The Prodigal Son

[Charlie1988]

23 minutes ago, Michael37 said:

I wonder if any of these drew a parallel with the Fall in the Garden of Eden.

Yes, some of them describe the prodigal son as being dead like Adam and Eve we after the fall. But God always knew they would fall, so He sacrificed His Son to atone for the sin of those He purposed to save before He made the world.  

[Michael37]

17 minutes ago, Charlie1988 said:

Yes, some of them describe the prodigal son as being dead like Adam and Eve we after the fall. But God always knew they would fall, so He sacrificed His Son to atone for the sin of those He purposed to save before He made the world.  

Another parallel is the permissive will of The Father in allowing human will a dimension of freedom.

[RdJ]

5 hours ago, FreeGrace said:

I quoted Acts 16:30 and 31 and you deny what Paul said???  Do you know MORE than what the apostle Paul did?

And what you just said is ANTI-biblical.

So what verse SAYS what you SAY?  I gave you Paul's answer to a jailer who asked what he MUST DO to be saved.  What Paul said is the truth.  What you say isn't.

Peter said repent and get baptized. He was anti biblical then? All these dumb reformed and protestant churches here never told people how to get saved. We had to wait until T.L. Osborn came in 1958. Thanks to him and the guy who translated him I learned how to get saved.

I will not read nor respond anymore. Go away with your antibiblical lies.

Edited June 18, 2024 by RdJ

[FreeGrace]

9 hours ago, Charlie1988 said:

If i didn't know you better, I would have easily mistaken you to be a Calvinist . I say this because you believe the parable is saying that the Prodigal son was already converted and saved when he left his father and sinned so grievously.

Eternal security is clearly taught in Scripture.  Election to salvation is not taught in Scripture.  Election is to service, taught plainly.  I'm neither Calvinist or Arminian.

9 hours ago, Charlie1988 said:

 I personally didn't consider the use of the word "son" in the parable to mean child of God as it applies to born again believers. I'm really not sure if your application of the word son in that parable is the intended context of the word.

I'm "applying" the word 'son' in the way Jesus used it.  The prodigal was the son of his father.  Rather clear to me.  How else can you take it?  And the 'father' represents our Heavenly Father, who always waits for his prodigal children, and greets them with love and grace when they have confessed and repented.

9 hours ago, Charlie1988 said:

I do see where your coming from, it sounds reasonable but I have my reservations about it for the reason I mentioned before. I don't think the father would have used words like dead and lost, if the son was merely in a backslidden state.

Then it would seem that you don't believe that fellowship can be broken.  Why?  The entire subject of 1 John 1 is about fellowship.

9 hours ago, Charlie1988 said:

 I think all born again believers suffer backsliding to some degree, during their journey.

All will sin, of course.  As to backsliding, not all do.  I have no idea the percentage that will.

9 hours ago, Charlie1988 said:

I don't get the sense that it was the case for this young man, so I still hold to the view that he left his father as an unconverted person who was dead in his trespasses and sin, just as everyone is until they are regenerated.

But this parable isn't about getting saved.  It's about breaking fellowship.  In the first century Palestine, it was considered the height of rudeness and crudeness for a son to ask his living father for his cut.  The children only got their cut when the father had died.  So the prodigal was basically telling his father he wished he was dead because he wanted his cut NOW.  That is definitely a break in fellowship.  Or the death of it.

9 hours ago, Charlie1988 said:

 Your take is not new to me, I have listened to hundreds of sermons on sermonaudio.com by different pastors and ministers from various denominations. So I've heard all the mainstream interpretations of scripture. 

It's OK to have different views on the non essential bible doctrines, as long as the main non negotiable things are accepted.  

I think what Jesus taught about the prodigal is essential.  Believers need to know how to get back into fellowship and how the Father receives a prodigal who confesses and repents.  This is BASIC to Christianity and the Christian life.

Unfortunately, there are way too many believers who are totally clueless about all this.

How many times do we hear people instruct to apologize to God, and ASK for forgiveness, when 1 John 1:9 tells believers to CONFESS their sins, NOT ask for forgiveness.  No verse tells believers to ask for forgiveness.

Ignorance abounds among evangelicals.  Blame goes to the pastors or seminaries for failing to teach this basic doctrine.

[FreeGrace]

7 hours ago, Charlie1988 said:

It's absolutely true that man is responsible for not responding to the gospel. But the reason for that is, he can't respond as he is dead in his sins and trespasses. A dead man can never respond to the gospel, that's why salvation is by Gods grace and it has nothing to do with the choice of man.

This is totally contradictory.  If man IS responsible for "not responding to the gospel", then HOW in the world can he be IF he is UNABLE to?  That makes zero sense.

If your boss instructed you to complete a task, but you had no ability to complete the task, would it be fair for the boss to FIRE you for your inability?  Of course NOT.

The reason that man IS IS IS totally responsible for responding to the gospel is because God created man WITH freedom of choice.  Man uses his conscience to make decisions, choices.  

Rom 1:19-21 is clear that God HAS revealed His divine power and attributes through creation, so that man is "without excuse" as Paul says.  

7 hours ago, Charlie1988 said:

 If God leaves a person in their natural state, they remain spiritually dead and simply can't believe the gospel as it is foolishness to them.

This would clearly mean that man is NOT responsible for their inability to believe.  

When a jailer asked Paul what he MUST DO to be saved, Paul told him to "believe in the Lord Jesus Christ and he will be saved".  Acts 16:30-31.

7 hours ago, Charlie1988 said:

There are around 120 verses in the bible which say that salvation was predetermined.

Only predetermined in the sense that God is pleased to save those who believe.  Oh wait!  There's a verse about that!

1 Cor 1:21 - For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not know him, God was pleased through the foolishness of what was preached to save those who believe.

This verse refutes Calvinism's doctrine of election.

It is God's choice to save those who believe.  God does NOT choose who will believe.

7 hours ago, Charlie1988 said:

The names of every single saved person were written in the book of life before time began.

Yes.  God is omniscient.  No surprise.  But He didn't choose anyone to believe.

7 hours ago, Charlie1988 said:

 Ephesians 1:4
just as He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we would be holy and blameless before Him. In love

And this verse teaches that election is to service.  The "us" in 'God chose us' is defined in v.19 as "us who believe".  Therefore, we can put "believers" in place of "us".  It is believers in v.4 that God has chosen.  The verse DOES NOT SAY that God chose who would believe.

And the purpose of this election is clearly stated:  THAT (purpose clause) we WOULD BE (subjunctive mood) holy and blameless (lifestyle).

That is what God chose believers for.  A holy and blameless lifestyle.

7 hours ago, Charlie1988 said:

2 Thessalonians 2:13
But we should always give thanks to God for you, brethren beloved by the Lord, because God has chosen you from the beginning for salvation through sanctification by the Spirit and faith in the truth.

I love this verse as well.  The Greek word (verb) for "chosen" is 'haireomai', which is not the verb used for God's election to service, which is 'eklegomai'.

And the verse isn't about God choosing for salvation, but rather, choosing the method of HOW one is saved:  "through sanctification by the Spirit and faith in the truth."

Salvation is ALWAYS by faith, and never by election.  

The Greek "kai" (and) has a wide range of semantics.  It can also mean "even" and I believe that Paul equated "sanctification by the Spirit" and "faith in the truth".

I don't see salvation as a two step process, but simply "through faith" as Eph 2:8 plainly says.

7 hours ago, Charlie1988 said:

2 Timothy 1:9
who has saved us and called us with a holy calling, not according to our works, but according to His own purpose and grace which was granted us in Christ Jesus from all eternity.

This verse directly links to Eph 1:4 which is about lifestyle.  What comes first is salvation, and then our "calling", commonly translated as an 'invitation'.  God invites us to live holy, just as Eph 1:4 says.

7 hours ago, Charlie1988 said:

John 15:16
You did not choose Me but I chose you, and appointed you that you would go and bear fruit, and that your fruit would remain, so that whatever you ask of the Father in My name He may give to you.

This is another verse that proves that election is to service.  Here, Jesus was addressing "the eleven" as Judas had left the group.  Jesus tells the eleven that He chosen them to "go and bear fruit".  That is service.

John 6:70,71 also teaches that Jesus told the 12 that they didn't choose Him (which was the common way rabbis had disciples) but He chose them.  And here, Jesus includes Judas, an unbeliever.  And John adds in v.71 the reason for Judas' election;  service - betrayer.

7 hours ago, Charlie1988 said:

Romans 9:10-13
And not only this, but there was Rebekah also, when she had conceived twins by one man, our father Isaac; for though the twins were not yet born and had not done anything good or bad, so that God’s purpose according to His choice would stand, not because of works but because of Him who calls, it was said to her, “The older will serve the younger.”
Just as it is written, “Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.”

Another verse that shows election to service.  "God's purpose in election" is "the older WILL SERVE the younger".  That is clearly purpose.

7 hours ago, Charlie1988 said:

2 Thessalonians 2:13-14
But we should always give thanks to God for you, brethren beloved by the Lord, because God has chosen you from the beginning for salvation through sanctification by the Spirit and faith in the truth. It was for this He called you through our gospel, that you may gain the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ.

Already addressed above.

7 hours ago, Charlie1988 said:

That's just a few verses which make it clear that God chose to save a remnant for His glory before He made the world. There's no getting around it, He even said He hates some before they're even born. 

I hope you have read all my responses to these very good verses.  None are about God choosing who will believe, which is the actual bedrock of Calvin's doctrine of election.

All election is to service.  

Examples of Divine Election

1.  Election of Christ:  an individual election

1 Pet 2:6 Isa 28:16 Isa 42:1  Luke 9:35 Luke 23:35

2.  Election of Angels:  a group or corporate election

1 Tim 5:21 and Heb 1:14

3.  Election of Israel:  a group or corporate election

Amos 3:2 Deut 7:6 Acts 13:17

4.  Election of believers:  a group or corporate election

Eph 1:4a [note:  this verse doesn’t say that God chose who would be believers, but that He chose believers…to be holy and blameless]

1 Peter 2:9

5.  The Election of the 12 Disciples:  a group or corporate election  John 15:16

6.  The Election of Paul:  an individual election     Acts 9:15

In EVERY example, service is the purpose of that election.

In the first 3, there is NO WAY any of the examples could have been "chosen to salvation". 

Jesus Christ is the Chosen One.  Why?  To be the suffering SERVANT.  Bingo.

Angels were chosen to serve those who would be saved.

The people of Israel were chosen as "God's people" to preserve His Word and share it with the world.

[FreeGrace]

17 hours ago, RdJ said:

Peter said repent and get baptized. He was anti biblical then?

The Greek word for "repent" means to "change the mind".  Recall that the crowd had just crucified their Messiah.  They HAD TO change their mind about who Jesus was.  They crucified Him because they viewed Him as merely human who claimed He was God.  That was blasphemy.  

17 hours ago, RdJ said:

All these dumb reformed and protestant churches here never told people how to get saved. We had to wait until T.L. Osborn came in 1958. Thanks to him and the guy who translated him I learned how to get saved.

Please explain how to get saved.  I've never heard of Osborn.  I was saved before 1958.

Edited June 18, 2024 by Michael37
Ad Hominem Content Removed

[RdJ]

10 hours ago, FreeGrace said:

The Greek word for "repent" means to "change the mind".  Recall that the crowd had just crucified their Messiah.  They HAD TO change their mind about who Jesus was.  They crucified Him because they viewed Him as merely human who claimed He was God.  That was blasphemy.  

Please explain how to get saved.  I've never heard of Osborn.  I was saved before 1958.

Oh please. Tickle ears. Thats that dumb calvin all is fake grace nonsense. Murder a guy on the stake, never be sorry never change (that is repent: be sorry, ask forgiveness, get a new heart and learn to stop sinning and overcome sin and satan).

[RdJ]

Just now, FreeGrace said:

Apparently you don't understand grace.  Sad.

What is your sarcasm all about?  

I've asked you how you became saved.  Why ignore the questiond?  

I put this whole topic and you on ignore but it keeps sending a notice. Maybe you can first shut up and not say my mother was unbiblical for getting my dad saved who just died and stop quoting me. Look it up. Holland Wonder T.L. Osborn or anything from Steve Hill who did thousands of alter calls.

[FreeGrace]

22 minutes ago, RdJ said:

I put this whole topic and you on ignore but it keeps sending a notice. Maybe you can first shut up and not say my mother was unbiblical for getting my dad saved who just died and stop quoting me.

Why would I quote you?  I ask questions to try to clarify what you post.  

Do you know how the Berean crowd verified Paul's message as God's Word?  They "searched the Scriptures daily to see if what Paul SAID was true.

iow, they found that Paul SAID what the Scriptures SAID.  They matched.  That is how to verify whether what people SAY is what Scriptures SAY.

That is why I ask questions.  To see if what you SAY is what Scriptures SAY.

Maybe you keep getting notices because God WANTS you know things that you need to know.

22 minutes ago, RdJ said:

Look it up. Holland Wonder T.L. Osborn or anything from Steve Hill who did thousands of alter calls.

There are no "alter calls" in the Bible.  Did you know that?

And I don't care what others SAY.  I'm not posting to them.  You claim you learned how to be saved from Osborn.  And yet you don't want to explain it.  

Is it that you don't remember, or just don't know?

Edited June 18, 2024 by FreeGrace

[FreeGrace]

27 minutes ago, RdJ said:

Look it up. Holland Wonder T.L. Osborn or anything from Steve Hill who did thousands of alter calls.

No help there.  I could find no weblink that lays out what TL preaches about how to be saved.  And you've been just as much no help.  

You said you learned how to be saved from him, yet you won't tell me.  And I'm not going to go through videos trying to encapsulate his gospel.

Salvation is clear in the Bible.  So if you don't want to explain what TL preached, ok.