Reformationist said:
This is the line of reasoning that always confuses me. You say that those who freely accept the gift of God do so "BECAUSE God will give them the grace to choose Him" but you completely contradict that by saying that man's doesn't choose God BECAUSE God gives them the grace but rather because they choose to respond to it.
No. It's not a contradiction. God gives all men grace. He may not give them all the same grace and he even Predestines some to heaven. We believe [Catholic's teach] predestination.
God has predestine some to heaven but he has a plan for everyone, the BVM is one example. He has predestine certain prophets like Moses etc to do just what they did. It is not something like it was up to them if they respond so the salvation of the world depended on them.
God did raise up certain people and predestined them to do what he intend them to do, we know but that does not at all mean that he neglected to even give someone else enough grace where they would be able to accept Christ's death and resurrection.
You see, he places all of us with out exception in the place where we can come to know him, believing and unbelieving so they have no excuse if they were to follow the path that God has put them on. They however are free to ignore him and do what they want which leads to hardness of heart.
What ever grace he gives in what ever way, it is not one size grace fits all. The grace he gives you is sufficient for you to be able to follow his plan and be saved, the grace he gives to another may be extraordinary like those that he gives to his saints where they are destine for sanctity or sainthood.
In other words, you avoided the question. So, I'll ask it in a more pointed way. Why do some, who receive the grace of God, respond positively to the message of the Gospel while others, who also receive the grace of God, respond negatively to the message of the Gospel? Is the same grace given to both those who respond positively and those who respond negatively?
The grace my not be the same and he may not have the same plan for everybody but what ever grace he gives to whatever person is sufficient for them to respond to God's chosen plan, if the do not then they are the reprobates.
It is free will, we are free to choose him because he gives us grace to but we believe we are also free to turn him down because we are also free to do that to.
Okay. I'm pretty sure you don't believe that the grace of God is sufficient to "guarentee salvation"
Not guarantee salvation so much as to guarantee his plan for us that will guarantee us salvation if we stick with God's plan. He predestine us to heaven by his plan that he has for us but we have to follow his plan and give ourselves over to it, if we do, then we are on the road to salvation if we take a different route than the one God has picked out for us then we are on the road to hell and that is not hs fault.
so you must believe that it is sufficient to "open the gates of mercy for all who want to come in." So, why do some want to come in and some don't? Did God give a special measure of grace to some that He didn't give to others?
Yeah, I believe that God opened up the gates of mercy because of the sacrifice that his son has made for all of mankind. God saw that his son, the perfect lamb with out blemish died for all the sins of this world and for the sin of Adam. So he opened up the gates of his mercy and who ever partakes in his mercy is forgiven.
If some do not want to come in, it has nothing to do with it being insufficient or because that sacrifice was not for them, it is because they are not following God's plan of salvation for them in their own lives.
Michelle, God does give a measure of grace to all people. What He does not give to all people is the same measure of grace.
You'll have to ask him. I assume it is because he has a certain plan for some where he predestines them to do just what they do and others Like Jacob and Esau where he loved Jacob and predestined him and he hated Esau and did not.
It still doesnt mean the he predestined Esau to hell or that he just let him go to hell because he didn't save him from it, it just means that he had a much different plan for Jacob so he preferred him in that way. Why Jacob and not Esau, why not the other way around, only God know's why he does what he does.
We all have a plan on our lives and God puts us right where he wants us but some will not follow his plan and some will, because we are all free to obey or disobey God.
Here again you make a nonsense statement. You say God could "give grace and have it be sufficient" but "not have it depending on whether or not the person was saved in the end or not in order for it to be sufficient." If it's not sufficient to bring about salvation then what is it sufficient to accomplish?
It is sufficient to bring about salvation if the person applied it to his or her life and follow God in all things. If the person did not obey God and did their own thing does that mean that God failed the person in some way or does it mean that the person failed themselves because they choose not to accept his sufficient grace.
Okay. Let's look at this logically. You say God gives sufficient grace to someone who rejects that sufficient grace. What, pray tell, was it sufficient to accomplish?
Why would rejection make the grace insufficient, I do not understand?
If I gave you, not just offered you the money to pay your rent and you did not pay your rent but instead you tore up the check or you spent the money on something else does that mean I was insufficient or does that mean you were insufficient?
I mean I could go and pay it for you because I can't trust you to pay it for yourself or because I want to be the one totally in control of your life but that would mean that it is a slave-master relationship where you had no freedom to follow me out of love, you would be following me because you had no choice, I took away your choice.
If I followed you on trust, then that is truly a equal relationship one not based on works, if I do x y and z correctly and you did x y and z for me to insure I did it correctly then it is not authentic trust and love.
And let's say you gave me the money and I did just what you trusted me to do, how would you look at me then? The relationship would be as good as it could be but if you take away that trust and treat me as if I can't obey you on my own then would you still look at me the same?
Huh??!! God doesn't "require us to be saved." He saves us. What are you trying to convey here? Are you asking if salvation is something that God requires of us or do you believe that salvation is something that God gives us?
What I am saying is if we are elected and given grace irresistible he is still depending on us isnt he, to bare fruit and obey? And once your given the grace that you can only say yes to because your nature has undergone a radical change, God is still depending on you to be obedient because if your not then that means he did not really save you then.
Maybe you could explain how you are using the word "free." Do you mean "free" as in "autonomous?" Do you mean "free" as in "not coerced?" Do you mean "free" as in "morally free to choose between all the available moral choices?"
I mean we never lost the ability to choose between good and evil and God never abandoned us to our own depravity. He shines his grace on the individual that he created that individual to have to make good choices but that does not mean that he still doesnt allow them to choose wrongly.
Again, I do not believe that after the fall of Adam our nature was destroyed where we have to be regenerated first and restored to perfect grace in order for Christ sacrifice to be effective and sufficient. If we're already restored to grace then why even the need of Jesus. We need Jesus because we are all depraved sinners who has no grace, not because we have been regenerated and restored to grace.
I think Jesus sacrifice is plenty sufficient to save us as we are with out God having to restore us to full grace first.
Our freedom is always and in every way limited by God's sovereign dominion as our Creator. We are free in the sense that the decisions we make are not the result of external coercion but they are most certainly determined. They are determined by our own desires. This is the very essence of freedom, that a person chooses according to his/her greatest inclination. This is never unconditional. Our choices are most certainly subject to our nature and what we desire.
Now thats illogical. You are saying that the only way God can trust you to make a morally free right choice is to make it for you.
First off, neither you nor I believe that there are no conditions to be saved. At the very least we believe that faith is necessary for salvation. So, the concept of "without a condition attached" is a moot discussion. "Could" God have accomplished our salvation another way? Sure, as long as it did not violate His nature. He could not give His Law, which says that the "wages of sin is death," and then just arbitrarily disregard His own Law. But yes, I imagine that God could have accomplished our salvation another way.
Why is it so hard to accept that God chose to have us come to him as we are, sinful and fallen and accept him as he is? Merciful and forgiving? To what glory is it if he
had to do something, like regenerate us and give us full grace in order for us to be saved? To what glory is it if he man makes him
have to do anything at all?
This is not at the expense of his justice, his justice as been satisfied through Jesus and it is not justice for him to punish someone if they lack
willful wicked actions.
It is His grace so He could, and most certainly does, give it to whom it pleases Him to give it. Again, this is not an arbitrary or random choice. It is also not a reason that has been revealed to us any more clearly than it was according to His own good pleasure.
Agreed he does select some to a certain predestination than others like Esau and Jacob but your right it is his grace and he can give it to whomever he wants,
however he wants.
He presedestined Jacob and not Esua. He insured Jacob for the sake of his plan but he just didn't insure Esua but that does not mean that Esua was left for dead. If he wanted to accept God, he was always free to do it because what God did preordain for him was enough to do that.
Michelle, this seems to be operating from the standpoint that God's greatest desire is the salvation of all people. It just isn't and the Bible conveys that numerous times. Yes, God is a benevolent God and does not take delight in the necessary death of the wicked (unsaved) but, make no mistake, it absolutely does glorify Him to punish unrighteousness.
Yes but only if they are deserving of punishment. He will not condemn someone by no fault of their own and if God won't give you grace then it's not your fault is it?
He also desires all men to be saved. Are you saying that even though he desired that all be saved he choose not to save all anyway?
The mere fact that he said that he desires all to be saved means that he desires, not guarantees that all, as in who ever he chooses will be saved.
Please answer a question for me. Have you ever acted contrary to your greatest desire when it was your greatest desire? IOW, can you give an example of a time that you did not choose your greatest desire or inclination at that moment?
All the time. My desire sometimes is to sin [I do what I dont want and I dont do what I do want.] but my faith tells me that I have been saved by grace, I do not have to sin because I have the love of Jesus in my heart, meaning I do not have to like the choice to be obedient because of the consequence of original sin, I do not choose God because of me, I choose him because it is not me living for me anymore but because it is Jesus living in me. He loves others for me when I do not want to, [I do what I dont want and I dont do what I do want.] and if I fall as I often do we are truly saved by grace, Jesus died to save me from my peril. He is there for me, his grace is sufficient to save me when I fall. I rely on grace and not my works.
