What do you believe in?

[cubinity]

I am, and feel that I have been, this entire time, saying what Spurgeon has said, and what Skala is most recently saying.

Skala, thank you for taking the time to respond to my thoughts as you did. I found your post very helpful and supportive.

I have always insisted that man's will has been an undeniable part of the Gospel story. It was just that when I started participating in this thread, I found myself in dialogue with someone that blatantly rejected the notion of man's independent will, and felt compelled to further explore that idea.

I too believe Spurgeon hit the nail on the head.

God bless.

 

[98cwitr]

Now that is something to chew on...very interesting point.
Do you believe the Holy Spirit has revealed this truth to you through the bible?

I feel I know of Truth without being reborn...if that makes any sense. There are a lot of pieces missing though. IOW, I'm in an awakening state, I feel. Still have asleep and half awake...aware of my surroundings yet experiencing some sleep paralysis. That's the best analogy I've got.

 

[Skala]

Cubinity:

No problem my friend I'm glad these things are being sorted out in your mind! I know it took me a while.

One thing I wanted to add though, is that the doctrine of sin is super important for Calvinism. While the doctrine of Predestination has a little to do about the profoundness of eternal things and God's decree, it has a lot to do with man's enslavement to sin.

That is, if given the choice and set before a path, with two choices (go left and choose God, or go right and reject God), the Calvinist believes that the Biblical description of man is that he will always consistently choose the path that rejects God. This is because he is hostile to Christ, cannot understand spiritual things on account of being spiritually deaf/blind/dead, and is rebelling against God, hates God, and loves his own sin and loves to fulfill his own pleasures (Eph 2)

So you see, for the Calvinist, predestinating/electing grace is mandatory if anyone at all is to be saved. Without predestination, heaven would be empty.

So when non-Calvinists are trying to argue for "man's free choice" being the ultimate deciding factor, when they try to argue that man is set before two equal choices and simply needs to exercise his will and make the right choice, what he's really arguing for, in the Calvinist's mind, is a ticket straight to hell. There's no such thing as a free choice between God and sin/self/rebellion. Man is enslaved to sin, not free from it. He is spiritually dead and needs spiritual life before he can do anything spiritually good or anything that leads to salvation.

Long story short, when non-calvinists are trying to "talk us out of" predestination/election, they really have two major tasks ahead of them, not just one. They must convince us not only that we are misunderstanding certain predestination verses, but secondly, they must convince us that we are misunderstanding the bible's description of fallen man and his helpless state. They must convince us that the Bible teaches that fallen man is free from sin and is capable of choosing evil as equally as he is of choosing good.

They must convince us that the Bible allows for the idea that fallen, unregenerate man can suddenly convert himself or prepare himself for conversion, or give himself eyes that can see and ears that can hear. Or that he is able to simply will himself out of his enslavement to sin and hostility to Christ and suddenly embrace the God he hates so much and forsake the sin he loves so much. All by an act of the will (which supposedly, isn't fallen, and isn't biased one way or another, according to the concept of "Free will")

Pay attention and you will see that anytime a non-calvinist comes to the forums with a few key verses to copy/paste (John 3:16, 2 Pet 3:9, etc), they never create a biblical argument for the doctrine of sin and man's depravity. It is conveniently left out of the picture as if choosing Jesus, for the fallen man, was as easy as choosing vanilla over chocolate icecream.

 

[RobertZ]

Some arminians I have come across do acknowledge that no man will seek God without God first doing a work in that mans heart, I have never actually seen anyone claim that man can seek God of his own will.

Where I see the two theologies differing is that one says that man can resist the regenerating saving work of the Holy Spirit and the other says that It cannot be resisted.

 

[Skala]

Amen Robert.

However many people on these boards that are opposed to Calvinism are not Arminians, but they claim to be 'neither'.

The arguments of many on these boards implies that they do not believe grace is necessary first before a sinner will positively respond to Christ. (does that make them pelagians?)

 

[RobertZ]

The arguments of many on these boards implies that they do not believe grace is necessary first before a sinner will positively respond to Christ.

That is disgusting because apart from the Grace of God no one can or will respond to God.

The question though that remains with me is if the grace is irresistable and if so then why the warnings of Hebrews chapter 6,10, and 12. Especially chapter 12 which makes it clear that a person can fail to lay hold of the grace of God and then later find himself in a posistion in which repentance is no longer granted.

 

[Skala]

Robert, it's funny you ask me about Heb 6 because I just came across this article from a dear brother on another forum. Let me quote him:

When you come to such a passage as this, you need to know what the scriptures say about the perseverance of the saints, and the true nature of salvation. As salvation is the work of the faithful God, and he will glorify those whom he foreknows, we must conclude that this text does not speak of people falling away from salvation.

A second problem with such texts is a huge degree of assumption as to what certain phrases and words must mean. None of the phrases in this passage have to mean the ones being described are generally saved, the NT especially, is full of warnings of just closely the unbeliever can mimic salvation. Jude, for example speaks of false teachers who have crept in unawares, we have references to wolves in sheep’s clothing. By the art of Satan, the mimicry of the saved, can be almost perfect. Hence a descriptions that sounds very like a Christian, but does not have to be a Christian is a very good way of describing those who mimic genuine faith.

A third problem is that people reading the bible today do not seem to pay much attention to pronouns, when we look at see if the writer is speaking in the first, second or third person, we are given huge clues as to what he means, especially we notice how he changes, notice here in ch6 the author starts with ‘we’ then in the contention verses he is speaking of ‘those’ and then he comes back to speak of ‘you’ v9. This switch makes it plain that the author is speaking of a group that is different to those he is addressing, he is speaking of a group that he will not join his name with, and that he is confident none of his readers are part of. Hence again, we must conclude he is not speaking of those who are part of the true church.

 

[RobertZ]

Robert, it's funny you ask me about Heb 6 because I just came across this article from a dear brother on another forum. Let me quote him:

Bro, I believe in eternal security. Im not advocating that Hebrews teaches loss of salvation at all. Im showing that one can be enlightened and have a certain knowledge of salvation yet in the end fall away from this conviction proving they were never saved in the first place.

Where I have issue is that Calvinist generally say that God skips over the non elect but we see right here in Hebrews that apparently even the non elect are brought under some type of conviction by the Holy Ghost.

 

[Skala]

It is not logically contradictory for the HS to convict of sins and yet not endow saving faith in Christ

It serves as an indictment against them and shows that they are indeed guilty for sin.

 

[RobertZ]

It is not logically contradictory for the HS to convict of sins and yet not endow saving faith in Christ

It serves as an indictment against them and shows that they are indeed guilty for sin.

What if they ask God to forgive them though? Does God say no because your not being called with irressitable grace?

These are honest questions from me, please dont think im trying to be funny because im not, im serious about this.

 

[Skala]

The unregenerate doesn't want to turn to Christ for forgiveness.

 

[Texan40]

None of us can be forgiven by asking nor by acts of goodness. The only salvation anyone has is in who Christ was and what Christ did.

 

[histruth]

The Bible clearly says, "For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord, shall be saved."(Romans 10:13) It is true that nobody can come to Christ unless the Holy Spirit draws them. However, according to many verses in the Bible(too numerous to list all of them), the Holy Spirit draws all men everywhere to Jesus. Some obey in receiving Christ by faith, others disobey by resisting the Holy Spirit. Stephen yelled at the disobedient because they resisted the Holy Spirit (Acts 7:51) He continues by reminding them that they received the law by angels, but have not kept it.

In Acts 13:46 Paul and Barnabas told the Jews that the Gospel was to be preached to them first; but since they reject it, and judge themselves unworthy of everlasting life, they will go preach to the Gentiles. I am not saying that the Bible does not teach predestination because it does. I am however saying that God elected some for a specific purpose such as Paul and the disciples, and the elders of the early Church. These were elected by God to do the work of the early church ministry, but everone else falls into the catagory of the whosoevers. The whosoevers are all of us who do not resist the Holy Spirit, but obey by receiving Jesus by faith.

 

[Skala]

However, according to many verses in the Bible(too numerous to list all of them), the Holy Spirit draws all men everywhere to Jesus.

Where are all these supposed verses?.

These were elected by God to do the work of the early church ministry, but everone else falls into the catagory of the whosoevers. The whosoevers are all of us who do not resist the Holy Spirit, but obey by receiving Jesus by faith.

According to the Bible God's people are elected/chosen before the foundation of the world. (Eph 1:4-11)

 

[dies-l]

The unregenerate doesn't want to turn to Christ for forgiveness.

I think that this statement sums up my disagreement with Calvinism. I agree with this statement, but not its emphasis.

I believe that a person is "unregenerate" because they don't want to turn to Christ for forgiveness.

The Calvinist view seems that a person does not want to turn to Christ for forgiveness because they are "unregenerate."

Yet, the very use of the "regenerate" implies that a person who once was one way (lost, "unregenerate", damned, etc.) is made into something different (saved, "regenerate", blessed, etc.). This verbiage seems to contradict Calvinist doctrines of election, which say that a person is saved because they are individually "elected" and "predestined" unto salvation. If this doctrine is true, then there is no need for regeneration.

 

[Skala]

I think that this statement sums up my disagreement with Calvinism. I agree with this statement, but not its emphasis.

I believe that a person is "unregenerate" because they don't want to turn to Christ for forgiveness.

The Calvinist view seems that a person does not want to turn to Christ for forgiveness because they are "unregenerate."

Yet, the very use of the "regenerate" implies that a person who once was one way (lost, "unregenerate", damned, etc.) is made into something different (saved, "regenerate", blessed, etc.). This verbiage seems to contradict Calvinist doctrines of election, which say that a person is saved because they are individually "elected" and "predestined" unto salvation. If this doctrine is true, then there is no need for regeneration.

All people by default are born unbelievers and are not "born again". This makes them unregenerate (which is synonymous with not born again). This contradicts your assertion that a person is unregenerate on account of choosing to reject Christ. The exact opposite is true. They are already born-not-born-again. Thats why they need to be born again. They are unregenerate on account of being fallen. All humans by nature are spiritually dead (Eph 2) and need to be made alive. Aka, they are unregenerate by nature, and need to be regenerated.

 

[dies-l]

All people by default are born unbelievers and are not "born again".

With this much I agree.

This makes them unregenerate (which is synonymous with not born again). This contradicts your assertion that a person is unregenerate on account of choosing to reject Christ.

You are putting words into my mouth. But for the record, let me correct my prior statement to make it more clear: A person remains unregenerate because they don't want to turn to Christ for forgiveness. I would agree that "unregenerate" (to use your term) would be a default position. However, one passes from that position not because they were predestined to do so, but because they choose to.

The exact opposite is true. They are already born-not-born-again. Thats why they need to be born again. They are unregenerate on account of being fallen. All humans by nature are spiritually dead (Eph 2) and need to be made alive. Aka, they are unregenerate by nature, and need to be regenerated.

And, how does this play into the debate between individualistic predestination and free will?

 

[prophecyistrue]

your question lacks a space for both to be true, which is the true and correct answer

 

[Skala]

You are putting words into my mouth. But for the record, let me correct my prior statement to make it more clear: A person remains unregenerate because they don't want to turn to Christ for forgiveness. I would agree that "unregenerate" (to use your term) would be a default position. However, one passes from that position not because they were predestined to do so, but because they choose to.

You said and I quote

I believe that a person is "unregenerate" because they don't want to turn to Christ for forgiveness.

How did I put words in your mouth?

However, one passes from that position not because they were predestined to do so, but because they choose to.

Well, Calvinists do believe that both are true (God predestines, and man chooses, see Acts 4:27-28), but you have yet to provide Bible evidence for the order of faith and regeneration. My argument would be, in addition to the inescapable logical conclusion of Rom 8:8, a Further proof is 1 jn 5:1 which states that people believe because they were born of God.

And, how does this play into the debate between individualistic predestination and free will?

All men are fallen and unregenerate by nature, thus they willingly choose to reject God. By grace, God converts sinners through the gospel message and takes off their blindfold, so to speak, and makes them spiritually alive. The natural response of being no longer dead to the things of God is that you obey him and embrace Christ. Eph 2. You were dead and God made you alive.

God does conversion. We willingly choose because God converts us. Does God convert everyone? Obviously not, or all would be converted!

 

[dies-l]

You said and I quote



How did I put words in your mouth?

Because that differs from what you claimed that I said. You claimed that I said "a person is unregenerate on account of choosing to reject Christ."

What I actually said was "I believe that a person is "unregenerate" because they don't want to turn to Christ for forgiveness." and based on your critique, I corrected this by saying: "A person remains unregenerate because they don't want to turn to Christ for forgiveness."

Notice that nowhere did I say anything about a person "choosing to reject Christ." Those are your words, not mine. Hence, I say you were putting words in my mount.

Well, Calvinists do believe that both are true (God predestines, and man chooses, see Acts 4:27-28), but you have yet to provide Bible evidence for the order of faith and regeneration

.

I have provided plenty. You have responded with generic assertions that I am misunderstanding your use of words, but with no Scripture to clarify. So, I am a bit confused by this accusation.

My argument would be, in addition to the inescapable logical conclusion of Rom 8:8, a Further proof is 1 jn 5:1 which states that people believe because they were born of God.

Romans 8:8 neither helps nor hurts your argument. 1 John 5:1 seems to me to flatly contradict it. "Everyone who believes that Jesus is the Christ is born of God, and everyone who loves the father loves his child as well." We are born of God by believing that Jesus is the Christ. So, this verse would suggest (if not outright saying it) that belief precedes regeneration.

All men are fallen and unregenerate by nature, thus they willingly choose to reject God. By grace, God converts sinners through the gospel message and takes off their blindfold, so to speak, and makes them spiritually alive. The natural response of being no longer dead to the things of God is that you obey him and embrace Christ. Eph 2. You were dead and God made you alive.

And, I believe that this call ("removing the blindfold") comes to EVERY person, and that many reject it.