards to being a disciple of Christ does not mean they were born again yet. You are really reaching for the stars all over the place.
MATTS RESPONSE 8/23: Did I say God forced Judas to betray Jesus? I never said that! Judas betrayed Jesus because it was in his nature to betray people especially for money. Do you think that Judas ever accepted Christ and was saved? Please explain this about Judas' responsibility to accept Christ and his rejection of Christ.
Kelly's reply: We all are by nature sinners before one comes to know God, OT or NT. I never said Judas accepted Christ, I believe the opposite is true. However I don't belive Judas was forced to disbelieve anymore than others rejected Christ. It is your traditions that state he had no choice.
MATTS RESPONSE 8/23: Is nobody forced to believe the message of the gospel? Let's see, the woman at the well was confronted by Jesus by supernaturally revealing her secret past sins, Saul [the Apostle Paul] saw Christ and was supernaturally blinded and thrown on the ground; Lydia had her heart opened by God (Acts 16:14), all those that heard Peter's message were supernaturally prick in their hearts (Acts 2:26), etc. How many more divine interventions for salvation do you want???
Kelly's reply: Lydia was a devoted person to God already prior to hearing about Jesus, so she was already on her way before Acts 16:14! Woman at well not forced, she was not a believer before Christ encountered her, and it is within the text she was believing after, but not by force but by choice! Paul's experience does not say he was forced, there is not much there about it. But from Paul's writings it is clear that we accept or reject Christ, not forced! The account with Peter is Acts 2:37 not Acts 2:26, just for your information. Peter preaches Jesus death and resurrection to them, the people "respond" without being born again "YET" (key word) and ask "what shall we do?", hello! They were not born again yet, have not received Jesus yet, have not received the promise of the Holy Spirit yet, and they asked what they were to do. What did Peter say?
Did he say: Um, guys and gals, there is nothing you can do, only those who are predetermined to be saved will believe and are the only ones who can, and after you have become regenerated, you then can believe in Jesus.
or...
Did he say: "Repent, and each one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of sins; and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit"
The second one is what Peter said, and he told them to repent which means to have a change of mind, to turn in the right direction, obviously to Christ. To be baptized meaning to publicly demonstrate their lives to people for the turning to Christ, and through that they would be saved and receive the Holy Spirit. Now knowing that Peter was also involved with Cornelius, (Acts 10) and those who Peter preached to received the Holy Spirit without water baptism demonstrates the physical water is not what saves at all, but the heart. Peter points that out in Acts 15:7-11 and 1 Peter 3:21. So the baptism in Acts 2:38 can be demonstrating an act of obedience and through their repentance they are baptized into the body of Christ spiritually, which fits the New Testament teachings clearly.
(I responded to the verses you have again added into this discussion only to show how out of context you have portrayed them)
MATTS RESPONSE 8/23: Turning the table, where does it say Gen. 6:5 is not for today?
Kelly's reply: Gen. 6:5 as a whole at that time was truly a horrific site if God was bringing judgment upon the world. You brought it up, again you have added into this discussion, a text in which has really nothing to do with Matthew 22:1-14. However, to reply again to you. Gen. 6:5 can be for today in the sense that sin is world wide, no doubt. But it is not that bad yet, and that text does not teach ALL people are totally depraved because Noah's family was protected, and Noah was called according to the Word of God and I quote: Noah was a righteous man, blameless in his time; Noah walked with God" (Gen. 6:9 NASB) Noah was not born again, no one was born again in the OT, no one. So again you used a text which proves nothing for reformed theology. All that you have proven is how many like yourself have to reach and stretch the Word of God out of context to fit your theology.
MATTS RESPONSE 8/23: Yes. Jesus said this but it does not endorse your position of "free will" nor does it provide a case for man's responsibility in salvation.
Kelly's reply: The whole point of sharing Matthew 5:45 which is within the same book of Matthew by the way, is that God's Word states there are people who are good and evil. The point was not all people are classified as being evil and totally depraved. Now you have to insert those who are good are the "elect" of God and those who are evil are the "non-elect" of God. That is serious "eisegesis" of reading into the Bible over and over what you want it to say.
MATTS RESPONSE 8/23: The "good man" is regenerate and the "evil man" is not. What is so hard to understand about this verse?
Kelly's reply: My point exactly on your way of interpreting the Scriptures. People were called good before the work of the cross and resurrection, no one was regenerated yet, no one! I shared in an early comment reply to you from John 7:37-39 which clearly indicates that no one was regenerated/born again before the cross and resurrection. So again your traditions fall short.
MATTS RESPONSE 8/23: My view is this: It is God who invites. It is God who supernaturally changes the heart of stone to a heart of flesh. It is God who gives the gift of salvation. It is God who cleanses sin away. It is God who elects and adopts to his family without a decision from man (John 1:13).
Kelly's reply: And your view has been proven wrong Biblically. I already stated from John 1:10-13 that people received Jesus, then became children of God, not vise versa. As to verse 13 salvation is God's design not man and that is the point. No one is born a Christian or a saved person, no one is able to save themselves, it is God alone, and God has given mankind the responsibility to accept or reject the message of the gospel.
MATTS RESPONSE: Can unbelievers practice the truth? Of course, not. It follows that "he who practices the truth" and "comes to the light" is a believer. "He" is mentioned in verse 18, "He that believeth on him is not condemned" and in verse 20 the generic "he" becomes "everyone": "For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved." Those people do "good" are believers. Earlier, Jesus said they are ones who are born again or actually "born from above." They are brought in "by God"; by his assistance, and gracious influence, without which men can do nothing.
Kelly's reply:Your comments here are so out there all I can say is for anyone who actually reads John 3:1-21 what you said is clearly wrong. You have inserted words again that are not in the text. Jesus clearly presents man's responsibility to respond to the message to Nicodemus in verses 14-16, and that Jesus came to save and that the world might be saved in verse 17. Those who believe will be saved, those who do not will be judged. Verses 19-21 address people like Cornelius, Lydia, even the Ethiopian enuch in Acts 8 asking Phillip what prevented him from being baptized, and Phillip said to believe in Jesus the Son of God, and he did so. What you said makes no sense according to what we read about Paul throughout the book of Acts. Especially Acts 17-18 where he would daily try to persuade people to believe in Jesus Christ. If Paul taught that we are totally depraved why does he try so hard to see people to come to Christ if what we do and say to people does not matter? Again your traditions has deceived you Biblically.
MATTS RESPONSE: You cry out "Salvation is of God, not man!" but only after verse 12 which you say man receives Jesus by making what? A human decision!!! Is a human decision in receiving Christ or not? You have butchered the verse and diced the context to fit your preconceived theological view. If there is "no human decision" in becoming a child of God, let's end this conversion right now. That is the context.
Kelly's reply: Already addressed this point. We do have a choice to accept or reject, that is crystal clear.
MATTS RESPONSE 8/23: John 1:13. John 15:16. Where else does John need to spell it out to you?
Kelly's reply: You use John 1:13 and John 15:16 to prove man has to first be regenerated in order to believe in Jesus? That is fascinating, truly fascinating. Both those texts do not state that at all, not even close when examined. John 1:13 done already. As to John 15:16 the context there is Jesus choosing the 12 to be His disciples to represent Him to the world, not on eternal salvation or that they were regenerated. Judas Iscariot, remember him. He was also chosen, but he was not regenerated, yet for a time he was a follower of Jesus and most like thought it is not written did things in the name of Christ that were supernatural. My point is they were chosen, but chosen for what? Were they forced? Jesus calls them to follow but no where is there any indication they were forced. Many of them still had issues with Jesus and doubts. Peter questioned Jesus a number of things, and even Thomas doubted Jesus but then came to believe through Jesus personally proving Himself to him. Why did Jesus do that? Why not just make him believe as you say? The obvious is the obvious, they are to make a choice.
MATTS RESPONSE: This is lengthy but look at the references to believers who are called "whosoever", "every one", "we", "us" and sometimes "he." Kelly, look hard at verse 19...Kelly, do you see that John is writing to believers? What does verse 19 mean to you???
Kelly's reply: This was in reference to 1 John 5 that I pointed out concerning how John the apostle would of been indicating one believing or rejecting Jesus Christ. I am amazed even replying to this that you are so much into your own reasoning and you really are not letting the Word of God be clear. Of course John is writing to believers, who said they were not. However 1 John 5:10-12 addresses non-believers and what they do with Christ will be their eternal destiny. No where does John write as I have said that people have to first be regenerated in order to believe in Jesus. Where does John's epistles state this? John 20:31 is clearly indicating for non-believers to come to Christ, and John's epistles are a demonstration of him writing to the same people clarifying and teaching them the gospel message.
As to verse 19 and what does it mean to you, great question. Clearly here this does indicate the word "world" as being in the power of the evil one or as your King James stated, "the whole world lieth in wickedness". All those who are not in Christ are sinners by nature and the power of the enemy is active in their lives. But this does not teach total depravity, does not teach that a person cannot believe in Jesus without first being regenerated. No where does John write this in his epistles, again no where.
MATTS RESPONSE 8/23: The message is clear…only the elect will respond to the coercion of the message. The bulk of the hard hearted Pharisees will never be converted unless Christ softens and converts them. Salvation is supernatural and a gift. The first physical birth is a gift and so is the second supernatural birth from above.
Kelly's reply: The message is clear, that Christ came to give His life for mankind and that whosoever believes in Him will have eternal life. You as a reformed person have to make salvation a puppet show for who gets saved and who does not. Meaning this is a big production play that God is forcing people to believe and others God has predetermined to go to hell forever.
As to Matthew 22 and the parallel story in Luke 14. The Scriptures indicated that people had a choice to accept but they did not, and that shows that total depravity is not Biblically accurate. You have bounced around using others Scriptures in an attempt to validate your traditions but in the end have shown how to use Scriptures out of context. I have responded to the additional Scriptures that you added to this discussion and within the same text or book or by the same author addressed them point by point. This discussion on Matthew 22 is now done. If we are to continue discussing reformed doctrines and etc you will need to respond to the email I sent you on what we agreed to. I will also make that visible for others to read so that we are both accountable to keeping with the context.
Kelly Powers
P.S. I appreciated the dialogue though I completely do not agree with your views.
Post a Comment