What Value has Evangelism in Reformed Theology

[TibiasDad]

Lets look at this very closely:

Joh 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made. In him was life, and the life was the light of men. The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it. There was a man sent from God, whose name was John. He came as a witness, to bear witness about the light, that all might believe through him. He was not the light, but came to bear witness about the light. The true light, which gives light to everyone, was coming into the world. He was in the world, and the world was made through him, yet the world did not know him. He came to his own, and his own people did not receive him. But to all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God, who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God.

God enables us where?

We see here the receivers, the believers are born by the will of God alone, and had nothing to do with them what so ever.

If we are enabled by the will of God as a result being born again, then we agree. But those own are not by the will of God born again are still not enabled.

Agreed?

Bill,

All this simply says is that man's will cannot and does not initiate and thereby cause us to be born again, in other words, God doesn't save us simply because we want to be saved, but because he wants us to be saved and has provided us the means of becoming saved. The restoration of relationship takes two parties, and we can want to reconcile all we want, but unless God is willing, nothing will ever happen. God has made the decision to save, and that from before the creation of the world, so now the second party, each man, has the responsibility to receive the willingness of God. God's actions are always first, and thus by grace because he didn't have to, legally, want to save us in the first place.

I noticed you said nothing about the sovereignty definition I gave you just went into a discussion of free will.


Doug

 

[5thKingdom]

Then you aren't aware of "replacement theology" is. That God supposedly replaced Israel with the Church. It's just a bunch of hooey,

(1) God shows the Jewish "Kingdom of Heaven" [Mat 22:2]
being destroyed [v7] and replaced with the Christian Kingdom
in verses 8-14.


(2) God shows the "Kingdom of God" being TAKEN from
the Jews and GIVEN to the Christians in Matt 21:43


Mat 21:43
Therefore say I unto you, The Kingdom of God
shall be TAKEN from you, and GIVEN to a nation
bringing forth the fruits thereof.


(3) God shows the "harvest" of the Jewish Saints
into the Christian Kingdom in John 4:35


Joh 4:35
Say not ye, There are yet four months, and then cometh harvest? behold, I say unto you, Lift up your eyes, and look on the fields; for they are white already to harvest.

.

 

[BBAS 64]

Bill,

All this simply says is that man's will cannot and does not initiate and thereby cause us to be born again, in other words, God doesn't save us simply because we want to be saved, but because he wants us to be saved and has provided us the means of becoming saved. The restoration of relationship takes two parties, and we can want to reconcile all we want, but unless God is willing, nothing will ever happen. God has made the decision to save, and that from before the creation of the world, so now the second party, each man, has the responsibility to receive the willingness of God. God's actions are always first, and thus by grace because he didn't have to, legally, want to save us in the first place.

I noticed you said nothing about the sovereignty definition I gave you just went into a discussion of free will.


Doug

Good Day, Doug

In general I agreed with it... only to add in case you missed it

"I contend that man is never free with in his own violation. Man yes is a volitional creature and does have the freedom of choice, but those choices are not free as they are impacted by things that man can not control. His choices are dependent on that which he desires as well as the options that are possible and as such can not be considered in any way free.

Never said God must but will contend that scripture teaches God does."


The reconciliation of the broken relationship is the exclusive roll of Jesus though His blood... Col 1:13-23


Yes Gods actions are always first and they are the cause and they serve His purpose.

He removes our heart of stone, and gives us a heart of flesh, his Spirit in us and causes us to walk in His statues and obey His commands he becomes our God and we as a result become his people.

The Joy of the new Covent and the better promise.

In Him,

Bill

 

[FreeGrace2]

I contend that man is never free with in his own violation.

I know you meant volition here. And yes, man IS free in his volition. Or else it can't be "his". It's whoever is pulling the strings.

Man yes is a volitional creature and does have the freedom of choice, but those choices are not free as they are impacted by things that man can not control.

This is a non starter. Of course no one controls the weather and other things out of our control. And that's hardly the issue at all. The only issue is that man CAN make choices WITHIN the realm of options (choices) available to him.

[QUOTE[ His choices are dependent on that which he desires as well as the options that are possible and as such can not be considered in any way free.[/QUOTE]
Your claim here is just your opinion. You cannot prove it. man is free to make his own choices among the options (as you say) or choices that are available.

 

[FreeGrace2]

5thKingdom said: ↑
Eph 2:5
Even when we [the elect] were DEAD in sins,
[God] hath quickened us [the elect] together with Christ,
(by [the] grace [of God] ye [the elect] are saved)

Let's stop with the slaughtered 'explanation' here. No one is elect until they are believers. Eph 1:4 makes that clear.

You are actually arguing a DEAD man can make a "decision" to
believe what ONLY THE REGENERATED ("the quickened")
can believe... amazing.

Where do you get that "only the regenerated can believe" from any verse?

Someone "quickened us" (the elect) when we were DEAD.
Now WHO do you think showed that "grace" that "saved" us
(the elect) when we were spiritually DEAD?

Answers don't seem to matter to those who can't read what is so clear.

[QUOT]And you actually use THIS PASSAGE to try to show that regeneration FOLLOWS/COMES AFTER "we" (the elect) have been "quickened" (regenerated)? Absolutely amazing.[/QUOTE]
When you include v.8, yes. And you haven't proven otherwise.

You used Ephesians 2:8-9 as your PROOF text.

It seems you don't even understand the issue here.

I showed HOW and WHY your proof text does NOT prove
what you claim.. so now you want to DEFLECT to another text.

If you had read what I posted, you would have understood that v.8 is tied to v.5 and proves that both salvation and regeneration follow faith.

Stick with the TEXT you argued before deflecting to anothers.

Again, v.5 establishes that "salvation" and "regeneration" are equated.
v.8 plainly says that salvation is by grace THROUGH FAITH. The faith MUST BE there in order for salvation to occur.

The question is clear:
Does Eph 2:8-9 teach regeneration FOLLOWS after we
(dead men) are "quickened"... and WHO "quickens" us?

-OR-

Do we (DEAD) men "decide" to believe BEFORE we are "quickened"?
This is not an unclear question, nor is it a hard question to answer
from the Bible.

Neither of your "questions" are even valid.

v.5 shows that regeneration and salvation are equated. iow, you can't have either one without the other. They go together.

Can you have a regenerated person who is not saved? No.
Can you have a saved person who is not regenerated? no.

No... it is YOU that miss the point.
A spiritually DEAD person has the "free will" in SECULAR matters.

Your opinions just keep getting in the way. This is like those who have a "selective memory". You're just making up stuff. When you combine v.5 and v.8, it's clear that both salvation and regeneration follow faith.

They can choose to wear white socks or black socks. However,
there is NO SCRIPTURE that says they can "quicken" themselves
and NO SCRIPTURE that says they can "decide" to become elect.

Of course no one can quicken themselves, and I never suggested such silliness.

It is God who quickens (regenerates). And He regenerates those who believe.

When you PRETEND to not know the difference between "free will"
in SECULAR matters (which I have never disputed) you are only
PRETENDING... because we are discussing SPIRITUAL MATTERS.
You intentionally CONFLATE the two separate issues in order
to save fact. Nothing more.

Do you realize that when YOU make up stuff it just like pretending. Your opinion isn't even close to the Bible.

How silly. I am obviously talking about men physically alive
and "quickened" from their spiritual death. I find it very hard
to believe you do not understand what I said... I NEVER SPOKE
about a physical death or resurrection. You already know that.
And Ephesians 2 is not talking about physical death either.

You noted that "dead men cannot make decisions", or something very close to that.

Since it is ONLY physically dead men that cannot function, your comments clearly suggested that you WERE describing physically dead men.

Eph 2:5
Even when we [the elect] were DEAD in sins,
[God] hath quickened us [the elect] together with Christ,
(by [the] grace [of God] ye [the elect] are saved)

Let's remove the silly blue and phony words and just see the text:

NIV made us alive with Christ even when we were dead in transgressions—it is by grace you have been saved.

ESV even when we were dead in our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ--by grace you have been saved--

This is my point: in both translations, the red words and the blue words are equated.

iow, they go together. Can't have one without the other.

Or prove me wrong from Scripture.

Now, v.8 says we are saved by grace through faith. It is clear that the faith MUST BE present in order to be saved.

You are actually arguing a DEAD man can make a "decision" to
believe what ONLY THE REGENERATED ("the quickened")
can believe... amazing.

No verse says this. Only your imaginative opinion.

Someone "quickened us" (the elect) when we were DEAD.
Now WHO do you think showed that "grace" that "saved" us
(the elect)?

Of course God does. And he quickens those who believe.

And you actually use THIS PASSAGE to try to show that regeneration FOLLOWS/COMES AFTER "we" (the elect)
have been "quickened"? Absolutely amazing.

What is amazing is that you seem unable to understand what is so clear.

 

[FreeGrace2]

(1) God shows the Jewish "Kingdom of Heaven" [Mat 22:2]
being destroyed [v7] and replaced with the Christian Kingdom
in verses 8-14.

(2) God shows the "Kingdom of God" being TAKEN from
the Jews and GIVEN to the Christians in Matt 21:43

Mat 21:43
Therefore say I unto you, The Kingdom of God
shall be TAKEN from you, and GIVEN to a nation
bringing forth the fruits thereof.

(3) God shows the "harvest" of the Jewish Saints
into the Christian Kingdom in John 4:35

Joh 4:35
Say not ye, There are yet four months, and then cometh harvest? behold, I say unto you, Lift up your eyes, and look on the fields; for they are white already to harvest.

We've had this discussion about your so-called "kingdoms". You don't have a point.

 

[TibiasDad]

You say God really wants them saved ... ok then why is he unable, or unwilling to do so? What is it that stops God from getting that which he desires?

He is not unwilling or unable to do anything, and he will save all who believe. Hos desire is for a volitional relationship with his creation. I think it was CS Lewis that said something to the effect that "in the end we will either say to God, 'thy will be done' or God will say to us, 'thy will be done'. God, in his sovereignty, allows man to choose to reject or believe God's promises. This is evident, in part, by the commands to repent and believe always being in the active voice. John 3:16 doesn't say "that whoever is given belief" but whoever believes.

Doug

 

[Butch5]

That's not important.

It's the entire discussion.

What? Of course Paul's message is the issue. Why else would he write to the church at Rome?

No, the post you replied to stated that Paul was addressing the Jews at Romans 2:17 and continued that discourse through 11:13. What he was discussing wasn't at issue.

So you mistakenly believe that he wrote to Christians and Jews (non-Christians) then. Wow. You couldn't be more wrong.

Why are you having such a hard time with this. I said they were all Christians, some where Jews some Gentiles. You don't seem to following the discussion.

Since this seems to important to you, there must be a reason and significance for his "message to saved Jews" vs his "message to saved Gentiles", yet you claim that isn't the issue. Of course it is.

I already explained it. The significance is who is being addressed. Not everything in the Bible pertains to every Christian.

OK, let's go with that. Paul makes a distinction between Jew and Gentile but you CAN'T make a distinction in his message to each group. What's up with that?

The distinction is who is being addressed. I'm not sure why you keep going to the message. The thread is about witnessing to people if their salvation is predetermined. My post was to point out that Romans is mistakenly used to support Reformed theology and that when understood correctly it doesn't support it. To show that I showed where Paul addressed the Jewish believers in the Church at Rome at 2:17 of the book of Romans. That was my argument. How or why you've gone to the message, I don't know.

Then you aren't aware of "replacement theology" is. That God supposedly replaced Israel with the Church. It's just a bunch of hooey, but since Calvinists do not properly understand election, their confusion drives them further deeper and deeper.

I don't even see how this addresses what I said.

If the difference between his message to Jews from the Gentiles isn't important, then why is any of Romans important?

It isn't important to what I said. I think you've totally missed the point of the post you originally challenged.

 

[ICONO'CLAST]

Calvinists focus is entirely on the sovereignty of God ... and in the process dismiss God's abundant love. He is indeed sovereign ... but He chose to give all His intelligent beings freedom of choice. Without choice TRUE love can not exist .... we know that ... God knows that.

Love is not a forced issue nor can it be.

The greatest of these is LOVE. God IS Love.

The love of God is only found In Christ.
Men are bound in sin.

 

[ICONO'CLAST]

"TibiasDad,
[Calvinism completely compasses God's redemptive plan and teaches that God saves a small percentage of humanity based on His elective determination before creation and passes over the rest. Since God's redemptive plan excludes most people,]

This is a blatant falsehood by yet another blame God religious person. God is going to save a multitude that no man could number, more than the stars of the heaven,more than the sand of the sea

[there is no basis for us to tell a lost person that God loves them,]

The Apostles did not do this. The biblical teaching is that God loves sinners "In Christ"

[ that Jesus died for them, that they should believe in Christ for salvation, or that there is hope beyond the grave. If the lost person is not elect, we would be misleading them if we said any of those things. Indeed, it is difficult to see how we could make any honest gospel presentation knowing most people are by God's purposes not savable. Not only that, since salvation hangs on God's elective determination before creation and not on a present decision for Christ, we must make this TULIP reality personal. We must come to grips with the fact that many of those we know, and perhaps some of those closest to us, have no possibility of being reconciled to God because they are not elect.]

This is another foolish argument speculating and doubting Gods promise that everyone believing will be saved....

What caught my eye is the idea that "there is no basis for us to tell a lost person that God loves them, that Jesus died for them,

Where do you see anything close to this in Acts???

 

[TibiasDad]

"TibiasDad,
[Calvinism completely compasses God's redemptive plan and teaches that God saves a small percentage of humanity based on His elective determination before creation and passes over the rest. Since God's redemptive plan excludes most people,]

This is a blatant falsehood by yet another blame God religious person. God is going to save a multitude that no man could number, more than the stars of the heaven,more than the sand of the sea

[there is no basis for us to tell a lost person that God loves them,]

The Apostles did not do this. The biblical teaching is that God loves sinners "In Christ"

[ that Jesus died for them, that they should believe in Christ for salvation, or that there is hope beyond the grave. If the lost person is not elect, we would be misleading them if we said any of those things. Indeed, it is difficult to see how we could make any honest gospel presentation knowing most people are by God's purposes not savable. Not only that, since salvation hangs on God's elective determination before creation and not on a present decision for Christ, we must make this TULIP reality personal. We must come to grips with the fact that many of those we know, and perhaps some of those closest to us, have no possibility of being reconciled to God because they are not elect.]

This is another foolish argument speculating and doubting Gods promise that everyone believing will be saved....

What caught my eye is the idea that "there is no basis for us to tell a lost person that God loves them, that Jesus died for them,

Where do you see anything close to this in Acts???

I would be happy to respond to you if you would correct the formating so that I can respond properly.

Doug

 

[5thKingdom]

We've had this discussion about your so-called "kingdoms". You don't have a point.

How sad when people cannot discern WHO is the subject
in the Jewish "Kingdom of Heaven" that JESUS (not me)
specifically NAMED in Matthew 22:2-7


Mat 22:2 The Kingdom of Heaven is like unto a certain king,
which made a marriage for his son, 3 And sent forth his servants
to call them that were bidden to the wedding: and they would
not come. 4 Again, he sent forth other servants, saying, Tell them
which are bidden, Behold, I have prepared my dinner: my oxen and
my fatlings are killed, and all things are ready: come unto the
marriage. 5 But they made light of it, and went their ways,
one to his farm, another to his merchandise: 6 And the remnant
took his servants, and entreated them spitefully, and slew them.
7 But when the king heard thereof, he was wroth: and he sent
forth his armies, and destroyed those murderers, and burned
up their city.


And how sad it is when "Christians" cannot discern
WHO is the subject of those REPLACING that Jewish
"Kingdom of Heaven" in [v8-14] after it's destroyed.


Mat 22:8 Then saith he to his servants, The wedding is ready,
but they which were bidden were not worthy. 9 Go ye therefore
into the highways, and as many as ye shall find, bid to the marriage.
So those servants went out into the highways, and gathered together
all as many as they found, both bad and good: [wheat and tares]
and the wedding was furnished with guests. 11 And when the king
came in to see the guests, he saw there a man which had not on a
wedding garment: 12 And he saith unto him, Friend, how camest
thou in hither not having a wedding garment? And he was speechless.
13 Then said the king to the servants, Bind him hand and foot, and
take him away, and cast him into outer darkness; there shall be
weeping and gnashing of teeth. 14 For many are called, but few
are chosen.


How sad when people cannot discern WHO the "Kingdom of God"
was TAKEN FROM and WHO it was GIVEN TO in Mat 21:43
which (again) are the Words of Christ (not my words)...
and which was already FULFILLED in history (reality).


Mat 21:43
Therefore say I unto you, The Kingdom of God shall be
TAKEN from you, and GIVEN to a nation bringing forth
the fruits thereof.


I am always amazed when I find people who actually think
Biblical Truth is LIMITED to what they understand.... and are
willing to ignore any Scriptures that contradict their doctrines.


It's as if they WILL NOT BELIEVE what Scripture says unless
their denomination or church already teaches that Biblical Truth.
Their authority is not the BIBLE... but the words of men.


.

.

 

[5thKingdom]

He will save all who believe.

Doug

So we see the DEFINITION of the synergy needed to preach
the "boaster's gospel". Man must initiate the salvation process
(by "believing") and then God SEES what a good thing that man
has done and God is then OBLIGATED to regenerate that person.


In this synergistic gospel man does NOT need to DEPEND on
the mercy of God to "decide" to save who HE has elected...
as MAN "decides" to elect himself... and God must respect
that "good work" that man has done on his own.


So the saved man can "boast" to all the unsaved men that
they should have made the good "decision" that he made...
their eternal torment is for lack of making a good decision.


Men who cannot DEPEND on GOD to elect them cannot
follow a monergistic Gospel (the narrow way few find)
they must follow a "works gospel" where THEY decide
(the BROAD WAY leading MANY Christians to destruction)


Eph 2:9 Not of works, lest any man should boast.


I would estimate that 95% of "Christians" cannot DEPEND
on God Alone - and choose to follow the "boaster's gospel".
And then they must pretend that those following monergism
are "brothers" to those following synergism... that is like saying
the saved "wheat" (sown by God) are actually "brothers" to
the unsaved "tares" (sown by Satan)... since BOTH of them
attend the same church.


.

 

[5thKingdom]

Bill,
The restoration of relationship takes two parties,

Meaning we do NOT have a Sovereign and Autonomous God
we have a God who NEEDS man to help Him save.

but unless God is willing, nothing will ever happen.

Meaning some men were NEVER MEANT to be saved...
all the Gentiles in the OT Kingdom and all the "tares/goats"
in the NT Kingdom... and all those OUTSIDE the church.
That is a TON of people NEVER MEANT to be saved.


.

 

[BBAS 64]

How is the gospel the power unto salvation if one believes that salvation is by election? Wouldn't that make election to salvation the power?


Not an accurate one.


This just sidesteps the whole issue. If God chose unconditionally who will believe, then the gospel just ain't that important. Because of course, those chosen will automatically believe the gospel.


No, the Bible says so. 1 Tim 2:3-6 says so clearly. And Titus 2:11 says the grace of God offers salvation to everyone.


You are simply unwilling to (refuse) to understand that God has given humanity the choice of what to believe. Since you won't believe that, there is no other answer for you.


Nothing. He set up the plan. And He sticks with His plan.

Why can't Calvinsts understand that God can obligate Himself, and want something even knowing that man's free will can choose differently?


Of course He is the Seeker. That's WHY He died for all.

Good Day, FreeGrace2

God both ordains the ends as well as the mean.. the gospel is the power unto Salvation it alone is the instrumental means by which God achieves his ends. Much like the chisel is to a artist.

" Chosen will automatically believe"... um no the Gospel will being about it's intended purpose.

The Gospel is foolishness to them who perishing... Unless God does something they will freely and always believe that that is and will be their choice.

He is the seeker and He finds with out fail that is what makes him the good Shepard.

What appears to be men seeking God.. is merely just the result of being found by Him. The hound of heaven.

In Him,

Bill

 

[BBAS 64]

I thought the claim of Calvinistic "total depravity" is that man is unable to believe until or unless he is first regenerated. Has Calvinism changed their points?

I'm not a Calvinist, but I agree that God does all the regeneration. So man IS dependent upon God for regeneration. But that's different than needing to be regenerated in order to believe the gospel.

If you believe that regeneration precedes belief for salvation, please provide the verses that actually make that clear.

Thanks.

Good Day, FreeGrace2

The inability to believe is a result of of the effects of TD see RC Sproul on the issue of radical depravity.

Why does man need to be regenerated? Can he not choose to believe with out it?

Believing is a direct command (law) of God just like repentance and in order to do that God must cause us to do so, though the direct effects and purpose of regeneration.

Eze 36:26 And I will give you a new heart, and a new spirit I will put within you. And I will remove the heart of stone from your flesh and give you a heart of flesh. And I will put my Spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes and be careful to obey my rules.

We have a new heart.. new man, new desires, lovers of light, he writes His law on our new heart, we know Him, he becomes our God and he makes us His people.


Hebrews 8- For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, declares the Lord: I will put my laws into their minds, and write them on their hearts, and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. And they shall not teach, each one his neighbor and each one his brother, saying, ‘Know the Lord,’ for they shall all know me, from the least of them to the greatest. For I will be merciful toward their iniquities, and I will remember their sins no more.”

In Him,

Bill

 

[FreeGrace2]

It's the entire discussion.
No, the post you replied to stated that Paul was addressing the Jews at Romans 2:17 and continued that discourse through 11:13. What he was discussing wasn't at issue.
Why are you having such a hard time with this. I said they were all Christians, some where Jews some Gentiles. You don't seem to following the discussion.
I already explained it. The significance is who is being addressed. Not everything in the Bible pertains to every Christian.
The distinction is who is being addressed. I'm not sure why you keep going to the message. The thread is about witnessing to people if their salvation is predetermined. My post was to point out that Romans is mistakenly used to support Reformed theology and that when understood correctly it doesn't support it. To show that I showed where Paul addressed the Jewish believers in the Church at Rome at 2:17 of the book of Romans. That was my argument. How or why you've gone to the message, I don't know.
I don't even see how this addresses what I said.
It isn't important to what I said. I think you've totally missed the point of the post you originally challenged.

I've gotten tired of this back and forth. The epistle was written to believers in the Lord Jesus Christ, both Jewish and Gentile.

Your arguments are a waste of time and effort. All of the epistles were written to Christians, regardless of ethnicity.

 

[FreeGrace2]

FreeGrace2 said: ↑
We've had this discussion about your so-called "kingdoms". You don't have a point.

How sad when people cannot discern WHO is the subject in the Jewish "Kingdom of Heaven" that JESUS (not me) specifically NAMED in Matthew 22:2-7

This is what is truly sad: your so-called "5 kingdoms".

 

[FreeGrace2]

FreeGrace2 said: ↑
How is the gospel the power unto salvation if one believes that salvation is by election? Wouldn't that make election to salvation the power?

Not an accurate one.

This just sidesteps the whole issue. If God chose unconditionally who will believe, then the gospel just ain't that important. Because of course, those chosen will automatically believe the gospel.

Good Day, FreeGrace2

God both ordains the ends as well as the mean.

And, now for your explanation of what that exactly means, if you will.

the gospel is the power unto Salvation it alone is the instrumental means by which God achieves his ends. Much like the chisel is to a artist.

Yes, one must HEAR and UNDERSTAND the gospel BEFORE they can believe it.

" Chosen will automatically believe"... um no the Gospel will being about it's intended purpose.

Could you fix this comment so I can understand your point and respond? Thanks.

The Gospel is foolishness to them who perishing... Unless God does something they will freely and always believe that that is and will be their choice.

Right. It IS a choice. Always has been, and always will be a choice. Thanks for noticing.

A "choice" by definition is something that is decided by the one making the choice.

So why can't Calvinists apply that to believing for salvation?

He is the seeker and He finds with out fail that is what makes him the good Shepard.

What do you mean by "He finds..." after noting Jesus is the "Seeker"?

What appears to be men seeking God.. is merely just the result of being found by Him.

Are you not aware of what Scripture says about seeking?

Heb 11:6 - And without faith it is impossible to please God, because anyone who comes to him must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who earnestly seek him.

If men cannot seek God, why did the Hebrew author indicate that those who "come to Him" MUST BELIEVE that God rewards those who earnestly seek Him?

 

[FreeGrace2]

FreeGrace2 said: ↑
I thought the claim of Calvinistic "total depravity" is that man is unable to believe until or unless he is first regenerated. Has Calvinism changed their points?

I'm not a Calvinist, but I agree that God does all the regeneration. So man IS dependent upon God for regeneration. But that's different than needing to be regenerated in order to believe the gospel.

If you believe that regeneration precedes belief for salvation, please provide the verses that actually make that clear.

Good Day, FreeGrace2

The inability to believe is a result of of the effects of TD see RC Sproul on the issue of radical depravity.

I don't need to see Sproul. I asked the question to YOU, not him. We'll see if you can answer my request.

Why does man need to be regenerated? Can he not choose to believe with out it?

I have already shown from Scripture that regeneration follows faith. Eph 2:5 and 8.

Believing is a direct command (law) of God just like repentance and in order to do that God must cause us to do so, though the direct effects and purpose of regeneration.

Not an answer.

Eze 36:26 And I will give you a new heart, and a new spirit I will put within you. And I will remove the heart of stone from your flesh and give you a heart of flesh. And I will put my Spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes and be careful to obey my rules.

Still not a response to my request. This verse simply notes what regeneration is. And yes, God does the regenerating.

We have a new heart.. new man, new desires, lovers of light, he writes His law on our new heart, we know Him, he becomes our God and he makes us His people.

Still doesn't answer my request. This is just a comment about what regeneration is.

Hebrews 8- For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, declares the Lord: I will put my laws into their minds, and write them on their hearts, and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. And they shall not teach, each one his neighbor and each one his brother, saying, ‘Know the Lord,’ for they shall all know me, from the least of them to the greatest. For I will be merciful toward their iniquities, and I will remember their sins no more.”

In Him,
Bill

Well, as I thought, you didn't answer my request.

This is what I requested:
"If you believe that regeneration precedes belief for salvation, please provide the verses that actually make that clear."

And you didn't provide any verses.

otoh, Eph 2:5 shows that salvation and regeneration are equated, and by that, I mean they go together. You can't have either one without the other at the same time.

And v.8 shows that salvation is "through faith". That means clearly that faith is necessary for salvation.

And there are over 2 dozen verses that specifically state that salvation and/or eternal life are by believing.

So, regeneration follows faith. Every time.