Actual statements by synergists

[FreeGrace2]

But you don't listen to us

How judgmental! Of course I listen. But no one has convinced me of RT because no one can provide verses that actually SAY what RT claims.

If there were verses that actually SAID that Christ died only for the elect, I'd believe it.

If there were verses that actually SAID that God chooses who will believe, I'd believe it.

I don't believe these things because the Bible NEVER SAYS these things.

 

[FreeGrace2]

However, the fact that Paul defines faith as "not of your own," to me is a general statement applicable to all believers.

That phrase refers to not being saved by your own works. It's not about faith.

Monergism (Heb 12:2, Phil 2:13) is blatantly endorsed in Scripture, so without an explicit reference that God cannot, it seems to me that He can.

I agree that salvation is all of God. But I strongly disagree that God gives the faith. Faith comes from the heart. Man is free to believe or reject.

Otherwise, Scriptures such as the following make no sense: No man can come unto me, except it were given unto him of my Father. John 6:65

And in Jn 14:6, Jesus said, "no one can come to the Father, except by Me". What is your point?

Here is a good Scripture:
He saved us, not on the basis of deeds which we have done in righteousness, but according to His mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewing by the Holy Spirit (Titus 3:5)

Yes, it's very good. It teaches us that we are not saved on the basis of deeds that we have done, but we are saved on the basis of regeneration. iow, those He regenerates are saved. And Scripture also says, "believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you WILL BE SAVED". They go hand in hand.

There's nothing in Titus 3:5 that supports Calvinism.

So, mercy comes from an initiative of God (regeneration, the making of believers into new creations upon belief) and renewing (the sanctification process).

Right.

 

[Skala]

How judgmental! Of course I listen. But no one has convinced me of RT because no one can provide verses that actually SAY what RT claims.

False. Here are hundreds of verses. Enjoy:

What Does the Bible Say About God Is In Control?

Verses showing God's Sovereignty, salvific work, and man's nature

The Illusion of a Gentleman Godby Robert Bernecker

Verses showing God's Sovereignty, salvific work, and man's nature

Large List of Scripture Verses Establishing God's Absolute Sovereignty & Control Over All Things

Does God Control Human Decisions and Actions? — DashHouse.com

Westminster Confession of Faith

If there were verses that actually SAID that Christ died only for the elect, I'd believe it.

Nobody ever claimed that the Bible used that verbiage. However, it does say he died for his sheep, and it does say that he died for "many", and it does say that he ransomed for God people I]out of [/I]every tribe, and it does say that his death justified many, because He bore their iniquities, and it does say that he bore the sin of many, and it does say that his death was efficacious unto salvation (not merely made salvation a possibility), etc etc etc.

If there were verses that actually SAID that God chooses who will believe, I'd believe it.

Nobody ever claimed the Bible used that verbiage.

I don't believe these things because the Bible NEVER SAYS these things.

It's funny you say that, because it seems like you believe a ton of thing the Bible never says.

For example, you believe God elected based on foreseen faith. Not a single Bible verse ever says that.

I digress

 

[Skala]

I agree that salvation is all of God. But I strongly disagree that God gives the faith.

That's funny because on another thread you said you agreed that God provided whatever we need to be saved.

But here you are saying that he didn't provide everything after all. Interesting.

And in Jn 14:6, Jesus said, "no one can come to the Father, except by Me". What is your point?

His point is probably because in John 6, Jesus explains why there are unbelievers present: because it was not given to them, from the Father, to "come to Jesus" (v 65)

Yes, it's very good. It teaches us that we are not saved on the basis of deeds that we have done,

But you just said you disagreed that God provided the faith (instead, you provide it), so you are saved based on something you did that God didn't do.

There's nothing in Titus 3:5 that supports Calvinism.

The entire verse proves Calvinism and refutes all forms of non-Calvinism.

 

[guuila]

Well, that was fun.

 

[Skala]

Well, that was fun.

^ An actual statement by a monergist.

 

[janxharris]

For example, you believe God elected based on foreseen faith. Not a single Bible verse ever says that.

I digress

1 Peter 1:1-2
Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, To God’s elect, exiles scattered throughout the provinces of Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia and Bithynia, who have been chosen according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through the sanctifying work of the Spirit, to be obedient to Jesus Christ and sprinkled with his blood: Grace and peace be yours in abundance.

 

[janxharris]

His point is probably because in John 6, Jesus explains why there are unbelievers present: because it was not given to them, from the Father, to "come to Jesus" (v 65)

The ones who are enabled have learnt from what they were taught of God (v.45).

Since there is no consideration of foreknowledge involved in the doctrine of election/reprobation, what can be the reason for God 'not giving it to them'? Nothing other than arbitrary choice can be the reason with all its dire implications.

The entire verse proves Calvinism and refutes all forms of non-Calvinism.

No it does not.

Titus 3:5
he saved us, not because of righteous things we had done, but because of his mercy. He saved us through the washing of rebirth and renewal by the Holy Spirit,

Since faith is not a work, you are incorrect. Paul demonstrates the clear difference between attaining righteousness through the law as opposed to attaining it by faith.

Romans 9:30-32
What then shall we say? That the Gentiles, who did not pursue righteousness, have obtained it, a righteousness that is by faith; but the people of Israel, who pursued the law as the way of righteousness, have not attained their goal. Why not? Because they pursued it not by faith but as if it were by works. They stumbled over the stumbling stone.

 

[FreeGrace2]

False. Here are hundreds of verses. Enjoy:

What Does the Bible Say About God Is In Control?

Verses showing God's Sovereignty, salvific work, and man's nature

The Illusion of a Gentleman Godby Robert Bernecker

Verses showing God's Sovereignty, salvific work, and man's nature

Large List of Scripture Verses Establishing God's Absolute Sovereignty & Control Over All Things

Does God Control Human Decisions and Actions? — DashHouse.com

Westminster Confession of Faith

There are NO verses that SAY that Christ died ONLY for the elect/believers/some/etc/however you want to phrase it.

There are No verses that SAY that God chooses who will believe

Until Rt can find any verses that actually SAYS that Christ's death was ONLY for the elect, and that God chooses who will be saved, there is no reason to believe it.

Nobody ever claimed that the Bible used that verbiage.

And I've never held anyone from RT to ANY specific verbiage. (see above for proof).

However, it does say he died for his sheep

Wrong.

Jn 10:11 - “I am the good shepherd; the good shepherd lays down His life for THE sheep.

If the verse did say "His sheep", you'd have a point. As it is, you do not.

and it does say that he died for "many", and it does say that he ransomed for God people I]out of [/I]every tribe, and it does say that his death justified many, because He bore their iniquities, and it does say that he bore the sin of many, and it does say that his death was efficacious unto salvation (not merely made salvation a possibility), etc etc etc.

Many times the word "many" is used in contrast to the "few". So even that weak defense falls apart in that sense. We know from Matt 7 that only a "few" find the narrow path (salvation), and WIDE is the path to destruction.

Nobody ever claimed the Bible used that verbiage.

The RT view of election MEANS that God chooses who will believe. I care not for any specific verbiage. The point is that the Bible does NOT teach that God chooses who will believe, but the RT view is that God most certainly DOES choose who will believe.

It's funny you say that, because it seems like you believe a ton of thing the Bible never says.

For example, you believe God elected based on foreseen faith. Not a single Bible verse ever says that.

I believe what Peter wrote, under the divine guidance of inspiration. As we all should, btw.

1 Pet 1:1-2

1 Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, To those who reside as aliens, scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia, who are chosen 2 according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, by the sanctifying work of the Spirit, to obey Jesus Christ and be sprinkled with His blood: May grace and peace be yours in the fullest measure.


I believe that the elect were chosen according to the foreknowledge of God, just as Peter wrote.

I've NEVER EVER said that God's electioin is based on "foreseen faith" as you have falsely charged me.

Please acknowledge your error.

Your example fell flat.

I digress

OK.

 

[FreeGrace2]

That's funny because on another thread you said you agreed that God provided whatever we need to be saved.

It's always unfortunate when context is being totally ignored. In that other thread, I made clear what I meant, which you aren't acknowledging here.

#1 God created mankind to seek Him. Acts 17:26-27.
#2 God created mankind with a conscience with which to know right from wrong. Rom 2:14
#3 God has revealed Himself to mankind through creation, so that no one has any excuse for not honoring Him and giving thanks to Him. Rom 1:19-20

This is what God has provided to mankind. No one has any excuse for not seeking Him, finding Him and believing the Gospel.

Yet, in RT, because of predestination, all who end up in hell have the excuse that God simply didn't choose them. Denying this fact makes no difference.

But here you are saying that he didn't provide everything after all. Interesting.

Rather, you have ignored context completely. In this thread I denied that God gives "saving faith", which is claimed by RT but NOT supported by Scripture.

His point is probably because in John 6, Jesus explains why there are unbelievers present: because it was not given to them, from the Father, to "come to Jesus" (v 65)[/QUOTE]
Huh??? "Probably"??? Jesus was very clear and to the point. NO ONE comes to the FATHER but by Me.

But you just said you disagreed that God provided the faith (instead, you provide it), so you are saved based on something you did that God didn't do.

No, this is just twisting a foreign meaning into my words that AREN'T there.

RT cannot prove that man has no ability to believe. I've given you in this post support for why man CAN believe or not. But RT denies free will.

The entire verse proves Calvinism and refutes all forms of non-Calvinism.

Not at all. Not even close.

 

[abacabb3]

That phrase refers to not being saved by your own works. It's not about faith.

Please read the whole sentence in Ephesians:

For by grace you have been saved through faith; and [h]that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; 9 not as a result of works, so that no one may boast.

The "that not of yourselves" is referred to as "the gift of God." Then Paul continues to say "not as a result of works." The gift is the faith, not the works. And, if that is the case, the faith is described as "that not of yourselves."

This makes sense with passages that state that God is the "author and pioneer of our faith."

I agree that salvation is all of God. But I strongly disagree that God gives the faith. Faith comes from the heart. Man is free to believe or reject.

I would agree with you if the Bible didn't specifically say that belief comes from God. Take Ezekiel 36:27 for example:

I will put My Spirit within you and cause you to walk in My statutes, and you will be careful to observe My ordinances.

God can manipulate the will. That does not mean we have no thoughts of our own, as another Scripture states:

The mind of man plans his way,
But the Lord directs his steps. (Prov 16:9)

And in Jn 14:6, Jesus said, "no one can come to the Father, except by Me". What is your point?

They refer to two different things. John 6 is talking about how we can even have faith in Christ (God must draw you to Him) and John 14 is referring to that only believers in Christ no the true God and are saved. One is about the nature of grace and the other the nature of our justification.

It teaches us that we are not saved on the basis of deeds that we have done, but we are saved on the basis of regeneration...There's nothing in Titus 3:5 that supports Calvinism.

Whatever "Calvinism" is aside, Paul is referring to the fact that God takes initiative and does works through the believer. It is an idea that humbles me and brings me closer to God, as apart from Him I am nothing.

 

[FreeGrace2]

Please read the whole sentence in Ephesians:

For by grace you have been saved through faith; and [h]that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; 9 not as a result of works, so that no one may boast.

The word "it" in the phrase "it is the gift of God" refers back to salvation, not faith.

The "that not of yourselves" is referred to as "the gift of God."

No it's not. It refers to works that one thinks may save them. "not of yourselves" means you can't work for or earn salvation.

Then Paul continues to say "not as a result of works."

Right, salvation is "not as a result of works".

The gift is the faith, not the works.

Neither. The gift is salvation. Rom 6:23 clearly states that eternal life, which is salvation, is the gift.

And, if that is the case, the faith is described as "that not of yourselves."

Wrong conclusion from wrong analysis.

This makes sense with passages that state that God is the "author and pioneer of our faith."

In this verse, the word "faith" is a noun, not a verb. It refers to the "body of knowledge that is believed". And God most certainly is the author pioneer of our faith. But not our act of believing.

What verse teaches that the act of believing comes from God?

I would agree with you if the Bible didn't specifically say that belief comes from God. Take Ezekiel 36:27 for example:

I will put My Spirit within you and cause you to walk in My statutes, and you will be careful to observe My ordinances.

I don't see anything about the act of believing coming from God here. Where in this verse are the actual words that indicate what is being claimed in your view?

Further, Ezekiel also wrote this, before 36:27:
18:31 - “Cast away from you all your transgressions which you have committed and make yourselves a new heart and a new spirit! For why will you die, O house of Israel?

Here, God tells His people to "make yourselves a new heart and new spirit".

God can manipulate the will.

He occasionally does.

That does not mean we have no thoughts of our own, as another Scripture states:

The mind of man plans his way,
But the Lord directs his steps. (Prov 16:9)

The WCF says that God ordains all that comes to pass. Which would, by necessity, include sinful thoughts and actions. Why do you believe that God ordains your sins? Do you think that Prov 16:9 includes sin?

Whatever "Calvinism" is aside, Paul is referring to the fact that God takes initiative and does works through the believer. It is an idea that humbles me and brings me closer to God, as apart from Him I am nothing.

I agree with this.

 

[Skala]

Bumped thread with a new addition! Enjoy.

 

[Legionwrex]

So why does it matter what some synergists say? As if all of us hold to the same belief? Westboro Baptist Church (The "God Hates ***s" one) is a hardcore Calvinist church that believes that God hates almost everyone and actually has a tally of the people going to Hell each day on their website. Did I mention that their website is named "God Hates ***s.com"?

 

[abacabb3]

I also hear Hitler was a hardcore Calvinist who thought the Aryans were the elect...

 

[nobdysfool]

Well this thread has officially "jumped the shark"....

 

[konroh]

We must be born again.
We must believe.

Can one be born again without believing? No, that would mean someone is saved without having faith.

Can we believe without being born again? No, that would mean someone is saved without being born again.

Hello, both are true at the same time. It must be this way, and it must only be this way.

 

[Skala]

So why does it matter what some synergists say? As if all of us hold to the same belief? Westboro Baptist Church (The "God Hates ***s" one) is a hardcore Calvinist church that believes that God hates almost everyone and actually has a tally of the people going to Hell each day on their website. Did I mention that their website is named "God Hates ***s.com"?

1) WBBC are hyper Calvinists, not Calvinists. Learn the difference

2) I document things synergists say because they say things that are consistent with synergism, thus shedding more light on synergism and it's implications and how it affects the rest of our thinking.

For example, typically in synergism people believe God is "hands off", leaves everything to human free will, and would never actually kill anyone because that would be a violation of the creature's free will. Hence the statement of one synergist who said that "God doesn't kill anyone, it's just the weather". Human autonomy is elevated so high in synergism that God can't even be credited for using the weather to kill his own creation, even though in the entire story of the flood, He did exactly that!

 

[Legionwrex]

1) WBBC are hyper Calvinists, not Calvinists. Learn the difference

2) I document things synergists say because they say things that are consistent with synergism, thus shedding more light on synergism and it's implications and how it affects the rest of our thinking.

For example, typically in synergism people believe God is "hands off", leaves everything to human free will, and would never actually kill anyone because that would be a violation of the creature's free will. Hence the statement of one synergist who said that "God doesn't kill anyone, it's just the weather". Human autonomy is elevated so high in synergism that God can't even be credited for using the weather to kill his own creation, even though in the entire story of the flood, He did exactly that!

Hyper Calvinists, Calvinists, whatever. I could say that those Arminians you talked to are Hyper Arminians. Whatever logic you use to justify these comments being the voice of Arminians I can use the same against Calvinists.

 

[Skala]

Hyper Calvinists, Calvinists, whatever. I could say that those Arminians you talked to are Hyper Arminians. Whatever logic you use to justify these comments being the voice of Arminians I can use the same against Calvinists.

The thing is, the hyper Calvinists (WBBC) are acting in ways consistent with their beliefs.

The synergists I quoted were stating things consistent with synergistic beliefs.

The only way you can justify using comments by Calvinists against Calvinists is by finding statements consistent with Calvinism (not hyper-Calvinism)

So take your best shot at making the truth that God freely saves sinners who deserve hell look bad.