When We Were Born-Again

[ThroughChrist]

When we were born-again, did we get saved because we believed to receive God's gift of salvation by grace? Or, receiving a new life, did God save us first before we could have faith to believe to receive the cross of Christ? Which is the view of calvinism/reformed? And what is the reason for holding this view?

 

[GrinningDwarf]

When we were born-again, did we get saved because we believed to receive God's gift of salvation by grace? Or, receiving a new life, did God save us first before we could have faith to believe to receive the cross of Christ? Which is the view of calvinism/reformed? And what is the reason for holding this view?

Good question, ThroughChrist! Thanks for posting.

I'm on a break from work right now, so I don't have time for a complete answer, but I'll start things off.

Before we are born again, what is our capacity for choosing God? Would somebody that has not been regenerated ever choose for God? The scriptures are pretty clear on this. Here are a few:

As it is written:
"There is no one righteous, not even one;
there is no one who understands,
no one who seeks God. Romans 3:10-11

The heart is deceitful above all things
and beyond cure.
Who can understand it? Jeremiah 17:9

The man without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned. 1 Corinthians 2:14

...the sinful mind is hostile to God. It does not submit to God's law, nor can it do so. Those controlled by the sinful nature cannot please God. Romans 8:7-8

Let’s think about this for a minute. These and other scriptures say that the unregenerate person is sinful, wayward, lying, having every inclination towards evil, mad, loving of darkness, rejecting of the things of God, considering the things of God as foolishness, hardened, insensitive, corrupt, and hostile towards God. Why would such a person even want anything to do with God?

To understand salvation, we need to really have a firm grasp on what we are saved from.

Gotta go back to work. I'll post more later, and I'm sure others will have more to say, as well.

 

[ThroughChrist]

Before we are born again, what is our capacity for choosing God? Would somebody that has not been regenerated ever choose for God?

"That whosoever believeth" (John 3:16). Anyone who chooses to believe can receive. I chose God before I was regenerated. It was because I chose God that I was then graced with regeneration.

As it is written:
"There is no one righteous, not even one;
there is no one who understands,
no one who seeks God. Romans 3:10-11

The heart is deceitful above all things
and beyond cure.
Who can understand it? Jeremiah 17:9

These verses say no one by the flesh chooses God. The flesh will never choose God. But I didn't choose God by the flesh, but according to God's way and desire of receiving Him according to John 3.16; that is, not by the flesh, but that which is not of the flesh, which is the image of God.

The man without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned. 1 Corinthians 2:14

If you have not been regenerated, you would not have the Holy Spirit indwelling: you would be "without the Spirit".

...the sinful mind is hostile to God. It does not submit to God's law, nor can it do so. Those controlled by the sinful nature cannot please God. Romans 8:7-8

The sinful mind of the flesh is hostile, it does not submit to God. The flesh is utterly corrupted and can not be improved or refined or fixed. The judgment of the flesh is death by the cross.

Let’s think about this for a minute. These and other scriptures say that the unregenerate person is sinful, wayward, lying, having every inclination towards evil, mad, loving of darkness, rejecting of the things of God, considering the things of God as foolishness, hardened, insensitive, corrupt, and hostile towards God. Why would such a person even want anything to do with God?

Because he is still made in God's image (Gen. 1:26,27).

To understand salvation, we need to really have a firm grasp on what we are saved from.

I think you can sum it up in one word - Hell.

So given my response as the Holy Spirit has led me, what would be the correct answer to the question that I first posed?

 

[GrinningDwarf]

So given my response as the Holy Spirit has led me, what would be the correct answer to the question that I first posed?

Hmmm...my response is this:

You may think the 'Holy Spirit' led you there, but your replies don't square up very well with an accurate reading of God's Holy Word. Where does that put us?

The responses you give demonstrate that you clearly do not understand the Reformed view. Do you really want to understand the Reformed view, or do you merely want to argue for the position you already hold?

If you want to argue, I think the General Theology room is for that. If you really want to try to understand the Reformed view, so that at the very least you can say you are refuting the actual Reformed view and not the caricature so prevalently imagined in the general Christian populace today, let's try this discussion again, shall we?

 

[ThroughChrist]

You may think the 'Holy Spirit' led you there, but your replies don't square up very well with an accurate reading of God's Holy Word. Where does that put us?

I responded to your interpretation, giving you how the Holy Spirit leads me to believe in agreement with the Word and brothers and sisters in Christ. In return, you give no specific response to these details that I gave. And your response was the equivalent of saying "No" without a reason from the center of your self. So that leads me to ask the question: Why don't you believe man is made in God's image? God's image is permanently existing. It cannot be destroyed and if it wants to, it can come to the cross to receive the precious blood.

The responses you give demonstrate that you clearly do not understand the Reformed view. Do you really want to understand the Reformed view, or do you merely want to argue for the position you already hold?

I don't want to argue. What I want to do is find justification for the Reformer view if it exists, so I look forward to your reply. That would be fair.

If you want to argue, I think the General Theology room is for that. If you really want to try to understand the Reformed view, so that at the very least you can say you are refuting the actual Reformed view and not the caricature so prevalently imagined in the general Christian populace today, let's try this discussion again, shall we?

I assure you that I don't want to argue, but would like to find just cause for the Calvinist view if it can be shown. Who better to ask than you? Can you respond directly to what I posted in my previous post, so that there is a flow to the conversation, otherwise it gets disjoined as though starting a new discussion in the same thread. Let's continue from there, shall we?

 

[GrinningDwarf]

So that leads me to ask the question: Why don't you believe man is made in God's image?

This is an example of why it seems like you're coming here trying to prove your own point. Where did I ever say anything like this? Even remotely implying this? I agree that we are made in God's image...but there were serious consequences of the fall.

I don't want to argue. What I want to do is find justification for the Reformer view if it exists, so I look forward to your reply. That would be fair.

Cool. Then we need to start at the beginning and move logically. Your responses were jumping all around. Let me first show you what I mean:

"That whosoever believeth" (John 3:16). Anyone who chooses to believe can receive. I chose God before I was regenerated. It was because I chose God that I was then graced with regeneration.

Calvinists would agree with your first point. Anyone who chooses to believe can receive. We disagree with your second and third sentences...and this is the point you are asking to clarify, correct? But instead of trying to understand a Reformed view here, you're insisting upon your own Arminian view. I'm sorry, but that doesn't seem like someone trying to understand.

Now let's go back to the beginning...with the fall of man. I'll ask you a question to see where we stand with each other's understanding here...

What exactly was the effect of the fall upon man? Upon man's nature and will? This is not a trick question, and I promise not to 'beat you up' over any reply. Just keep it focused on the effect of the fall upon man...not any later works.

 

[ThroughChrist]

Two choices: sigh or repent I suppose.

This is an example of why it seems like you're coming here trying to prove your own point. Where did I ever say anything like this? Even remotely implying this? I agree that we are made in God's image...but there were serious consequences of the fall.

I don't wish to prove a point, but just let the Holy Spirit take us where He wills. Is that so wrong? Now then, if you believe you are still made in God's image, why are you yet unable to come to the cross not by the flesh, but by that image in which God gives the choice to be drawn by God? The consequences of the fall are not so dire that you would not be able to come to the cross as a helpless sinner. God foreknew He could draw us to do so because we were made in His image to have that choice to receive God's grace and gift of eternal life. I dare say if it is not so, then God would be evil wouldn't He? Since He has given us His same free-will, to not allow this choice is then an afront to the very image of God.

Cool. Then we need to start at the beginning and move logically. Your responses were jumping all around. Let me first show you what I mean: Calvinists would agree with your first point. Anyone who chooses to believe can receive. We disagree with your second and third sentences...and this is the point you are asking to clarify, correct? But instead of trying to understand a Reformed view here, you're insisting upon your own Arminian view. I'm sorry, but that doesn't seem like someone trying to understand.

Sentence 1 - "That whosoever believeth" (John 3:16).
Sentence 2 - Anyone who chooses to believe can receive.
Sentence 3 - I chose God before I was regenerated.
Sentence 4 - It was because I chose God that I was then graced with regeneration.

I am not insisting on any particular view, but asking you to resolve the issue of your own belief. Yes, I am asking you, if you can, to resolve this apparent contradiction as outlined:

Aren't you contradicting yourself when you say you agree that "whosoever believeth" but disagree with "anyone who chooses to believe"? If this confusion is in your heart, then wouldn't other confusion follow such as not accepting God's desire to regenerate the person who "chose God" (sentence three) to receive redemption?

And, how am I jumping around, for you didn't say? I did post #3, which you did not reply to specifically, but seemed to start a new thread with post #4, not touching on much at all specifically in post #3. So that is why I suggested you get back to responding to those specific points I responded to you from your post #2. Since, now, by post #6, you had still not done so, I shouldn't hold out hope that you will should I? This would have been proper flow of the discussion

If resistible grace, unlimited atonement, conditional election, preservation of the saints and free-choice are wrong teachings, how? I am giving you every opportunity to make your case. My ears and eyes are are waiting for you since post #2, #4, and #6. What if it goes for infinity? What then?

Now let's go back to the beginning...with the fall of man. I'll ask you a question to see where we stand with each other's understanding here...What exactly was the effect of the fall upon man? Upon man's nature and will? This is not a trick question, and I promise not to 'beat you up' over any reply. Just keep it focused on the effect of the fall upon man...not any later works.

Because of the fall, man's flesh becomes utterly corrupted, so the man could not, nor ever could, choose the cross by that irredeemable flesh. Yet the man is still made in God's image, which you agree, but that contradicts total depravity doesn't it, since to be totally deprave means you can't choose the cross unless you were made that way while others were not. Remember you did say you "disagree" with sentences 2 and 3: Anyone who chooses to believe (i.e. whosever willeth).

Shouldn't we get back to the beginning that was left off in post #3 which you ddidn't respond to? such as when I said, "Because he is still made in God's image (Gen. 1:26,27)." Doesn't the image of God precede the fall? Now though man is fallen, yet still made in God's image, those who would receive God's grace, chose the cross by God's image, not by the new found flesh-body of sin and selfish self.

Do you see how the grace or gift of being made in God's image is the grace that preceded the fall, that which came later (and so did fleshly ideas like total depravity also comes later)? And so God knowing this allows man to fall, but since man is still made in God's image, man can come to the cross. He does nothing else to receive salvation because the man is so utterly corrupted, but not totally deprave? Even before the fall if man were to receive from the tree of life, it will still be done by the image of God first given and by no other means.

 

[ThroughChrist]

Talk to you tomorrow or later today as the case may be.

 

[bradfordl]

WOW! Is it the coffee or the effects of space travel causing this flood of stream-of-consciousness? We may never know because....... Look! Up in the sky! Leaping whole books of scripture in a single bound! Strong enough to stop lucid trains of thought with blather! Able to deny plain truth with his super blinders! Defying logic by private revelation! It's a bird! Its a plane! No, its SuperArminiMan, coming to save the day!

Whew! And I was getting a little bored! I've seen this condition before. When confronted with scripture that plainly refutes your position, switch into rabbit mode and hop all around to elude the facts. Here's something you can do after you finally run out of breath.... Go...... Read...... The...... Bible.

As long as you're preferring to think that whatever thought enters your head was sent by God, you may think you don't need that little Book. I mean, if you have a direct line, what's the need? But -newsflash- what if you're wrong?!?

Oh, but that couldn't be, right? I forget. You're SuperArminiMan. I surrender. You MUST be right, and most of scripture isn't really saying what it sounds like, I'm just muddled up because I don't have that heavenly high-speed hook-up that you possess. Forgive me my insolence. You are obviously a prophet. I'll shut up now. Sorry.

 

[ThroughChrist]

WOW! Is it the coffee or the effects of space travel causing this flood of stream-of-consciousness? We may never know because....... Look! Up in the sky! Leaping whole books of scripture in a single bound! Strong enough to stop lucid trains of thought with blather! Able to deny plain truth with his super blinders! Defying logic by private revelation! It's a bird! Its a plane! No, its SuperArminiMan, coming to save the day!

I don't think that was constructive. What if everyone chose to have your attitude?

Whew! And I was getting a little bored! I've seen this condition before. When confronted with scripture that plainly refutes your position, switch into rabbit mode and hop all around to elude the facts. Here's something you can do after you finally run out of breath.... Go...... Read...... The...... Bible.

How does this constitute substantiating your view?

As long as you're preferring to think that whatever thought enters your head was sent by God, you may think you don't need that little Book. I mean, if you have a direct line, what's the need? But -newsflash- what if you're wrong?!?

But I don't think that whatever thought enters my head was sent from God, so why misrepresent? Who is the great accuser? Now then, instead of all these vagaries, why not deal specifically with the discussion?

Oh, but that couldn't be, right? I forget. You're SuperArminiMan. I surrender. You MUST be right, and most of scripture isn't really saying what it sounds like, I'm just muddled up because I don't have that heavenly high-speed hook-up that you possess. Forgive me my insolence. You are obviously a prophet. I'll shut up now. Sorry.

As they say, sarcasm is the lowest form of humor.

Why not just accept the Scriptures plainly, for don't they say you are made in God's image? Where does the Bible ever say you are not made in God's image? And if you do think you are made in God's image, then how can you be totally deprave? One can be fallen, while still made in God's image, but they can't be totally deprave, as I understand it, because that would require they need to be saved first which denigrates being made in God's image to be able to choose to come to the cross and be drawn by God to be saved.

Hopefully we can have a little more intelligent conversation than your last post, and less angst. By the way, I do believe in once-saved-always-saved.

 

[GrinningDwarf]

I don't wish to prove a point, but just let the Holy Spirit take us where He wills. Is that so wrong? Now then, if you believe you are still made in God's image, why are you yet unable to come to the cross not by the flesh, but by that image in which God gives the choice to be drawn by God?

Here ya go again...lecturing me on how I'm wrong before you even understand even the most basic part of my position. That's not seeking to understand. That's looking for an arguement.

Again I'll ask...what do you do if the 'Spirit' takes you somewhere that violates a true reading of Scripture? You're reading an awful lot into some scriptures that simply are not there...that are not possible by following something as basic as grammar for cryin' out loud!!

You say you believe in free will, huh? And then in a later post you say you believe in 'once saved, always saved'? How does that work? Free will is so important to God that He leaves my salvation up to it, but then He takes that choice away from me once I've made one choice? All you've done is switch the point where God turns us into 'robots' from pre-salvation to post-salvation. Seriously, the 'free will but OSAS' position is the most logically inconsistent view in all of Christiandom.

I think we're done talking unless you can do it with a more humble and teachable spirit.

 

[ThroughChrist]

Here ya go again...lecturing me on how I'm wrong before you even understand even the most basic part of my position. That's not seeking to understand. That's looking for an arguement.

How is this lecturing? Don't just blankly accuse me of this, for that is wrong and fuel's your own arguing. Why say I have not understood? How so? I keep waiting for you to say how, but you never do. Please don't be coy and cunning with me (this is false fruit), for I don't sense the love of the Holy Spirit from you when you do that, nor in that you say in your profile that you are a full-fledged preterist. Christ has not returned. "Then if any man shall say unto you, Lo, here [is] Christ, or there; believe [it] not" (Matt. 24:23).

Again I'll ask...what do you do if the 'Spirit' takes you somewhere that violates a true reading of Scripture? You're reading an awful lot into some scriptures that simply are not there...that are not possible by following something as basic as grammar for cryin' out loud!!

The Spirit does not take a person away from the Word, so why ask such a beguiling question? Again, why accuse of claiming of reading something is not there? Can't you deal specifically rather than just proclamation this and that from your self as the center? The language is basic and specific, so why try be legalistic with it?

You say you believe in free will, huh? And then in a later post you say you believe in 'once saved, always saved'? How does that work? Free will is so important to God that He leaves my salvation up to it, but then He takes that choice away from me once I've made one choice? All you've done is switch the point where God turns us into 'robots' from pre-salvation to post-salvation. Seriously, the 'free will but OSAS' position is the most logically inconsistent view in all of Christiandom.

There are both the tares and the wheat in Christendom (kingdom of heaven).

Salvation is God's doing. God saves when we choose. When we fulfill the condition, He complies. He leaves His salvation up to Him, and wants to be with those who choose His life to receive His life. He does not take the choice away once it is authentically made, for the authentic choice was real to be saved forever to receive eternal salvation. That's how powerful the choice is. The choice first made remains forever. It was a choice for forever thus enters grace to receive God's uncreated life. Why do you despise this? Who is a robot? The one who makes an authentic choice to the glory of God's desire for us or one where you are saved first before you can believe, using your words, like a robot? Logically consistent is the authentic choice that is so apropos that it warrants God gracing with eternal life. See down to that minute point!

I think we're done talking unless you can do it with a more humble and teachable spirit.

I am sure the Holy Spirit can make me even more humble, but what are you going to do with the contradiction you hold, that is not humble, in believing that you are made in God's image, but you don't have the image of God in which you are made to choose the cross, to be drawn by God, because you demand, by the flesh, that God did not make you first for hell, but for salvation robotically?

If I am wrong, do correct me. But how many more posts will it be? So far by my reckoning, you have posted #2, #4, #6 and #11, with the continual promise you will show a valid reasoning. I am waiting. Will these numbers continue for infinity?

I would love for you to deal with these questions head on and not shut down your mind to them, so we can move forward in the discussion.

 

[PapaLandShark]

Let's break this down a bit and ask for some deep introspective thought. No worries...this won't hurt much. It didn't me.

When I look back at my salvation I ask myself how exactly did I become saved in the first place?

Was it from hearing the Word?
Who spoke the Word to me?
Where did he/she get the Word?

How did I hear the Word?
If I, a sinner, hear not the Word because my eyes and ears are darkened how did I hear?
If I, a sinner, run toward inequity and bloodshed what turned me instead towards God?

Did I somehow force myself to overcome that darkness?
Was I helped?
Who or what helped me?
Was it the Word?
Was it God?
If it was either or both of the last what exactly did I have to do with it?

We are, to quote someone elses words, saved from the Wrath of God, by the Power of God, for the Glory of God.

I find it interesting that you quote John 3:16...did you happen to miss the verses before and afterwards?

10. Jesus answered and said to him, "Are you the teacher of Israel and do not understand these things?
11. "Truly, truly, I say to you, we speak of what we know and testify of what we have seen, and you do not accept our testimony.
12. "If I told you earthly things and you do not believe, how will you believe if I tell you heavenly things?
13. "No one has ascended into heaven, but He who descended from heaven: the Son of Man.
14. "As Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of Man be lifted up;
15. so that whoever believes will in Him have eternal life.
16. "For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life.
17. "For God did not send the Son into the world to judge the world, but that the world might be saved through Him.
18. "He who believes in Him is not judged; he who does not believe has been judged already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
19. "This is the judgment, that the Light has come into the world, and men loved the darkness rather than the Light, for their deeds were evil.
20. "For everyone who does evil hates the Light, and does not come to the Light for fear that his deeds will be exposed.

21. "But he who practices the truth comes to the Light, so that his deeds may be manifested as having been wrought in God."

All of this points to an external source...That source would be God. Not you. You did nothing and to think otherwise is to steal God's Glory. That is dangerous ground my friend.

1. And you were dead in your trespasses and sins,
2. in which you formerly walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, of the spirit that is now working in the sons of disobedience.
3. Among them we too all formerly lived in the lusts of our flesh, indulging the desires of the flesh and of the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, even as the rest.
4. But God, being rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us,
5. even when we were dead in our transgressions, made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved),
6. and raised us up with Him, and seated us with Him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus,
7. so that in the ages to come He might show the surpassing riches of His grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus.
8. For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God;
9. not as a result of works, so that no one may boast.
10. For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand so that we would walk in them.

 

[ThroughChrist]

I find it interesting that you quote John 3:16...did you happen to miss the verses before and afterwards?

No.

10. Jesus answered and said to him, "Are you the teacher of Israel and do not understand these things?
11. Truly, truly, I say to you, we speak of what we know and testify of what we have seen, and you do not accept our testimony.
12. If I told you earthly things and you do not believe, how will you believe if I tell you heavenly things?
13. No one has ascended into heaven, but He who descended from heaven: the Son of Man.
14. As Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of Man be lifted up;
15. so that whoever believes will in Him have eternal life.
16. For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life.
17. For God did not send the Son into the world to judge the world, but that the world might be saved through Him.
18. He who believes in Him is not judged; he who does not believe has been judged already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
19. This is the judgment, that the Light has come into the world, and men loved the darkness rather than the Light, for their deeds were evil.
20. For everyone who does evil hates the Light, and does not come to the Light for fear that his deeds will be exposed.

21. But he who practices the truth comes to the Light, so that his deeds may be manifested as having been wrought in God.

All of this points to an external source...That source would be God. Not you. You did nothing and to think otherwise is to steal God's Glory. That is dangerous ground my friend.

That God made man in His image to have a right to the cross is God's doing-His gift, His glory. Why deny His glory to be with those who choose the cross, stealing His glory to create a facsimile? It is dangerous ground my friend to think that because man is fallen, that man is no longer made in God's image to be able to be drawn by God to receive the cross by grace. To do nothing is nothing by the flesh, not nothing by the image of God. If it was not so, God would not implore us to come cross to receive the precious blood. Shall you stand by to puff up self rejecting God's claim He is not respecter of persons (Acts 10:34)? He is equal to all and to all may receive the unlimited atonement if grace is not resisted for the conditional election.

1. And you were dead in your trespasses and sins,
2. in which you formerly walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, of the spirit that is now working in the sons of disobedience.
3. Among them we too all formerly lived in the lusts of our flesh, indulging the desires of the flesh and of the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, even as the rest.
4. But God, being rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us,
5. even when we were dead in our transgressions, made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved),
6. and raised us up with Him, and seated us with Him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus,
7. so that in the ages to come He might show the surpassing riches of His grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus.
8. For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God;
9. not as a result of works, so that no one may boast.
10. For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand so that we would walk in them.

Not of yourselves, that is not by your flesh. By grace you have been saved by faith. This salvation is a gift of God, one only by which if you come to the cross to receive God's eternal life, you will be saved. Such works flow from this new life. Such works are the works of not propagating false teachings, such as the pride of thinking you are saved before you could believe and others were not saved so they could never believe. How prone to puff up this idea is by the mind of the flesh, leaving the spirit unchanged.

Is it not so?

 

[ThroughChrist]

I was hoping a calvinist could substantiate their beliefs, so I am still waiting, since we should not believe things we have no ground for.

 

[ThroughChrist]

Going to get something to eat. Talk to you in a bit GrinningDwarf, PapaLandShark as I can see you are both watching diligently thinking what to say and not repenting.

 

[bradfordl]

for I don't sense the love of the Holy Spirit from you when you do that

See! There's no point in all you befuddled hairy ticks arguing with Superarminiman! He's got that heavenly high speed connection with God! Just humbly bow out before he calls down fire on your heads.

Not of yourselves, that is not by your flesh.

Glad we have him here to add what was missing to the scripture!

Besides, his brain is miraculously shielded from such trivial human endeavors as proper exegesis of scripture or the use of logic. Like arguing with a foghorn. Maybe if we're real quiet he'll go away. Or at least calm down and start thinking coherently.

 

[PapaLandShark]

That God made man in His image to have a right to the cross is God's doing-His gift, His glory. Why deny His glory to be with those who choose the cross, stealing His glory to create a facsimile?

How exactly does man have a right to the Cross? Are we then, through some doing of our own, deserving of God's mercy?

God was under no obligation to save us. God did not have to save anyone. This is what makes it grace and a gift.

1. Therefore, having been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ,
2. through whom also we have obtained our introduction by faith into this grace in which we stand; and we exult in hope of the glory of God.
3. And not only this, but we also exult in our tribulations, knowing that tribulation brings about perseverance;
4. and perseverance, proven character; and proven character, hope;
5. and hope does not disappoint, because the love of God has been poured out within our hearts through the Holy Spirit who was given to us.
6. For while we were still helpless, at the right time Christ died for the ungodly.
7. For one will hardly die for a righteous man; though perhaps for the good man someone would dare even to die.
8. But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.
9. Much more then, having now been justified by His blood, we shall be saved from the wrath of God through Him.
10. For if while we were enemies we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, much more, having been reconciled, we shall be saved by His life.
11. And not only this, but we also exult in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have now received the reconciliation.

It is dangerous ground my friend to think that because man is fallen, that man is no longer made in God's image to be able to be drawn by God to receive the cross by grace.

I think you are a touch mixed up my friend. Drawn by God? Which is it to be...God initiated or man initiated? Your arguement falls apart here. I'm not sure where you get the image part ( other than Genesis ).

I am out of time for the moment. I'll try to drop in later to respond further. Until then Peace.

 

[ThroughChrist]

See! There's no point in all you befuddled hairy ticks arguing with Superarminiman! He's got that heavenly high speed connection with God! Just humbly bow out before he calls down fire on your heads.

I think you are repeating your accusations from your old man.

Glad we have him here to add what was missing to the scripture!

Who is that great accuser?

Besides, his brain is miraculously shielded from such trivial human endeavors as proper exegesis of scripture or the use of logic. Like arguing with a foghorn. Maybe if we're real quiet he'll go away. Or at least calm down and start thinking coherently.

So much angst without justification.

 

[GrinningDwarf]

Try this...it's an essay I started (but havn't finished) on this very topic (it will take two posts to fit. Reformed folks tend to be verbose. ):

For it is by grace you are saved, through faith--and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God--not of works, so that no one can boast. Ephesians 2:8-9, NIV

Is it possible that with our fleshly nature wanting to be the Masters of our own Destiny, that we give too much credence to the role we play in our salvation? Does our being born and raised in the United States, home of the rugged individualist, almost require us to read scripture through the lens of someone who just has to contribute something and is above taking handouts from anyone, regardless of the time, place, or circumstances? I submit that these factors play a very large role in our understanding of the state of fallen man and the dynamics between God and man in our salvation.

One thing that amazed me the most was how we can take scriptures that we all know...that we have all used in witnessing and evangelizing...and with just a little twist of perspective, just one slight change in exactly what Man’s fall means, the Reformed position become so obvious.

First, an explanation of terms is in order. Throughout this essay, I will be using the terms ‘Reformed’ and ‘evangelical’ .

I will use ‘Reformed’ to refer to those subscribing to the Reformed view of salvation. I don’t like to use the term Calvinist, because it has become such a loaded word. People can have a hard time understanding that the view they have in mind of a Calvinist probably bears little resemblance to what Calvinism really teaches. They wind up disagreeing with what they think they hear about Calvinism, but they’re not disagreeing with what Calvinists are really saying. In fact, I was in that very category at one time.




I will use ‘evangelical’ to lump together those within Protestant Christianity emphasizing Biblical authority and personal conversion who do not follow the Reformed view of salvation. I realize this will lump together those who ordinarily aren’t lumped together (such as Pentecostals and fundamental dispensationalists), and Reformed thinkers might be offended at my contrasting them with ‘evangelical’ (since Reformed thinkers hold to the ‘evangel’ themselves), but ‘evangelical’ has come to be synonymous in America with ‘mainstream Christian’. You have to admit, the Reformed view, or Calvinism, is definitely not mainstream in American Christianity. I needed one word that would encompass all those Christians holding non-Reformed views. Also, there is no generic type of non-Reformed Christian out there. Non-Reformed Christians can come from several different points of view, the most common two being Arminians and semi-Pelagians. Most modern Christian lay-people would not recognize those terms anyway, even though they follow the doctrine, so again for simplicity and style’s sake, I beg your indulgence in my use of the terms Reformed and evangelical.

Around 1991 or 1992, I began to get a glimpse of the true depth of God’s grace. Nothing has ever blown me away so much before or since as the idea of what God has provided in the way of salvation for those who not only don’t want anything to do with Him, but are in open rebellion to Him. I began to pursue an understanding of the depths of God’s grace, knowing full well that I will never ‘get to the bottom of it’, so to speak, on this side of heaven.

In 2002, I decided that I would try to understand what Calvinism was really about. (At that point, I still had the stereotype of Calvinist in mind.) In his book Chosen By God, RC Sproul mentions the president of a Presbyterian seminary who took pride in the fact that he was not a Calvinist. The seminary president said, “I am not a Calvinist because I do not believe that God brings some people, kicking and screaming against their wills, into the kingdom, while He excludes others from His kingdom who desperately want to be there.”



I thought Sproul’s response to this was illuminating. “I was astonished when I heard those words. I did not think it possible that the president of a Presbyterian seminary could have such a gross misconception of his own church’s theology. He was reciting a caricature which was as far away from Calvinism as one could get. Calvinism does not teach and has never taught that God brings people kicking and screaming into the kingdom or has ever excluded anyone who wanted to be there.”

This was certainly a surprise to me. That was certainly how I’d always understood Calvinism, even after it was explained to me by Calvinists, and they always seemed to insist that this is indeed the truth, that it is not open to interpretation or modification, and if one doesn’t like it...well...that’s too bad, because that’s just the way it is. Then here was Sproul saying that this was not really Calvinism at all! I decided to take a closer look at what Sproul had to say. I admit that when I started, the deck was stacked in my mind against the Reformed perspective. I was certain Calvinism would turn out to be wrong, because I couldn’t imagine any way salvation could work other than the way I had been taught to interpret the scriptures , but I wanted to have a correct understanding of exactly what I was refuting. If I was going to reject a point of view...and an important view from church history...I wanted to be able to reject the real view and not just the caricature of that view.

Let me begin by examining exactly what I did believe regarding salvation. If I may be so presumptuous, I think it will be compatible with the views of most evangelical Christians in America today...with the probable exception of my views on eternal security, but we’ll discuss that at the appropriate time.




All Christians...evangelical and Reformed...have to agree that man exists in a fallen state. The scriptures declare it and the evidence is all around us on a daily basis. The scriptural evidence can be summed up in as what is commonly referred to as The Romans Road. The Romans Road is a method for explaining salvation, or the Gospel, by simply using a few verses from one Bible book, and it begins by looking at man’s fallen state.

As it is written:
"There is no one righteous, not even one;
there is no one who understands,
no one who seeks God. Romans 3:10-11

...for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God...” Romans 3:23

Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all men, because all sinned– Romans 5:12

Of course, there are many other scriptures describing Man’s fallen state. We know the scriptural support. The point is that man is separated from God and can do nothing to make himself right with God.

Now suppose a man (we’ll call him Hal) hears the Gospel message from a Christian friend. At the beginning of the conversation, Hal was separated from God. He was lost and unregenerate. Left on his own course, he was surely on the road that leads to hell. At some point in the conversation, suppose he becomes aware of the truth of the message and see his lost state and need for the Savior. At this point, evangelicals would say that Hal’s spirit has been quickened and it is at this point that he needs to choose. Everything up to now has been God working on Hal. Hal now sees his need, and it is up to him to accept or reject the offer of God’s free gift of salvation. If Hal responds in faith and accepts God’s gift, God regenerates him and Hal is born again into the Kingdom of God. The critical factor for our discussion here is that in this view faith precedes regeneration.




The typical argument I had heard from the Reformed perspective would have said Hal was unregenerate at the start of the conversation, and while unregenerate, never would make a decision for Christ. The typical Reformed argument I had heard would say that Hal could not make a decision for Christ in his unregenerate state. Here’s where Reformed theology separates from the typical evangelical teaching in America of the twentieth century...and here’s where I believe most of the presentation of the Reformed viewpoint I’d heard over the years goes wrong and many of the false assumptions are bred, resulting in the bad rap that the Reformed view has. The Reformed view usually comes off seeming to say that poor Hal couldn’t make a decision that he might otherwise want to. That if only God would let him, surely Hal might actually want to choose Christ if he were given the opportunity.

(cont.)