But God

[ReverendRV]

How so, Doug?

In Arminianism it's not different, because Prevenient Grace 'Modifies' the same thing that Irresistible Grace modifies; IE Total Depravity. That's a Monergistic, prevenient, unwelcomed intrusion, uninitiated, unasked for by the Enemy; Act of God...

The answer to our Age-Old debates belong to the Fundamentals. I'm so glad to be a 5-Point Calvinist; and a Fundamentalist. The thing is, Doug will agree with me; but with a caveat...

 

[Sethproton]

The bible is clear enough for anyone who want's to learn. Calvinism does not teach "Calvinism depends on claiming that the dead have no faith and cannot respond to get life?" The Bible teaches that.

Again, Calvinists don't teach that "Calvinists if a spiritually dead person is able to entrust themselves to Jesus to be indwelt?" We have never said that. STOP misrepresenting us. Any elect person will come to Christ. It's what the Bible says.

you misread my post,

 

[TibiasDad]

Here you go, Doug, " to entrust themselves."

Where is this implied in my answer to Seth’s question? This said…

This is exactly what we have been pointing out. Sinners still trying to entrust themselves, is a false notion, of a subjective selfie, in that sinners are bent inward, instead of upward.

1) There is no try…only do or do not.
2) Isn’t our trust something only we can give. I think you’re conflating awareness with belief! Being made aware of something previously unknown is always a passive experience! We are always told this information by a second party source, be it a person or some other informational medium. But whether I trust/believe this source/information is on me alone!

Doug

 

[TibiasDad]

In Arminianism it's not different, because Prevenient Grace 'Modifies' the same thing that Irresistible Grace modifies; IE Total Depravity. That's a Monergistic, prevenient, unwelcomed intrusion, uninitiated, unasked for by the Enemy; Act of God...

The answer to our Age-Old debates belong to the Fundamentals. I'm so glad to be a 5-Point Calvinist; and a Fundamentalist. The thing is, Doug will agree with me; but with a caveat...

But we are different in the point of the process in which this modification is made, and what that means for our capacity to respond to it!

Doug

 

[ReverendRV]

But we are different in the point of the process in which this modification is made, and what that means for our capacity to respond to it!

Doug

Yes brother. But you know me, I like to point out what we have in common. I think YOU shouldn't be as against Monergism as you are; and we shouldn't be as against Synergism as we are (but we have to pick a side). On our side, I point out Sproul saying that Sanctification is Synergistic. I know this ruffles feathers; but he did teach it, however little he did teach it...

 

[Ladodgers6]

1) There is no try…only do or do not.

LOL...I love Star Wars!

2) Isn’t our trust something only we can give. I think you’re conflating awareness with belief! Being made aware of something previously unknown is always a passive experience! We are always told this information by a second party source, be it a person or some other informational medium. But whether I trust/believe this source/information is on me alone!

Doug

In the words of Darth, I find your lack of faith disturbing!

 

[preacher4truth]

1) There is no try…only do or do not.

No, there is only cannot, Ephesians 2:4ff is the answer, only God can, not you, not man.

2) Isn’t our trust something only we can give.

So, while lost and dead in sin you gave to God. This isn't only unbiblical, it is a smug attitude about man's state of being lost.

I think you’re conflating awareness with belief! Being made aware of something previously unknown is always a passive experience! We are always told this information by a second party source, be it a person or some other informational medium. But whether I trust/believe this source/information is on me alone!

No, sorry, it's all due to God, not you.

 

[preacher4truth]

I think YOU shouldn't be as against Monergism as you are; and we shouldn't be as against Synergism as we are

But we're not talking synergism in salvation, but he is, so to say we shouldn't be against it as we are is a category error, it's apples and oranges.

 

[TibiasDad]

Yes brother. But you know me, I like to point out what we have in common. I think YOU shouldn't be as against Monergism as you are; and we shouldn't be as against Synergism as we are (but we have to pick a side). On our side, I point out Sproul saying that Sanctification is Synergistic. I know this ruffles feathers; but he did teach it, however little he did teach it...

You know that I have always maintained that there are irresistible effects of grace, such as the restraint of sin and it's power over man. I am only against, or perhaps in disagreement with, the Calvinistic expression of what is irresistible, and thus monergistic in the process! Synergism is inferred and/or implied by the fact that man's believing is a statutory requirement for both the initial act of regeneration/salvation and his ongoing maturity/sanctification after regeneration.

As far as picking a side, the question is such a choice necessarily a hardline requirement? If we both agree that this is not a debate over our Christianity, Heaven and Hell in the balance, orthodox or heterodox, etc, etc, then why create such a line of dissention? Our points of disagreement are not matters of salvific value, and I don't believe are warranting of the disharmony that so easily seems to raise it's head in these discussions.


Doug

 

[TibiasDad]

LOL...I love Star Wars!

Yes, I thought a little Yodaism was in order...

In the words of Darth, I find your lack of faith disturbing!

So you find your support from the Dark Side?... Lol! But seriously, where is my lack of faith? I can do nothing without him! I can do everything he asks of me through him and "His divine power has given us everything we need for a godly life through our knowledge of him who called us by his own glory and goodness. Through these he has given us his very great and precious promises, so that through them you may participate in the divine nature, having escaped the corruption in the world caused by evil desires." (2Peter 1:3-4) If I succeed, then it is his power and glory that is responsible, and if I fail, it is only because I don't believe he has "given us everything we need for a godly life through our knowledge of him" and thus, I have not "lived according to the Spirit" (Rom 8:4,12-13)

Doug

 

[Ladodgers6]

Yes, I thought a little Yodaism was in order...


So you find your support from the Dark Side?... Lol! But seriously, where is my lack of faith? I can do nothing without him! I can do everything he asks of me through him and "His divine power has given us everything we need for a godly life through our knowledge of him who called us by his own glory and goodness. Through these he has given us his very great and precious promises, so that through them you may participate in the divine nature, having escaped the corruption in the world caused by evil desires." (2Peter 1:3-4) If I succeed, then it is his power and glory that is responsible, and if I fail, it is only because I don't believe he has "given us everything we need for a godly life through our knowledge of him" and thus, I have not "lived according to the Spirit" (Rom 8:4,12-13)

Doug

Thanks for the laughs, I needed that...LOL. Yeah, I agree with you here, on almost everything. The part I wish to share with you is that Christ left nothing undone. This is the glorious good news for sinners!

The thank offering; fulfillment of the Covenant of Creation; and the guilt offering; bearing our curses for having violated it; converge in Christ's priestly office. Since "there is no longer any offering for sin," all that is left for us is the sacrifice of praise---the thank offering. Even here, the perfect living sacrifice of praise has been offered up to God on our behalf. We need not be paralyzed by the fear of falling short; we do and will fall short of Christ's covenantal obedience. However, none of that matters finally. God has in his Son that righteous life and justice-satisfying sacrifice that his holiness requires of us. Forgiveness is not enough, since it merely clears the slate and cancels the debts; God requires a living sacrifice of positive obedience. It is precisely this full and joyful obedience that he has in Jesus Christ, and this righteousness is imputed to us in Justification. On this basis, Justification is not merely forgiveness, "just-as-if-I-never-sinned," but God's crediting us with Christ's fulfillment of the Law.

Far from inhibiting good works, this freedom is the only source of the Spirit's fruit. Not even the sinfulness clinging to our best works can keep our grateful obedience from bringing pleasure to God, who is now our Father rather than a judge. "I appeal to you therefore, brothers, by the mercies of God, to present your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God, which is your spiritual worship (Rom. 21:1).

Discipleship under Jesus is no longer even remotely involved with offering any of our own sacrifices or works of atonement, but only of grateful living in the joy of the God of our salvation. At last, it is not dead sacrifices for guilt, but the living sacrifice of thanksgiving, that Jesus inaugurates for his coheirs in a world that lies under the bondage of fear and death. The Law drives us to Christ for Grace, and Grace drives us to our neighbors in grateful Love and service.​

 

[SovereignGrace]

But we're not talking synergism in salvation, but he is, so to say we shouldn't be against it as we are is a category error, it's apples and oranges.

If I am wrong please correct me...I find the words "But God" to be as powerful as "Let there be light".

 

[preacher4truth]

If I am wrong please correct me...I find the words "But God" to be as powerful as "Let there be light".

Pelagius and Finney think that's the cart before the horse. So do many on this forum.

 

[Manfred]

Yes brother. But you know me, I like to point out what we have in common. I think YOU shouldn't be as against Monergism as you are; and we shouldn't be as against Synergism as we are (but we have to pick a side). On our side, I point out Sproul saying that Sanctification is Synergistic. I know this ruffles feathers; but he did teach it, however little he did teach it...

Synergism within sanctification:
2 Do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewal of your mind, that by testing you may discern what is the will of God, what is good and acceptable and perfect.

 

[ReverendRV]

You know that I have always maintained that there are irresistible effects of grace, such as the restraint of sin and it's power over man. I am only against, or perhaps in disagreement with, the Calvinistic expression of what is irresistible, and thus monergistic in the process! Synergism is inferred and/or implied by the fact that man's believing is a statutory requirement for both the initial act of regeneration/salvation and his ongoing maturity/sanctification after regeneration.

As far as picking a side, the question is such a choice necessarily a hardline requirement? If we both agree that this is not a debate over our Christianity, Heaven and Hell in the balance, orthodox or heterodox, etc, etc, then why create such a line of dissention? Our points of disagreement are not matters of salvific value, and I don't believe are warranting of the disharmony that so easily seems to raise it's head in these discussions.


Doug

For you and I, our differences are not as big a deal. But I have similar differences with TomL; with far more dissenting...

 

[fltom]

For you and I, our differences are not as big a deal. But I have similar differences with TomL; with far more dissenting...

That is because your seem to think the bible presents divergent truths which you mislabel as compatibilism