• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

Sanctification & Calvinism

Clare73

Blood-bought
Jun 12, 2012
29,090
7,513
North Carolina
✟343,679.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Jn 1:11-13 - addressed in post #136, and has not been demonstrated to be incorrect
Demonstrated to be incorrect by your following statement?
So, Jn 1:12-13 is not about faith before regeneration, it is about regeneration giving the right to sonship.

"To all who received him, to those who believed is his name, he gave the right to become children of God. . ." (Jn 1:12)

To "receive Him" is to be born again. Those who received him (born again) "believed in him."
Rebirth. . .then faith. . .then the right to sonship. . .not by natural regeneration--not by blood (descent), not by the flesh, not by the will of man--but born of God.

- speaking only of John addressing sonship? Can you provide backup from John's writings that the terminology he uses in those verses ever or only refer to sonship?

Sonship is a right that comes with regeneration, therefore, regeneration is necessarily sonship.
God doesn't give one without the other.

Short answer: No, I cannot provide back up that they are the same, for regeneration and faith are two different things.
 
Last edited:
  • Winner
Reactions: Mark Quayle
C
Clare73
Sausage done. . .
Upvote 0
C
Clare73
Well, I thunk on it, and I'm still not seeing this as a fruitful discussion to pursue.
But again, thanks anyway for all your work.

So, go ahead and take that deserved break from the merry-go-round, it'll do you good!
Upvote 0
Upvote 0

Mark Quayle

Monergist; and by reputation, Reformed Calvinist
Site Supporter
May 28, 2018
14,282
6,365
69
Pennsylvania
✟946,385.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Reformed
Marital Status
Widowed
And the difference in the theologies involve whether or not grace is resistible, whether or not, at the end of the day, man can refuse to be convicted, can still say "no", as he orignally did in Eden. Our justice begins to take root and flow as we say "yes". That's faith, a joint effort intiated and enabled by God. And we can say no later as well, returning to the flesh, dying again as we re-alienate ourselves from God, failing to persevere IOW.
That's a narrative built on the need for self-determination and the rejection of what the Bible says about man's completely sinful fallen state, and his need for new life by the Spirit of God placed within, by Grace alone. We've been through this before. No point in rehashing it. I have better things to do than to go over and over and over and over.....
 
Upvote 0

Mark Quayle

Monergist; and by reputation, Reformed Calvinist
Site Supporter
May 28, 2018
14,282
6,365
69
Pennsylvania
✟946,385.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Reformed
Marital Status
Widowed
No matter how much peripheral language you put forth claiming something to be "cogent" or not, none of us override Scripture. So, let's see your Scripture and we'll pick it apart as extensively as we need to, one section at a time.

I saw you using Philippians2:12-13 several times. Would you like to begin there? Let's see what we can do to pick apart these theories.

The difference between the 2 theories is seemingly simple: Rebirth > Faith vs. Faith > Rebirth. I'd begin in John 1 or anywhere Rebirth is actually mentioned vs. inserting into places it is not.
Would you accept the principle of regeneration described or obviously assumed in context? For example, are descriptions of a new heart by the Spirit of God or other similar constructions, allowed? What about rivers of living water, and fountains?

Your "difference between the 2 theories needs the terminology defined: What is rebirth, and what is the faith being referenced? I'm not going to assume we have these notions in common —not just their arrangement.
 
Upvote 0

fhansen

Oldbie
Sep 3, 2011
15,882
3,967
✟384,201.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
That's a narrative built on the need for self-determination and the rejection of what the Bible says about man's completely sinful fallen state, and his need for new life by the Spirit of God placed within, by Grace alone. We've been through this before. No point in rehashing it. I have better things to do than to go over and over and over and over.....
Myself as well, Mark. But I still have hope for you...it's a selfless effort on my part, you see. Ahem, anyway, as stated over and over, and as the historic teachings of the church have maintained along with the ECFs and Scripture, grace is absolutely essential and yet man can still refuse it. Those who don't refuse and who continue in that vein, are the elect. Aside from "dead", fallen man is described as sick, in need of being healed, lost, in need of being found, filthy, in need of being cleansed, proud, in need of humilty in order to see God. Consonant with the rest of Romans which maintains that holiness and the overcoming of sin are necessary in order to have eternal life, 13:11-14 warns believers:

"And do this, understanding the present time: The hour has already come for you to wake up from your slumber, because our salvation is nearer now than when we first believed. The night is nearly over; the day is almost here. So let us put aside the deeds of darkness and put on the armor of light. Let us behave decently, as in the daytime, not in carousing and drunkenness, not in sexual immorality and debauchery, not in dissension and jealousy. Rather, clothe yourselves with the Lord Jesus Christ, and do not think about how to gratify the desires of the flesh."
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

fhansen

Oldbie
Sep 3, 2011
15,882
3,967
✟384,201.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Notice how you speak here in Generalities. God is specific. He chose certain ones. The general fact of depravity and condemnation is not even all on an even level but each according to their works. You speak of "God "allowing" his creation to do..." What really is your problem with God 'causing', as you seemed to admit below is true concerning evil? And I am agreed. To cause that evil come to pass is not the same as to create evil. I do not say he creates evil, in the sense of sin or wrongdoing.
Salvation is contingent for all even as God foreknows the outcome, which is all election really amounts to:
“I stand at the door and knock. If you open it I will come in…” Rev 3:20
“He is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance.” 2 Pet 3:9
The general fact of depravity and condemnation is not even all on an even level but each according to their works. You speak of "God "allowing" his creation to do..." What really is your problem with God 'causing', as you seemed to admit below is true concerning evil? And I am agreed. To cause that evil come to pass is not the same as to create evil. I do not say he creates evil, in the sense of sin or wrongdoing.

The fact that he caused that there be evil does not imply freewill. If libertarian free will, as I understand it, "uncaused choice", is what you mean by freewill, it is self-contradictory to say that God granted freewill. Not only that, but it is a construction you find necessary to explain choice, because you think choice is not real if it is not uncaused. Or do you have another narrative I have not heard from you?
Well, if someone else causes me to choose one way or the other it’s pretty hard to say that I made the choice. As it is the typical human of the “age of accountability”, of sound mind and not under coercion or duress is sufficiently free to be accountable for his actions, which is why we hold each other accountable for immoral or unjust behavior. We know that the person could do otherwise. Saying that God is the cause of all human moral choices is saying that God caused the choices that resulted in the holocaust. Or that, because he invented the automobile Mr. Daimler is the cause of all car accidents, or the poor choices that caused them. Anyway, God didn’t cause moral evil/sin: He allowed it and uses it for His purposes. The church has consistently held this truth. Free will means that God grants to men and angels the ability to oppose even His will, for a time. Question: Having told Adam not to eat of the fruit, did God want/cause Adam to eat of the fruit?
I completely agree with your last statement, though I would add, that if you were to get an honest answer from Satan, God not only 'allowed' evil to have its way —he caused it to have its way, and that, for God's own purposes. Yeah, Satan isn't a happy camper. EVERY move that Satan does contrary [by way of hate and attempted obstruction] to God's purposes, serves God's purposes. And because of his hatred, Satan can't stop or change his ways. Gotta be frustrating!
Evil serves God’s purposes but only in the sense that He wants His creation to learn personally, the hard way, by experience, that evil, alienation from and opposition to Him and His goodness, is, well, wrong: foolish, futile, evil-so that we may choose the good instead. For Him to make the decision for us renders this a very strange world, and creation a rather senseless, fruitless endeavor.
I don't know if you heard me describe one time, how a chess game one of my brothers told me about, resembles what happens with Satan. Satan's very nature is what causes him to do what he does, and, I believe, in every specific way and thing he does:
I hadn’t heard that but I’m not sure what makes either player more greedy than the other since each had the same objective- to win the game. In my mind satan shares the same limitation that all but God must endure: he’s not God. And with that limitation or imperfection he can easily enough, regardless of intelligence or relative perfection, fail, error, sin. In any case he needs to learn what Adam needed to know but preferred not to believe: that he’s not God, that he’s not the Best, and that only God can be the God of all in order for justice and peace and harmony to reign. Lucifer is just plain too obstinately proud to admit what he cannot help but know somewhere inside, that he won’t win. So he doesn’t stop-he believes in himself.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0