The foundation of all salvation.

Can you show me a verse that explicitly states any causal relationship between the unregenerate's will and his salvation?


Until you answer this question you don't get a reply for anything, especially not the biased use of extra-biblical sources and more eisegetic interpretations.
See


and once again you failed to prove eisegesis or that the lexical or dictionary or encyclopedia entries were biased

You like to raise charges but you fail to produce any evidence of those charges while you were clearly refuted in denying faith precedes regeneration

You would do best to recognize that truth and go on from there
 
Hello again everyone, I've been busy but I'd like to pick up where I left off. The next claim that was asserted in the synergist argument was, "Faith in the gospel precedes being begotten (born again)," and the two verses quoted to prove that claim were 1 Corinthians 4:15 and 1 Peter 1:23. I've just linked everyone to the various translations of the verses, but below is the BLT because it best reflects the Greek.

1 Corinthians 4:15 BLT
For if you should have ten thousand guardians in Christ, yet not many fathers; for in Christ Jesus I have begotten you through the gospel.

1 Peter 1:23 BLT
having been born again, not of perishable seed, but of imperishable, by the living and abiding word of God,

Notice once again the original poster quoted single verses, in both cases excluded the rest of the surrounding text, again thereby silencing the inherent context, and in the case of the latter verse quoted only half a sentence.

There's simply no way that practice is ever sound.

Here is what each verse states in the NAS in context of its surrounding text. In the case of the 1 Corinthians 4 passage Paul is writing about his relationship to his audience as a minster and steward of the gospel. He wrote,

1 Corinthians 4:8-21
You are already filled, you have already become rich, you have become kings without us; and indeed, I wish that you had become kings so that we also might reign with you. For, I think, God has exhibited us apostles last of all, as men condemned to death; because we have become a spectacle to the world, both to angels and to men. We are fools for Christ's sake, but you are prudent in Christ; we are weak, but you are strong; you are distinguished, but we are without honor. To this present hour we are both hungry and thirsty, and are poorly clothed, and are roughly treated, and are homeless; and we toil, working with our own hands; when we are reviled, we bless; when we are persecuted, we endure; when we are slandered, we try to conciliate; we have become as the scum of the world, the dregs of all things, even until now. I do not write these things to shame you, but to admonish you as my beloved children. For if you were to have countless tutors in Christ, yet you would not have many fathers, for in Christ Jesus I became your father through the gospel. Therefore I exhort you, be imitators of me. For this reason I have sent to you Timothy, who is my beloved and faithful child in the Lord, and he will remind you of my ways which are in Christ, just as I teach everywhere in every church. Now some have become arrogant, as though I were not coming to you. But I will come to you soon, if the Lord wills, and I shall find out, not the words of those who are arrogant but their power. For the kingdom of God does not consist in words but in power. What do you desire? Shall I come to you with a rod, or with love and a spirit of gentleness?

So we see that Paul is not writing about the salvation of non-believers, particularly not that of atheists. We can see he's not talking about the salvation of anyone, but of the paternal aspects of his relationship to the members of the Corinthian ecclesia. There's no explanation in that verse of how they came to be in Christ. Their being in Christ is a given, and already existing condition. So we see the original poster took a verse written to the regenerate about the regenerate, ripped it out of its context and then tried to apply it as if it has relevance to the unregenerate.

It does not.

The "you" of the text is the saints in Corinth, not the unregenerate atheist of anywhere. Remember: the claim the original poster was trying to prove was Faith in the gospel precedes being begotten (born again). That verse says nothing of the sort. The "begetting" in that verse is about the relationship between Paul and the saints in Corinth and he, not God, is the "father."

The same mistakes are made with the 1 Peter verse. Here is that verse in its larger passage,

1 Peter 1:17-25
If you address as Father the One who impartially judges according to each one's work, conduct yourselves in fear during the time of your stay on earth; knowing that you were not redeemed with perishable things like silver or gold from your futile way of life inherited from your forefathers, but with precious blood, as of a lamb unblemished and spotless, the blood of Christ. For He was foreknown before the foundation of the world, but has appeared in these last times for the sake of you who through Him are believers in God, who raised Him from the dead and gave Him glory, so that your faith and hope are in God. Since you have in obedience to the truth purified your souls for a sincere love of the brethren, fervently love one another from the heart, for you have been born again not of seed which is perishable but imperishable, that is, by the living and enduring word of God. For “All flesh is like grass and all its glory like the flower of grass. The grass withers, and the flower falls," And this is the word which was preached to you.

Once again, the original poster quoted single verses, in both cases excluded the rest of the surrounding text, again thereby silencing the inherent context, and in this verse what was quoted is only half of the sentence. So, once again, we find the verse in question was not written about the unregenerate but the already-regenerate. It is not written about how they got saved, how the went from being unregenerate nonbelievers to regenerate believers.

Notice also there's no mention an unregenerate's faith. In the 1 Corinthians 4 chapter there's no mention of faith or belief at all! In the 1 Peter 1 chapter there is mention of faith but it is the faith of the already redeemed and regenerate..... "for a salvation ready to be revealed in the last time," and a belief in Christ, "obtaining as the outcome of your faith, the salvation of our souls." In other words, those who were already saved from sin, death, and the wrath of God would through their already-existing faith receive a salvation - another salvation - to be revealed in the last time, the salvation of their souls. Those already saved would be saved.

Those soteriologically saved would be eschatologically saved.



Therefore, we find the use of the two verses proof-texted does not actually prove the claim asserted. Neither 1 Corinthians 4:15 nor 1 Peter 1:23 proves faith in the gospel precedes being born again in both cases the people are already born again and their faith in the gospel is a post-conversion concern applied to post-conversion circumstances.
 
Hello again everyone, I've been busy but I'd like to pick up where I left off. The next claim that was asserted in the synergist argument was, "Faith in the gospel precedes being begotten (born again)," and the two verses quoted to prove that claim were 1 Corinthians 4:15 and 1 Peter 1:23. I've just linked everyone to the various translations of the verses, but below is the BLT because it best reflects the Greek.

1 Corinthians 4:15 BLT
For if you should have ten thousand guardians in Christ, yet not many fathers; for in Christ Jesus I have begotten you through the gospel.

1 Peter 1:23 BLT
having been born again, not of perishable seed, but of imperishable, by the living and abiding word of God,

Notice once again the original poster quoted single verses, in both cases excluded the rest of the surrounding text, again thereby silencing the inherent context, and in the case of the latter verse quoted only half a sentence.
Um I quoted

James 1:18 (KJV)
18 Of his own will begat he us with the word of truth, that we should be a kind of firstfruits of his creatures.

1 Peter 1:23 (KJV)
23 Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever.

1 Corinthians 4:15 (KJV)
15 For though ye have ten thousand instructors in Christ, yet have ye not many fathers: for in Christ Jesus I have begotten you through the gospel.


they were all full verses




So we see that Paul is not writing about the salvation of non-believers, particularly not that of atheists. We can see he's not talking about the salvation of anyone, but of the paternal aspects of his relationship to the members of the Corinthian ecclesia. There's no explanation in that verse of how they came to be in Christ. Their being in Christ is a given, and already existing condition. So we see the original poster took a verse written to the regenerate about the regenerate, ripped it out of its context and then tried to apply it as if it has relevance to the unregenerate.

Was that supposed to be a serious reply

Lets look at

1 Corinthians 4:15 (KJV 1900) — 15 For though ye have ten thousand instructors in Christ, yet have ye not many fathers: for in Christ Jesus I have begotten you through the gospel.

The gospel was the instrument of their being begotten

as both


The Corinthians had been begotten i.e. born again by the gospel

the same concept as seen here

1 Peter 1:23 (KJV)
23 Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word (gospel) of God, which liveth and abideth for ever.

Paul is discussing their original conversion experience as recorded in 1cor 15

1 Corinthians 15:1–11 (KJV 1900) — 1 Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand; 2 By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain. 3 For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; 4 And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: 5 And that he was seen of Cephas, then of the twelve: 6 After that, he was seen of above five hundred brethren at once; of whom the greater part remain unto this present, but some are fallen asleep. 7 After that, he was seen of James; then of all the apostles. 8 And last of all he was seen of me also, as of one born out of due time. 9 For I am the least of the apostles, that am not meet to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God. 10 But by the grace of God I am what I am: and his grace which was bestowed upon me was not in vain; but I laboured more abundantly than they all: yet not I, but the grace of God which was with me. 11 Therefore whether it were I or they, so we preach, and so ye believed.

Paul had preached the gospel to them they believed and they were born again

Just as seen in the other two verses

1 Corinthians 4:15 BLT
For if you should have ten thousand guardians in Christ, yet not many fathers; for in Christ Jesus I have begotten you through the gospel.

1 Peter 1:23 BLT
having been born again, not of perishable seed, but of imperishable, by the living and abiding word of God,

The word here is of course the gospel as show by verse 25

1 Peter 1:25 (KJV 1900) — 25 But the word of the Lord endureth for ever. And this is the word which by the gospel is preached unto you.

As was seen the Corinthians had believed the message

unbelief would of course not profit them

Hebrews 4:2 (KJV 1900) — 2 For unto us was the gospel preached, as well as unto them: but the word preached did not profit them, not being mixed with faith in them that heard it.

so it is through belief in the gospel men are born again

The funny thing is all this had been noted previously but not touched upon by the writer
 
Last edited:
Um I quoted

James 1:18 (KJV)
18 Of his own will begat he us with the word of truth, that we should be a kind of firstfruits of his creatures.

1 Peter 1:23 (KJV)
23 Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever.

1 Corinthians 4:15 (KJV)
15 For though ye have ten thousand instructors in Christ, yet have ye not many fathers: for in Christ Jesus I have begotten you through the gospel.


they were all full verses
Read Post #3.

Re-read my dissent because the verses being full verses is not in dispute. The KJV has a period where the Greek has none, indicating the verse is not a full sentence, and even if it were it is not the one verse or sentence is not reflective of the whole thought. The point being the assertion of those verses in support of the clam made is very, very poor exegesis. N it's being made worse by defending something that should never have happened in the first place.



And I still don't read an answer to my original question: Can you show me a verse assigning salvific causality to the unregenerate's will?
 
Read Post #3.

Re-read my dissent because the verses being full verses is not in dispute. The KJV has a period where the Greek has none, indicating the verse is not a full sentence, and even if it were it is not the one verse or sentence is not reflective of the whole thought. The point being the assertion of those verses in support of the clam made is very, very poor exegesis. N it's being made worse by defending something that should never have happened in the first place.
But it is a full KJV verse which is what I stated

and if you want to talk about very very poor exegesis your handling of 1Cor 4:15 certainly qualifies

You ignored its parallelism with both

James 1:18 (KJV)
18 Of his own will begat he us with the word of truth, that we should be a kind of firstfruits of his creatures.

1 Peter 1:23 (KJV)
23 Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever.

and the entire concept of being begotten by the gospel

You also ignored Paul's history with the Corinthians

failing to recognize Paul was speaking of their initial conversion experience as seen in 1cor 15

Paul preached the gospel, the Corinthians believed the gospel and they were begotten by it

Paul being the agent by which they were begotten through faith in the gospel



And I still don't read an answer to my original question: Can you show me a verse assigning salvific causality to the unregenerate's will?
 
Now let's look at the next protest and its argument. In response to civic asserting life precedes faith Ephesians 2:5-8 was asserted as evidence to the contrary.
Ephesians 2:5-8 (KJV)
5 Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved;)
6 And hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus:
7 That in the ages to come he might shew the exceeding riches of his grace in his kindness toward us through Christ Jesus.
8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:

being quicken is equated with salvation - verse 5
There is nothing in the text equating quickening with salvation and if it were then it's a clear example of life preceding faith! The word in the KJV for "quickened" is the Greek term for making alive. We were dead. We were dead in sins. God made us alive together with Christ and He did so by grace. It is by grace we have been saved. There's no mention of faith in verse 5.
We know from verse 8 salvation is through faith[,] therefore faith precedes salvation which is accomplished by quickening
Again, that's not what the verse actually states. ANYWHERE!!!!! Verse 8 simply states we are saved by grace through faith and it explicitly states that salvation by grace through faith is not of ourselves (I covered this in a prior post). There isn't any place in the entire Bible that states we are saved by faith. We are justified by faith, not saved by it. We're saved by grace, saved by grace through faith and it is NOT of ourselves. Absolutely no mention whatsoever of faith preceding anything except the works for which we are created in Christ to perform, works God had already planned in advance. God is the causal agent of it all, not the unregenerate's will, not the unregenerate's faith.
Why you quote that verse is a mystery as it clearly does not support you
No, TomFL, the mystery is why things nowhere stated are read into scripture in denial of what is plainly stated.
 
Can you show me a verse that explicitly states any causal relationship between the unregenerate's will and his salvation?


Until you answer this question you don't get a reply for anything, especially not the biased use of extra-biblical sources and more eisegetic interpretations.
The unregenerate was the jailer. He was about to kill himself but then Paul stopped him. All of the events that transpired made him want what the Paul and Silas had. His unregenerate heart was open to hearing the gospel by these events and obeying it by faith.

23 After they had given them a severe flogging, they threw them into prison and ordered the jailer to keep them securely. 24 Following these instructions, he put them in the innermost cell and fastened their feet in the stocks.

25 About midnight Paul and Silas were praying and singing hymns to God, and the prisoners were listening to them. 26 Suddenly there was an earthquake so violent that the foundations of the prison were shaken, and immediately all the doors were opened and everyone’s chains were unfastened. 27 When the jailer woke up and saw the prison doors wide open, he drew his sword and was about to kill himself, since he supposed that the prisoners had escaped. 28 But Paul shouted in a loud voice, “Do not harm yourself, for we are all here.” 29 The jailer called for lights, and rushing in, he fell down trembling before Paul and Silas. 30 Then he brought them outside and said, “Sirs, what must I do to be saved?” 31 They answered, “Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved, you and your household.” 32 They spoke the word of the Lord to him and to all who were in his house. 33 At the same hour of the night he took them and washed their wounds; then he and his entire family were baptized without delay. 34 He brought them up into the house and set food before them, and he and his entire household rejoiced that he had become a believer in God.
 
ow let's look at the next protest and its argument. In response to civic asserting life precedes faith Ephesians 2:5-8 was asserted as evidence to the contrary.
TomFL said:
Ephesians 2:5-8 (KJV)
5 Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved;)
6 And hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus:
7 That in the ages to come he might shew the exceeding riches of his grace in his kindness toward us through Christ Jesus.
8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:

being quicken is equated with salvation - verse 5
Click to expand...

Josheb
There is nothing in the text equating quickening with salvation and if it were then it's a clear example of life preceding faith! The word in the KJV for "quickened" is the Greek term for making alive. We were dead. We were dead in sins. God made us alive together with Christ and He did so by grace. It is by grace we have been saved. There's no mention of faith in verse 5.

The writer above continues in his series of incredibly weak replies, ignoring texts and argument

Ephesians 2:5-8 (KJV)
5 Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved;)
6 And hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus:
7 That in the ages to come he might shew the exceeding riches of his grace in his kindness toward us through Christ Jesus.
8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:

being quicken is equated with salvation - verse 5

by grace are you saved

why does he separate it from the rest of the text

quickened together with Christ is being saved by grace

this is the same as what we see here


Titus 3:5 (KJV 1900) — 5 Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost;

regeneration as the method by which we are saved

and it verse 8 which for some reason the writer ignores

verse 8 which completes what was begun in verse 5

though it was noted in the argument the writer above ignored it

Ephesians 2:8 (KJV 1900) — 8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:

salvation (accomplished by regeneration) is by grace through faith

as was noted


TomFL said:
We know from verse 8 salvation is through faith[,] therefore faith precedes salvation which is accomplished by quickening

Josheb
Again, that's not what the verse actually states. ANYWHERE!!!!! Verse 8 simply states we are saved by grace through faith and it explicitly states that salvation by grace through faith is not of ourselves (I covered this in a prior post). There isn't any place in the entire Bible that states we are saved by faith. We are justified by faith, not saved by it. We're saved by grace, saved by grace through faith and it is NOT of ourselves. Absolutely no mention whatsoever of faith preceding anything except the works for which we are created in Christ to perform, works God had already planned in advance. God is the causal agent of it all, not the unregenerate's will, not the unregenerate's faith.

It does if one actually pays attention to the details and does simply offer knee jerk denials which we have seen in the writers replies throughout all of this series

that we are saved through faith is rather plain from Eph 2:8

as was noted through - dia in the greek in the genitive case notes the instrument or means

4. dia (διά, 1223), “by, by means of,” when followed by the genitive case, is instrumental, e.g., 2 Pet. 3:6, RV, “by which means” (KJV, “whereby”).

W. E. Vine, Merrill F. Unger, and William White Jr., Vine’s Complete Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words (Nashville, TN: T. Nelson, 1996), 398.

some additional verses

1 Corinthians 1:21 (KJV 1900) — 21 For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe.

Who does Paul say God saves?

Those that believe

Acts 16:30–31 (KJV 1900) — 30 And brought them out, and said, Sirs, what must I do to be saved? 31 And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house.

What was Paul's answer to what must i do to be saved?

Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ

Who must do it?

Isn't the answer rather plain

The writer objections are not founded on exegesis but theology

as he states

"Absolutely no mention whatsoever of faith preceding anything except the works"

through faith. faith as the instrument, the means - the necessary means as shown above

without you cannot be saved

John 3:15–18 (KJV 1900) — 15 That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life. 16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. 17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. 18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

it precedes salvation

It also seems he imagines faith is not of yourself

but as we see it is what man is told to do and does if he is to be saved

the writer would do best to forget his theological paradigms and actually read the text for what it states
 
For the second time: no one has said otherwise. Go back and re-read the post.
Newsflash there is no punction in the Greek manuscripts. All punctuation represents the translator opinion of where they believe the punctuation should appear
 
All of the events that transpired made him want what the Paul and Silas had.
THAT is the crux of the issue.

No one here in this discussion knows ALL that transpired. We have a few sentences that summarize the story. The statement his belief and profession are not said to precede his salvation, neither are they said to cause his salvation. Nor are they said to permit God to save him. none of that is in the account. Synergists read those things into the story. They do it inferentially. Both sentences would still be true if God regenerated the jailer first. Having been regenerated and confessing his belief with his mouth he would be saved. Having been brought from life to death, confessing his belief in Christ he would be saved. That in no way would be inconsistent with the Acts 16 report.

Read it again that way and see for yourself what I just wrote is true.
23 After they had given them a severe flogging, they threw them into prison and ordered the jailer to keep them securely. 24 Following these instructions, he put them in the innermost cell and fastened their feet in the stocks.

25 About midnight Paul and Silas were praying and singing hymns to God, and the prisoners were listening to them. 26 Suddenly there was an earthquake so violent that the foundations of the prison were shaken, and immediately all the doors were opened and everyone’s chains were unfastened. 27 When the jailer woke up and saw the prison doors wide open, he drew his sword and was about to kill himself, since he supposed that the prisoners had escaped. 28 But Paul shouted in a loud voice, “Do not harm yourself, for we are all here.” 29 The jailer called for lights, and rushing in, he fell down trembling before Paul and Silas. 30 Then he brought them outside and said, “Sirs, what must I do to be saved?” 31 They answered, “Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved, you and your household.” 32 They spoke the word of the Lord to him and to all who were in his house. 33 At the same hour of the night he took them and washed their wounds; then he and his entire family were baptized without delay. 34 He brought them up into the house and set food before them, and he and his entire household rejoiced that he had become a believer in God.
See? The words don't actually say what you say they say. You've been taught to read the text that way. I was, too. Most of us Cals here in CARM were previously Arms, btw.

It looks like Paul is make a sequence, possibly a causal relationship between "believe" and the "and of "and you will be saved, but he does not say if you believe you will be saved. He simply says, believe and be saved. Correlation, not sequence or causation.

Besides, the salvation being reference in this case may not be the salvation from sin. The jailer was attempting suicide because when it was discovered the prisoners were escaping, he'd be killed. If he trusted himself to God then he would be spared being executed. That is just as likely or possible an interpretation as the synergist infers - and it is one much more consistent with what is actually stated in the text itself. Temporal salvation is not the same thing as soteriological salvation. Soteriological salvation is not identical to eschatological salvation. Many times the three overlap and temporal and eschatological salvations are invariably figurative or symbolic of soteriological salvation in some way but they are not identical.

The point is the text does not actually say what you just said it says but that is how the synergist or volitionalist reads the text. None of the monergists here will read any of that into the text but neither will be read God into this particular passage. It is simply not stated so we endeavor not to add to it.

We can, however, point to other scriptures where God explicitly stated to be involved in a causal way before, during, and after the profession of faith and conversion. God is the preceding agent. God is the causal agent. This dispute began when I observed God as the causal agent and for the last ten pages the effort to show faith as causal and/or precedes regeneration has been attempted but none of the verses quoted actually state any such thing. It is ALWAYS and ONLY a function of inferential reading of scripture. His unregenerate heart was open to hearing the gospel by these events and obeying it by faith.

In other words, ten pages of post end up proving what I said: The synergist doctrines of salvation are ones that can be reached solely by inference.

His unregenerate heart was open to hearing the gospel by these events and obeying it by faith.

His unregenerate heart was open to hearing the gospel by these events and obeying it by faith.
Not a single word of that is actually found in the text of Act 16 but if it were....... you just said regeneration comes first: his heart was opened..... and then he obeyed! You limited his heart-opening to hearing but scripture never places any such limits on heart opening. When Luke wrote about Lydia, he said Lydia's heart was opened but you should not assume the order or experience was the same with the jailer. That would be another assumption. In Songs the open heart is juxtaposed with longing to find (SS. 5:6), for example. Acts 16:14 explicitly states, "The Lord opened her heart to [heed/understand/respond]" what Paul was saying. God is the causal agent there. That is explicitly stated. No one has to infer God as the one doing the opening. The verses do not attribute the opening of the heart to her will or her faith. The opening is sequential and causal to the heeding or understanding. No one has to infer that because the text itself plainly states the heart was opened to understand.


The text explicitly attributes that to the Creator, not the creature.


So, this proves to be an obvious and undeniable example of my original point: the monergist can actually point to actual statement in scripture that actually, specifically and explicitly report God as causal, but the synergist cannot.

The synergist infers sequence and cause and those inferential reading happen repeatedly. The entire doctrine of synergist salvation is built ONLY on inference and never on anything explicitly stating the unregenerate's faith or volition precedes regeneration or that either is in anyway causal to the creature's salvation. If it was otherwise surely ten pages of posts would be sufficient time and space to provide such an example, one indisputable example of an explicit statement.



Go back and re-read the Acts 16 accounts of Lydia's and the jailer's conversions, this time paying attention only and specifically to what is stated without reading additional content into the report of scripture.






<<<<<<<<<<<< . >>>>>>>>>>>>>





Learn to do this with every preacher and teacher you read/hear because Christians often make stuff up and add to scripture. Sometimes intentionally. Usually unwittingly and without ill intent. It's not particularly a sectarian thing. The discerning Christian must have a knowledge of the written word empowering the recognition of this problem so until then just open up the Bible and read exactly what is written and then compare what is stated to what is taught. After much practice the written word will be remembered and the ability to recall it (correctly) more natural. BE as critical of your sources as you are of my posts. Be an equal opportunity critic. I test Kim Riddlebarger and James White just as much as I do David Jeremiah and Roger Olson.

Always work first from what is actually stated.
 
You did not ask a question you made a statement
The question was asked nine pages ago (Post # 964) and has yet to be answered. After several attempted digressions (most of which were red herrings), I have made it unequivocally clear no further replies on my part should be expected until and unless that question has been answered. I have asked the question many, many times in this thread and I have done so in various ways with various wordings, but it has never been answered directly. The question is:



Can I be provided with an explicit example in scripture
of scripture itself ever explicitly stating any causal relationship
between the unregenerate's volition and his own salvation,
and if there is no such verse will the absence be acknowledged?



It does not matter whether anyone believes volition is causal or not because the answer is still relevant to the larger point being made either way. The larger point was also framed repeatedly in various ways. When worded in the form of a question, the point is:

In light of the absence of scripture itself to explicitly assign any causal relationship between the unregenerate's volition and his own salvation....


Will it be acknowledged the synergistic soteriologies are
always and solely a function of inference alone
and not what is first explicitly stated?​


Answer the first question and we'll talk about its answer. I've no interest in anything you have to say otherwise and anything I post in reply to things you've posted is intended for the other readers to evidence the facts of scripture as written working first and foremost from what is actually stated.

Answer the question.
 
The question was asked nine pages ago (Post # 964) and has yet to be answered. After several attempted digressions (most of which were red herrings), I have made it unequivocally clear no further replies on my part should be expected until and unless that question has been answered. I have asked the question many, many times in this thread and I have done so in various ways with various wordings, but it has never been answered directly. The question is:
Total nonsense the post you replied to spoke of an incomplete sentence and a period that was not in the greek

I suggest you go back and read

You can also read where faith was quoted as the necessary condition, instrument of, means of salvation

and that it is only through an act of the will can one entrust oneself to an object of faith
 
Total nonsense the post you replied to spoke of an incomplete sentence and a period that was not in the greek

I suggest you go back and read

You can also read where faith was quoted as the necessary condition, instrument of, means of salvation

and that it is only through an act of the will can one entrust oneself to an object of faith
That is not an answer to the question asked.
 
Inferences

Let me explain the point I've been trying to make here and in many other discussions elsewhere. Let me start by defining the term "inference." According to the dictionary, the term inference means, "a conclusion reached on the basis of evidence and reasoning," or "the act or process of reaching a conclusion reasoning from known facts." In other words, the process of inferential reasoning is supposed to begin with facts, known facts; it is supposed to be based on evidence. Basing our reasoning on known facts or fact in evidence is a process or method.

I often post comments about the importance of method and how equally important method is compared to content.

Facts
Evidence
Content
Method

What is the title, or topic, of this OP? "The Foundation of Salvation." I've asked everyone to look at the foundation of their foundation: look at the content AND method used to establish the foundation of salvation. Upon what is our doctrine of foundation founded? I have pointed to one of the most basic, base, foundational (pun intended) aspects in out method: the use of facts.

Human will as a causal aspect of salvation is not a fact of scripture. Nowhere does scripture ever make any explicit claim to that effect.

God's will as a causal aspect of salvation is a fact of scripture, one that is explicitly stated in various ways in various places in the Bible.



We call the process by which we interpret scripture "exegesis," and the principles by which we do exegesis is called "hermeneutics." There are several hermeneutical models of constructs, but the basic principles are the same. There are a variety of theological orientation in Christianity, but the basic precepts of exegesis apply uniformly to all orientations. There are no denominational or sectarian differences regarding the principles. There are vast differences how well people adhere to those principles. Some of the advanced principles of sound exegesis may be complex but the basics are easily learned and applicable to all. A person does not need to be extremely intelligent, extremely skilled, nor extremely studied to successfully use the basic precepts of sound exegesis. On numerous occasions have I and other posters provided links to a variety of websites listing those basics, or books guiding the believer in the application of those principles. These lists usually include authors from a variety of perspectives. For example, Gordon Fee's book "How to Read the Bible for All it's Worth" is a very commendable book on the subject but he writes from his own theological orientation. Does not matter because he is using the exact same tools an exegete from a different theological orientation will use. Fee is going to have different views than Walter Kaiser, John Hayes, Michael Gorman, Grant Osborn, and/or Henry Vickler, but they are all working (or supposed to be working) from the exact same set of exegetical tools.

Some of the most basic rules are as follows. This list is short and by no means exhaustive. It applies to everyone. In no particular order....

  • Read what is written exactly as it is written with the normal meaning of words in their ordinary usage unless there is reason provided in the surrounding text giving reason not to do so.
  • Identify the author.
  • Identify his audience.
  • identify his purpose if one is stated.
  • Identify the genre (histories are written differently from prophecies or epistles).
  • Identify the stated context(s), and always read a text in a manner consistent with its stated context.
  • NEVER read or interpret a single sentence apart from its surrounding text.
  • Work outward from a sentence through the paragraph in which it exist through the chapter, through the book as a whole, through the Bible as a whole making sure to avoid conflicts between any of these levels because the Bible never contradicts itself when correctly exegeted.
  • That which is literally or plainly stated has greater value over that which is figurative or symbolic; the former explains the latter.
  • Scripture is its own first best tool for interpreting scripture; use scripture to interpret scripture first.
  • The Old Testament informs the New Testament; the New Testament renders the Old Testament; the newer revelation reveals and explains the older.
  • Use logic; the Bible's content may be extra-rational but it is never irrational.


That's a dozen of the most basic rules to be used in correctly understanding the Bible. No one has to be an expert to apply these rules and most of us do it to varying on a daily basis without even thinking about or knowing we've done it.

That is exegesis.

Eisegesis, in comparison, is the practice of assuming a specific view prior to the reading of the text or the practice of filtering what is being read through an already-existing point of view. Eisegesis is the practice of reading the text in a manner that confirms what one believes before reading the text.

This is why I have asked the question I asked nine pages ago in Post #964: Where is the verse that actually, factually explicitly states the unregenerate sinner's volition is causally relevant to salvation from sin and wrath? It is a foundational question that gets at a person's presuppositions, the things supposed previous to the reading, supposed previous to the discussion, supposed previous to conclusions.




Inference is the process by which we reason from facts in evidence.



The problem, soteriologically speaking, is that scripture is not exhaustive in its explain how salvation occurs and the synergist side of the debate assumes the sinful unregenerate will is relevant. There a couple of different reasons for how and why this assumption exists and is applied presuppositionally to the interpretation of scripture but none of them have anything to do with any actual explicit statement in the Bible the unregenerate's will is relevant.

This is evidenced by the fact the question asked has not been answered.

It is foundational.

We could discuss this silence in scripture because none of us wants to be forming doctrine from argumentum ex silentio, but such a discussion proves impossible until the silence is acknowledged.

That too is foundational.

I can be judged for exploiting the ambiguity in the title's use of the word "foundation," but the examination of the foundation of our foundation is valid and relevant. Hence my question:


Where does scripture ever explicitly assign any causal relationship between the unregenerate's volition and his own salvation?


Because if the scriptures never make such a statement then it is not a fact from which anything in any way can be rationally reasoned and great care should be taken so as not to wrongly imagine the resulting eisegesis is valid inference.
 
Human will as a causal aspect of salvation is not a fact of scripture. Nowhere does scripture ever make any explicit claim to that effect.

God's will as a causal aspect of salvation is a fact of scripture, one that is explicitly stated in various ways in various places in the Bible.
faith is a necessary cause of salvation

as you cannot be saved without it according to God's design

John 3:16–18 (KJV 1900) — 16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. 17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. 18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

John 3:36 (KJV 1900) — 36 He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.

2 Thessalonians 2:10 (KJV 1900) — 10 And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.

1 John 5:11–12 (KJV 1900) — 11 And this is the record, that God hath given to us eternal life, and this life is in his Son. 12 He that hath the Son hath life; and he that hath not the Son of God hath not life.

God alone is the necessary and sufficient cause of Life

BTW you never did answer the question how does one entrust oneself to another without volition
 
faith is a necessary cause of salvation
You have yet to evidence that with any explicit statement found in scripture. You have been asked to do exactly that for more than a week and have uniformly failed to do just that or acknowledge it cannot be done. What you have done instead is demonstrate exactly what I said happens: the inferential reading of proof-texting that ignores what is in fact explicitly stated.

The following is an example:
as you cannot be saved without it according to God's design

John 3:16–18 (KJV 1900) — 16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. 17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. 18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

John 3:36 (KJV 1900) — 36 He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.

2 Thessalonians 2:10 (KJV 1900) — 10 And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.

1 John 5:11–12 (KJV 1900) — 11 And this is the record, that God hath given to us eternal life, and this life is in his Son. 12 He that hath the Son hath life; and he that hath not the Son of God hath not life.

God alone is the necessary and sufficient cause of Life

BTW you never did answer the question how does one entrust oneself to another without volition
Not a single scripture quoted actually states, "Faith is a necessary cause of salvation"!!!!!

In an attempt to disprove what I posted pages ago you've paradoxically proved it so.

Under other, more ordinary circumstances, we (the posters in collective assembly in this op) might be able to discuss how and why it is synergists make their case inferentially without a foundation of explicit scripture but that won't be happening with you. You don't seem capable. Want to prove otherwise? Then just answer the question asked.



Can I be provided with an explicit example in scripture of scripture itself ever explicitly stating any causal relationship between the unregenerate's volition and his own salvation, and if there is no such verse will that absence be acknowledged?



Until that questioned is answered you don't get squat from me.
 
Back
Top