What is Calvinism's good news?

SovereignGrace said:
Another time you’ve broken commandment # 9. Keep going bruh, not going to bode well for you when you stand before Christ and give an account for these.
Click to expand...
The telling us we don't believe Scripture is old, and false, no matter how many times you tell them what you believe.

Apparently they have to keep a falsity alive because truthfully representing us won't help their cause.
 
Ladodgers6 said:
Prevenient Grace means Grace that comes before anything the sinner can do, yes?
Click to expand...
Yes...
Ladodgers6 said:
Why must this happen prior to any human effort or will?
Click to expand...
For many reasons: First God, as the offended party, holds all the power of reconciliation, and nothing man could ever do can make him do anything he doesn't want to do. Second, if God does not move toward us first, we would never know that we are lost, that we are guilty, that we are meant to be other than what we are, that God wants to be reconciled to us, that there is a remedy for our sin, and a way from death to life! We cannot do anything without these acts of Grace preceding us. Prevenient grace makes these things known, and puts us into a position to respond to this new knowledge. God is still the only one who has the right and authority to reconcile, man must only submit to his power through belief in what God has promised and done for us while we were yet sinners. It is by grace alone we are saved through faith alone!


Doug
 
Ladodgers6 said:
The Cross of Christ is God's greatest demonstration that man is utterly helpless to attain Grace through efforts and works. Grace and the Law, Grace is not earned but given freely as a gift, and the Law is based upon perfect performance from the heart. This is often confuse and convoluted when Law & Gospel are not properly distinguished.

What, if anything, do human beings contribute to the process of divine Grace?
Click to expand...
Nothing but believing in it!


Doug
 
TibiasDad said:
Yes...
Click to expand...
In agreement (y)
TibiasDad said:
For many reasons: First God, as the offended party, holds all the power of reconciliation, and nothing man could ever do can make him do anything he doesn't want to do. Second, if God does not move toward us first, we would never know that we are lost, that we are guilty, that we are meant to be other than what we are, that God wants to be reconciled to us, that there is a remedy for our sin, and a way from death to life! We cannot do anything without these acts of Grace preceding us. Prevenient grace makes these things known, and puts us into a position to respond to this new knowledge. God is still the only one who has the right and authority to reconcile, man must only submit to his power through belief in what God has promised and done for us while we were yet sinners. It is by grace alone we are saved through faith alone!


Doug
Click to expand...
Thanks Doug for sharing your position, I would add that sinners will not have an excuse before God on judgement day (Romans 1-3). Now as far as Prevenient Grace from each side: Calvinism teaches that Prevenient Grace is effectual in it's cause, where as in the Arminian view it's not, because it can be resisted. Now I believe I have brought this point up over, over and over again without a satisfactory answer from the Arminian camp, including synergistic theologies. You say this Prevenient Grace is not effectual, basically saying it doesn't save the sinner, though above you say that God must initiate and move toward us first or sinners would never know they are lost. So, the reason why we labeled this Partial Regeneration is because God illuminates the sinner's faculties, correct? But they are not regenerated in the same sense as with the Calvinist view of regeneration. Which leads to the elephant question in the room. What does this Grace accomplish? Can you explain in full detail for us? How can it be resisted, if they are illuminated by God? I remember you saying you do hold to TD, correct? Because you do believe sinners must be born again to be saved. So, if they are not alive and not dead because they are now illuminated by God, where are they? Are they in a state between Life and Death? Do they fully understand their predicament before God as you say they do. If so, why do they resist being saved? Where in the Bible is this partial regeneration or whatever you call it, illuminated but not alive by the Holy Spirit, which is contrary to what even Arminius himself believes. I am not trying to bash you over the head here. I am asking honest straight forward questions. And feel free to ask me anything, fair enough?​
 
TibiasDad said:
Nothing but believing in it!


Doug
Click to expand...
Grace is given, not earned even by our responses. As I said before Faith & Repentance is not the good news. Because even our Faith is a Gift from God. Which you I know deny. You believe that a unregenerated sinner not born of Spirit can have faith and trust God though their faculties are some how illuminated to understand God. But still can resist once being illuminated to the truth of their dire need for a Savior? So, contrary to saying it's by Grace Alone, it is not, because the guilty ones tell God the offended party if it's okay for him to help or not help, does that sum it up?

There is nothing that fallen man can contribute to the divine process. If so, then it's no longer Grace! This is exactly what Paul says in Galatians.​
 
eternomade said:
I have no idea who God's people are. I do not know if you were prepared as a vessel of mercy or vessel of wrath. Just like I don't know if my wife was, or my pastor.

But, they do confess the truth of the Gospel, that Christ came to save His people from their sins. This is the evidence that I look for to determine if one is converted or not.
Click to expand...
I did not ask you how you might tell whether someone is a true believer; I ask what you might say to "me", an unbeliever with whom you are sharing the gospel! If this unbeliever were to ask you, according to your theological understanding, if they could be certain that Christ died for them, that the message of God's grace through Christ was applicable to them or if this was meant for someone else? I am not going to believe something that I don't think is for me! An inherent part of the gospel is that it is personal! It is for sinners as individuals, and to say that we cannot say with any definitive confidence that any particular person is meant to receive the benefits of the gospel message is to eliminate the hope of any that hear the message.

If I cannot say that the message gospel is for you without reservation, why would you consider believing it? And given the Calvinistic concept of evanescent grace, in which one may appear to believe, and even seem to other believers to be evidencing the fruits of the Spirit and grace, but eventually fall away we cannot say for certain, as you appear to be implying above, that even our pastors or ourselves are truly elect.

The gospel, in this construct, is at best a might be scenario that cannot be certain until the final judgement is complete. A sinner is asked to believe something that cannot be known to apply to him with certainty.

This is my perspective, my own mind's questions and logical process. I do not know what other minds think, and do not seek to superimpose these thoughts on anyone else. If I were a Calvinist, these are things with which I would struggle in my mind.


Doug
 
TibiasDad said:
I did not ask you how you might tell whether someone is a true believer; I ask what you might say to "me", an unbeliever with whom you are sharing the gospel! If this unbeliever were to ask you, according to your theological understanding, if they could be certain that Christ died for them, that the message of God's grace through Christ was applicable to them or if this was meant for someone else? I am not going to believe something that I don't think is for me! An inherent part of the gospel is that it is personal! It is for sinners as individuals, and to say that we cannot say with any definitive confidence that any particular person is meant to receive the benefits of the gospel message is to eliminate the hope of any that hear the message.

If I cannot say that the message gospel is for you without reservation, why would you consider believing it? And given the Calvinistic concept of evanescent grace, in which one may appear to believe, and even seem to other believers to be evidencing the fruits of the Spirit and grace, but eventually fall away we cannot say for certain, as you appear to be implying above, that even our pastors or ourselves are truly elect.

The gospel, in this construct, is at best a might be scenario that cannot be certain until the final judgement is complete. A sinner is asked to believe something that cannot be known to apply to him with certainty.

This is my perspective, my own mind's questions and logical process. I do not know what other minds think, and do not seek to superimpose these thoughts on anyone else. If I were a Calvinist, these are things with which I would struggle in my mind.


Doug
Click to expand...
Ah, apologies. I misunderstood you completely.

Thanks for sharing your thoughts. I understand where you are coming from I believe. A lot here to discuss.

I believe the Spirit is who convinces the sinner that through Christ's death, his/her sins have been forgiven. I don't believe this is the job of the evangelist. The job of the evangelist is to declare the Gospel.

As far as someone walking away from Christ, I assume you agree that this person is not a Christian, so I'm not sure where the disagreement there is coming from.

How do you "know" if one is saved or not? Is it not their testimony of what Christ has done for them?
 
Ladodgers6 said:
Grace is given, not earned even by our responses. As I said before Faith & Repentance is not the good news. Because even our Faith is a Gift from God. Which you I know deny. You believe that a unregenerated sinner not born of Spirit can have faith and trust God though their faculties are some how illuminated to understand God. But still can resist once being illuminated to the truth of their dire need for a Savior? So, contrary to saying it's by Grace Alone, it is not, because the guilty ones tell God the offended party if it's okay for him to help or not help, does that sum it up?

There is nothing that fallen man can contribute to the divine process. If so, then it's no longer Grace! This is exactly what Paul says in Galatians.​
Click to expand...

Please ......

Talk about misrepresenting other people's beliefs.

Straw .........

Don't light a match.
 
Ladodgers6 said:
In agreement (y)

Thanks Doug for sharing your position, I would add that sinners will not have an excuse before God on judgement day (Romans 1-3). Now as far as Prevenient Grace from each side: Calvinism teaches that Prevenient Grace is effectual in it's cause, where as in the Arminian view it's not, because it can be resisted. Now I believe I have brought this point up over, over and over again without a satisfactory answer from the Arminian camp, including synergistic theologies. You say this Prevenient Grace is not effectual, basically saying it doesn't save the sinner, though above you say that God must initiate and move toward us first or sinners would never know they are lost.​
Click to expand...

This is incorrect, at least in my belief and understanding! Prevenient grace is effectual for it enables all men to hear and understand the gospel, and the various truths within it, when it is presented. It also enables us to respond in faith to this truth. It does not, in itself, effect salvation, for that is not its objective at this point. The objective of 'saving grace' is to save those who believe. Prevenient grace is irresistibly effectual, removing the effects of sin that would preclude the logistics of the plan of salvation. But saving grace, being contingent upon belief, is resistable because all do not believe.

(I am also reluctant to refer to grace as Prevenient and Saving for it seems to create different types of grace. Grace is grace, but this singular grace has many different objectives to accomplish. I think of it as a series of steps to reach a final result. In order for Z to occur, we first have to accomplish X and Y. The requirements of each step may be different and require different tactics or means to achieve, but each of these elements are undeserved in nature and their achievement is therefore gracious and a gift.)


Doug
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top