Alert! God Will commonly not being done

Status
Not open for further replies.

John Mullally

Well-Known Member
Aug 5, 2020
2,412
835
Califormia
✟136,164.00
Country
United States
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Married
You do not understand fatalism or scripture. Sophocles used fate and chance interchangeably, is that what you mean? Or do you men the worldview where there is no god and things are just destined to happen?

Vincent Cheung:

"By some definitions, the terms “determinism” and “fatalism” are similar.

For example, some English dictionaries would define these terms in ways that fail to make a clear distinction between them. Merriam-Webster is too ambiguous for our purpose, and Webster’s New World Thesaurus considers the two synonymous. Certainly, even those who affirm “soft” determinism and accuse me of teaching fatalism would not want to accept these ambiguous definitions, since then they would become “soft fatalists” at best.

The definitions in theological and philosophical literature might be more precise.

By “fatalism,” I refer to the teaching that all events are predetermined by impersonal forces regardless of means, so that no matter what a person does, the same outcome will result.

By “determinism,” I am specifically referring to theological or divine determinism — I am referring to the teaching that the personal God of the Bible has intelligently and immutably predetermined all events, including all human thoughts, decisions, and actions, and that by predetermining both the ends and the means to those ends."

and

"What are people going to accuse me of now? I can’t be accused of teaching fatalism, since I am saying that fatalism is too weak! But slanderers will think of something."



What kind of parent would love their child but not override their free choice to save them when headed to hell? That's a wicked, devilish doctrine. I guess you're assuming all people are God's children, but that' isn't scripturally true, it's an Arminian dream. Would God love, but not save...and love and send to hell?

I made this video years ago for people that teach the humanistic gospel of freewill works religion.

You do not understand fatalism or scripture. Sophocles used fate and chance interchangeably, is that what you mean? Or do you men the worldview where there is no god and things are just destined to happen?

Vincent Cheung:

"By some definitions, the terms “determinism” and “fatalism” are similar.

For example, some English dictionaries would define these terms in ways that fail to make a clear distinction between them. Merriam-Webster is too ambiguous for our purpose, and Webster’s New World Thesaurus considers the two synonymous. Certainly, even those who affirm “soft” determinism and accuse me of teaching fatalism would not want to accept these ambiguous definitions, since then they would become “soft fatalists” at best.

The definitions in theological and philosophical literature might be more precise.

By “fatalism,” I refer to the teaching that all events are predetermined by impersonal forces regardless of means, so that no matter what a person does, the same outcome will result.

By “determinism,” I am specifically referring to theological or divine determinism — I am referring to the teaching that the personal God of the Bible has intelligently and immutably predetermined all events, including all human thoughts, decisions, and actions, and that by predetermining both the ends and the means to those ends."

and

"What are people going to accuse me of now? I can’t be accused of teaching fatalism, since I am saying that fatalism is too weak! But slanderers will think of something."



What kind of parent would love their child but not override their free choice to save them when headed to hell? That's a wicked, devilish doctrine. I guess you're assuming all people are God's children, but that' isn't scripturally true, it's an Arminian dream. Would God love, but not save...and love and send to hell?

I made this video years ago for people that teach the humanistic gospel of freewill works religion.

What kind of parent would love their child but not override their free choice to save them when headed to hell?

A parent can instruct, and pray for his children. He cannot force their decision for Christ.

Concerning fatalistic - Calvanism is a doctrine where God does all the choosing. He is the potter and we are the clay. The pot has no say in his own fate. And you call Arminianism evil.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
Jun 16, 2020
2,104
641
55
London
✟108,044.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
What kind of parent would love their child but not override their free choice to save them when headed to hell?

A parent can instruct, and praying for his children. He cannot force their decision for Christ.

Concerning fatalistic - Calvanism is a doctrine where God does all the choosing. He is the potter and we are the clay. The pot has no say in his own fate.

The mind of man plans his way, But the LORD directs his steps.
 
Upvote 0

Dave L

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jun 28, 2018
15,549
5,876
USA
✟580,140.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
God can turn bad situations around and create good where evil was intended - but He is not an agent in creating wrong doing itself.

James 1:13-14 Let no one say when he is tempted, “I am tempted by God”; for God cannot be tempted by evil, nor does He Himself tempt anyone. But each one is tempted when he is drawn away by his own desires and enticed.
Cannibalism? Possibly the worst sin a person can commit. Yet God turns the wicked into cannibals.

And I will cause them to eat the flesh of their sons and the flesh of their daughters, and they shall eat every one the flesh of his friend in the siege and straitness, wherewith their enemies, and they that seek their lives, shall straiten them.” Jeremiah 19:9 (KJV 1900)

So that he will not give to any of them of the flesh of his children whom he shall eat: because he hath nothing left him in the siege, and in the straitness, wherewith thine enemies shall distress thee in all thy gates.” Deuteronomy 28:55 (KJV 1900)

The hands of the pitiful women have sodden their own children: They were their meat in the destruction of the daughter of my people.” Lamentations 4:10 (KJV 1900)

And ye shall eat the flesh of your sons, and the flesh of your daughters shall ye eat.” Leviticus 26:29 (KJV 1900)

Therefore the fathers shall eat the sons in the midst of thee, and the sons shall eat their fathers; and I will execute judgments in thee, and the whole remnant of thee will I scatter into all the winds.” Ezekiel 5:10 (KJV 1900)

And ye shall eat the flesh of your sons, and the flesh of your daughters shall ye eat.” Leviticus 26:29 (KJV 1900)

And thou shalt eat the fruit of thine own body, the flesh of thy sons and of thy daughters, which the Lord thy God hath given thee, in the siege, and in the straitness, wherewith thine enemies shall distress thee:” Deuteronomy 28:53 (KJV 1900)

And he shall snatch on the right hand, and be hungry; And he shall eat on the left hand, and they shall not be satisfied: They shall eat every man the flesh of his own arm:” Isaiah 9:20 (KJV 1900)
 
Upvote 0

timothyu

Well-Known Member
Dec 31, 2018
22,653
8,480
up there
✟309,702.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
What kind of parent would love their child but not override their free choice to save them when headed to hell?

A parent can instruct, and pray for his children. He cannot force their decision for Christ.
Jesus did come after all, to help the oppressed, not to oppress them.
 
Upvote 0

JM

Augsburg Catholic
Site Supporter
Jun 26, 2004
17,377
3,637
Canada
✟753,130.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Others
What kind of parent would love their child but not override their free choice to save them when headed to hell?

Good, you got my point. God doesn't love everybody or everybody would be saved.

A parent can instruct, and pray for his children. He cannot force their decision for Christ.

Concerning fatalistic - Calvanism is a doctrine where God does all the choosing. He is the potter and we are the clay. The pot has no say in his own fate. And you call Arminianism evil.

You do not understand Calvinism or fatalism and Arminianism is the setting up of the idol of self will and determination. Paul writing to the Galatians didn't mentioned a laundry list of sins, just one, and you are guilty of it. By adding to the finished work of Christ, by adding to the Gospel, you are setting up a false system and false Gospel.
 
Upvote 0

John Mullally

Well-Known Member
Aug 5, 2020
2,412
835
Califormia
✟136,164.00
Country
United States
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Married
Please point out how I am "Adding to the finished work of Christ". I never mentioned any Work.

By the way Faith is not a "Work" - go read Romans 4:1-6.

If someone in obedience to John 3:16 believes in Him, is that setting up an idol of self will?
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

JM

Augsburg Catholic
Site Supporter
Jun 26, 2004
17,377
3,637
Canada
✟753,130.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Others
Please point out your accusation of my "Adding to the finished work of Christ". I never mentioned any Work.

You wrote, "if someone in obedience...is that setting up an idol?" You are looking at your fruit, your works, yourself! You are focused on you.
 
Upvote 0

John Mullally

Well-Known Member
Aug 5, 2020
2,412
835
Califormia
✟136,164.00
Country
United States
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Married
You cite a sentence as being offensive that I did not say. You fuse parts of two difference sentences and then dispute I know not what - except based upon an earlier post it has something to do with the Book of Galatians and false gospel. If you are going to argue over phraseology, you should quote more accurately and then make your point understandable.

If you quoted me verbatim, my response would be: "Obedience to John 3:16" could be better said as believing in Him. And that is far different than setting up an "idol of self will", as you term it, because self will is serving ones self and not Christ. And don't argue Galatians 3:1-2 with me because "Obedience to John 3:16" or believing in Him lines up with "the hearing with faith" and not the "works of the law".

You say that God does not love all people - then what is the plain reading on John 3:16 and 1 John 2:2 that you get from any popular Bible translation? By 1 John 2:2 His propitiation was made to all men - how can that be those He hates? Note that I am not saying that 1 John 2:2 implies universal salvation - you have to look at other scriptures. Jesus prays for His own in John 17 because the others do not qualify (see John 3:18). Reference the parable of the Wedding Banquet - Matthew 22:1-14.

Paul did not speak about free-will, pre-destination, foreordination, arminianism, or idols of self will when he was addressing the Galations at length concerning a false gospel in Galations 1-3. Keep in mind you are no Paul.

Matthew 7:2 For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.

John 3:36 He who believes in the Son has eternal life; but he who does not obey the Son will not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him.

2 Corinthians 13:5 Examine yourselves, whether ye be in the faith; prove your own selves. Know ye not your own selves, how that Jesus Christ is in you, except ye be reprobates?
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

JM

Augsburg Catholic
Site Supporter
Jun 26, 2004
17,377
3,637
Canada
✟753,130.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Others
Do you believe that man's will is fallen to the extent that he can't respond to the Gospel? (ex. dead in sin)

Do you pray for unsaved loved ones to come to faith in Christ?

If you answered "no" to the first question and "yes" to the second, could you explain the inconsistent logic?

Another set of questions worth ruminating on.

Do you believe that human nature was gravely affected by the fall of Adam, but that sinners have not been left powerlessness in spiritual matters and can choose to be saved?

Do you believe that God enables every sinner to repent and believe but does not override man’s freedom to do so?

Do you believe each sinner possesses a free will that they will use to decide their final destiny depending on how they uses it?
Do you believe the sinners free will enables them to choose good over evil in spiritual matters?

Do you believe the sinner has the power to cooperate with the Holy Spirit and be regenerated or refuse to accept God’s grace and perish?

Do you believe the lost sinner needs help from the Holy Spirit but does not have to be regenerated by the Spirit to believe? Or that faith is man’s act and precedes regeneration?

Do you believe that God’s choice in election is based on what He foresees?

Do you believe that some sinners would respond to the preaching of the Gospel and God therefore elects them unto salvation based on His knowledge of their choice? Or that God decided to elect only those who would believe the Gospel?

Do you believe election is ultimately determined by man’s faith foreseen by God from eternity past?

Do you believe that Christ’s saving work on the cross made it a possibility for everyone single person that has ever lived to be saved but did not really secure the salvation of anyone?

Do you believe that Christ died for all sinners but only those who believe on Him are saved?

Do you believe Christ’s death enabled God to pardon sinners on the condition that they believe?

Do you believe that Christ’s death did not actually put away anyone’s sin but made salvation a possibility?

Do you believe that redemption becomes efficient only if man chooses to believe it?

If you have answered yes to any of the above questions you are probably closer to Arminianism than you first believed, even if you reject the name. The history of the free will movement among Protestants sits squarely within the Arminian framework. If you answer yes to most of the questions, face it, you are an Arminian.

Once it is understood that modern Evangelicalism has a tradition wedded to Arminianism the debate breaks down into monergism and synergism. The free will Arminian tradition is very similar to Roman Catholicism. In fact, Arminius like Philipp Melanchthon before him, softened the Protestant doctrine moving Lutherianism toward the Roman church. When I say Protestant I refer to Martin Luther, Huldrych Zwingli and John Calvin. All there Reformers held to what is now called “Calvinism.” This is a remarkable fact considering the Reformers lived in different geographical locations.

The Reformers and Bible believers before them were monergists. A monergist believes the Holy Spirit will act effectually bringing sinners to salvation by spiritual regeneration. This is done without the sinner acting as an accomplice or assisting God. From beginning to end the work belongs to God. A synergist on the other hand believes the sinner must cooperate (Christ + something, you fill in the blank, faith, sacraments, works, etc.) in the salvation process often inserting ideas like “prevenient grace” to help explain the inconsistencies. For the Arminian or Christian supporting libertarian free will, it is the act of the unregenerate sinner in believing that begins the process of salvation. One dictionary describe this view as, “two efficient agents [acting] in regeneration, namely the human will and the divine Spirit, which, in the strict sense of the term, cooperate.” This is the definition of modern Evangelism and is the hinge on which the discussion swings.

Do you believe a sinner must be saved purely by an act of God? or, Do you believe a sinner is saved by cooperating with the Holy Spirit? That is where we are today folks. We are discussing this very issue. Does the Bible teach that we are saved by God alone without any contribution made by the sinner? Or Does the Bible teach that we cooperate in the regeneration process? As we move forward I pray you take time to look up the passages cited and pray over them. It is important to read scripture as it is written and not fall to peer pressure, setting aside the Arminian comprise with Rome and let the Gospel of God’s free and unmerited grace wash over you. Let’s set aside our prejudices or bias, our traditions including American Evangelicalism or Reformed Calvinism and consider what scriptures teach.

The scriptures will be examined in subsequent posts.

Yours in the Lord,

jm
 
Upvote 0

John Mullally

Well-Known Member
Aug 5, 2020
2,412
835
Califormia
✟136,164.00
Country
United States
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Married
Do you believe the sinners free will enables them to choose good over evil in spiritual matters?
jm
On the day of Pentecost, Peter plead with sinners (using many words) to receive his word and be baptized promptly. Peter's pleading was directed at the sinner's free will and not the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit was already leading everything Peter did on the day of Pentecost. Notice that Peter also got the new believers to act quickly (same day baptism).

Acts 2:40 And with many other words did he testify and exhort, saying, Save yourselves from this untoward generation. 41 Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls.

I believe that the Holy Spirit drew many on the day of Pentecost - even some that did not receive - per the parable of the Sower. The Bible says that men frequently reject the Holy Spirit - Acts 7:51.
 
Last edited:
  • Agree
Reactions: BNR32FAN
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

JM

Augsburg Catholic
Site Supporter
Jun 26, 2004
17,377
3,637
Canada
✟753,130.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Others
On the day of Pentecost, Peter plead with sinners (using many words) to receive his word and be baptized promptly. Peter's pleading was directed at the sinner's free will and not the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit was already leading everything Peter did on the day of Pentecost. Notice that Peter also got the new believers to act quickly (same day baptism).

Acts 2:40 And with many other words did he testify and exhort, saying, Save yourselves from this untoward generation. 41 Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls.

I believe that the Holy Spirit drew many on the day of Pentecost - even some that did not receive - per the parable of the Sower. The Bible says that men frequently reject the Holy Spirit - Acts 7:51.
"...as many as were ordained to eternal life believed." Acts 13:48
 
Upvote 0

John Mullally

Well-Known Member
Aug 5, 2020
2,412
835
Califormia
✟136,164.00
Country
United States
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Married
upload_2020-8-19_3-48-40.png


upload_2020-8-19_3-51-34.png
 
  • Haha
Reactions: JM
Upvote 0

BNR32FAN

He’s a Way of life
Site Supporter
Aug 11, 2017
22,722
7,425
Dallas
✟895,775.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Do you believe that man's will is fallen to the extent that he can't respond to the Gospel? (ex. dead in sin)

Do you pray for unsaved loved ones to come to faith in Christ?

If you answered "no" to the first question and "yes" to the second, could you explain the inconsistent logic?

Another set of questions worth ruminating on.

Do you believe that human nature was gravely affected by the fall of Adam, but that sinners have not been left powerlessness in spiritual matters and can choose to be saved?

Do you believe that God enables every sinner to repent and believe but does not override man’s freedom to do so?

Do you believe each sinner possesses a free will that they will use to decide their final destiny depending on how they uses it?
Do you believe the sinners free will enables them to choose good over evil in spiritual matters?

Do you believe the sinner has the power to cooperate with the Holy Spirit and be regenerated or refuse to accept God’s grace and perish?

Do you believe the lost sinner needs help from the Holy Spirit but does not have to be regenerated by the Spirit to believe? Or that faith is man’s act and precedes regeneration?

Do you believe that God’s choice in election is based on what He foresees?

Do you believe that some sinners would respond to the preaching of the Gospel and God therefore elects them unto salvation based on His knowledge of their choice? Or that God decided to elect only those who would believe the Gospel?

Do you believe election is ultimately determined by man’s faith foreseen by God from eternity past?

Do you believe that Christ’s saving work on the cross made it a possibility for everyone single person that has ever lived to be saved but did not really secure the salvation of anyone?

Do you believe that Christ died for all sinners but only those who believe on Him are saved?

Do you believe Christ’s death enabled God to pardon sinners on the condition that they believe?

Do you believe that Christ’s death did not actually put away anyone’s sin but made salvation a possibility?

Do you believe that redemption becomes efficient only if man chooses to believe it?

If you have answered yes to any of the above questions you are probably closer to Arminianism than you first believed, even if you reject the name. The history of the free will movement among Protestants sits squarely within the Arminian framework. If you answer yes to most of the questions, face it, you are an Arminian.

Once it is understood that modern Evangelicalism has a tradition wedded to Arminianism the debate breaks down into monergism and synergism. The free will Arminian tradition is very similar to Roman Catholicism. In fact, Arminius like Philipp Melanchthon before him, softened the Protestant doctrine moving Lutherianism toward the Roman church. When I say Protestant I refer to Martin Luther, Huldrych Zwingli and John Calvin. All there Reformers held to what is now called “Calvinism.” This is a remarkable fact considering the Reformers lived in different geographical locations.

The Reformers and Bible believers before them were monergists. A monergist believes the Holy Spirit will act effectually bringing sinners to salvation by spiritual regeneration. This is done without the sinner acting as an accomplice or assisting God. From beginning to end the work belongs to God. A synergist on the other hand believes the sinner must cooperate (Christ + something, you fill in the blank, faith, sacraments, works, etc.) in the salvation process often inserting ideas like “prevenient grace” to help explain the inconsistencies. For the Arminian or Christian supporting libertarian free will, it is the act of the unregenerate sinner in believing that begins the process of salvation. One dictionary describe this view as, “two efficient agents [acting] in regeneration, namely the human will and the divine Spirit, which, in the strict sense of the term, cooperate.” This is the definition of modern Evangelism and is the hinge on which the discussion swings.

Do you believe a sinner must be saved purely by an act of God? or, Do you believe a sinner is saved by cooperating with the Holy Spirit? That is where we are today folks. We are discussing this very issue. Does the Bible teach that we are saved by God alone without any contribution made by the sinner? Or Does the Bible teach that we cooperate in the regeneration process? As we move forward I pray you take time to look up the passages cited and pray over them. It is important to read scripture as it is written and not fall to peer pressure, setting aside the Arminian comprise with Rome and let the Gospel of God’s free and unmerited grace wash over you. Let’s set aside our prejudices or bias, our traditions including American Evangelicalism or Reformed Calvinism and consider what scriptures teach.

The scriptures will be examined in subsequent posts.

Yours in the Lord,

jm

Bless you friend. What are your thoughts on Revelation 2:20-21? Was Jezebel capable of repentance? Was Jesus expecting her to repent knowing that she was incapable of it?

“But I have this against you, that you tolerate the woman Jezebel, who calls herself a prophetess, and she teaches and leads My bond-servants astray so that they commit acts of immorality and eat things sacrificed to idols. I gave her time to repent, and she does not want to repent of her immorality.”
‭‭Revelation‬ ‭2:20-21‬ ‭NASB‬‬
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

John Mullally

Well-Known Member
Aug 5, 2020
2,412
835
Califormia
✟136,164.00
Country
United States
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Married
Bless you friend. What are your thoughts on Revelation 2:20-21? Was Jezebel capable of repentance? Was Jesus expecting her to repent knowing that she was incapable of it?

“But I have this against you, that you tolerate the woman Jezebel, who calls herself a prophetess, and she teaches and leads My bond-servants astray so that they commit acts of immorality and eat things sacrificed to idols. I gave her time to repent, and she does not want to repent of her immorality.”
‭‭Revelation‬ ‭2:20-21‬ ‭NASB‬‬
Jesus gave her time to repent, but by verse 22 we see that it did not happen (she was unwilling). If she never had any ability to repent, why was she given time and why would Jesus call her unwilling instead of incapable?

Jonah proclaimed that Nineveh had 40 days till judgement and I find no mention of repentance in Jonah's declarations. But God was gracious when the wicked city of Nineveh repented to Jonah's chagrin.
 
Upvote 0

BNR32FAN

He’s a Way of life
Site Supporter
Aug 11, 2017
22,722
7,425
Dallas
✟895,775.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Jesus gave her time to repent, but by verse 22 we see that it did not happen (she was unwilling). If she never had any ability to repent, why was she given time and why would Jesus call her unwilling instead of incapable?

Jonah proclaimed that Nineveh had 40 days till judgement and I find no mention of repentance in Jonah's declarations. But God was gracious when the wicked city of Nineveh repented to Jonah's chagrin.

Amen I agree
 
Upvote 0

JM

Augsburg Catholic
Site Supporter
Jun 26, 2004
17,377
3,637
Canada
✟753,130.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Others
Bless you friend. What are your thoughts on Revelation 2:20-21? Was Jezebel capable of repentance? Was Jesus expecting her to repent knowing that she was incapable of it?

“But I have this against you, that you tolerate the woman Jezebel, who calls herself a prophetess, and she teaches and leads My bond-servants astray so that they commit acts of immorality and eat things sacrificed to idols. I gave her time to repent, and she does not want to repent of her immorality.”
‭‭Revelation‬ ‭2:20-21‬ ‭NASB‬‬

It's important, when thinking 'God's thoughts after Him' to borrow from Augustine, to think theologically. The issue most Reformed Christians have with Arminian and other positions is the emphasis on man. The humanistic underpinnings of non-calvinist opinions remind me of this old clip.


When you read Revelation 2:20-21 immediately you think of man (ME), your understanding of the passage begins and ends with man (ME).

Classic biblical doctrine includes the ideas of God's eternality, that God exists outside of time and that God does not 'learn' but 'knows' all things (omniscience).

Can we agree that scripture teaches that God is not affected by time, that He is eternal and doesn't actually 'wait' on anything? That God doesn't 'learn?'

Can we also agree that scripture uses anthropomorphisms to communicate the decretive will of God?

If not, no need to continue this discussion, we will never agree. It's often not an issue of proof texting wars, which is what you want to do, but presuppositions. Your god looks more like you - the God of the Bible is utterly different.

Yours in the Lord,

jm
 
Upvote 0

JM

Augsburg Catholic
Site Supporter
Jun 26, 2004
17,377
3,637
Canada
✟753,130.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Others
My questions await.

Do you believe that man's will is fallen to the extent that he can't respond to the Gospel? (ex. dead in sin)

Do you pray for unsaved loved ones to come to faith in Christ?

If you answered "no" to the first question and "yes" to the second, could you explain the inconsistent logic?

Another set of questions worth ruminating on.

Do you believe that human nature was gravely affected by the fall of Adam, but that sinners have not been left powerlessness in spiritual matters and can choose to be saved?

Do you believe that God enables every sinner to repent and believe but does not override man’s freedom to do so?

Do you believe each sinner possesses a free will that they will use to decide their final destiny depending on how they uses it?
Do you believe the sinners free will enables them to choose good over evil in spiritual matters?

Do you believe the sinner has the power to cooperate with the Holy Spirit and be regenerated or refuse to accept God’s grace and perish?

Do you believe the lost sinner needs help from the Holy Spirit but does not have to be regenerated by the Spirit to believe? Or that faith is man’s act and precedes regeneration?

Do you believe that God’s choice in election is based on what He foresees?

Do you believe that some sinners would respond to the preaching of the Gospel and God therefore elects them unto salvation based on His knowledge of their choice? Or that God decided to elect only those who would believe the Gospel?

Do you believe election is ultimately determined by man’s faith foreseen by God from eternity past?

Do you believe that Christ’s saving work on the cross made it a possibility for everyone single person that has ever lived to be saved but did not really secure the salvation of anyone?

Do you believe that Christ died for all sinners but only those who believe on Him are saved?

Do you believe Christ’s death enabled God to pardon sinners on the condition that they believe?

Do you believe that Christ’s death did not actually put away anyone’s sin but made salvation a possibility?

Do you believe that redemption becomes efficient only if man chooses to believe it?

If you have answered yes to any of the above questions you are probably closer to Arminianism than you first believed, even if you reject the name. The history of the free will movement among Protestants sits squarely within the Arminian framework. If you answer yes to most of the questions, face it, you are an Arminian.

Once it is understood that modern Evangelicalism has a tradition wedded to Arminianism the debate breaks down into monergism and synergism. The free will Arminian tradition is very similar to Roman Catholicism. In fact, Arminius like Philipp Melanchthon before him, softened the Protestant doctrine moving Lutherianism toward the Roman church. When I say Protestant I refer to Martin Luther, Huldrych Zwingli and John Calvin. All there Reformers held to what is now called “Calvinism.” This is a remarkable fact considering the Reformers lived in different geographical locations.

The Reformers and Bible believers before them were monergists. A monergist believes the Holy Spirit will act effectually bringing sinners to salvation by spiritual regeneration. This is done without the sinner acting as an accomplice or assisting God. From beginning to end the work belongs to God. A synergist on the other hand believes the sinner must cooperate (Christ + something, you fill in the blank, faith, sacraments, works, etc.) in the salvation process often inserting ideas like “prevenient grace” to help explain the inconsistencies. For the Arminian or Christian supporting libertarian free will, it is the act of the unregenerate sinner in believing that begins the process of salvation. One dictionary describe this view as, “two efficient agents [acting] in regeneration, namely the human will and the divine Spirit, which, in the strict sense of the term, cooperate.” This is the definition of modern Evangelism and is the hinge on which the discussion swings.

Do you believe a sinner must be saved purely by an act of God? or, Do you believe a sinner is saved by cooperating with the Holy Spirit? That is where we are today folks. We are discussing this very issue. Does the Bible teach that we are saved by God alone without any contribution made by the sinner? Or Does the Bible teach that we cooperate in the regeneration process? As we move forward I pray you take time to look up the passages cited and pray over them. It is important to read scripture as it is written and not fall to peer pressure, setting aside the Arminian comprise with Rome and let the Gospel of God’s free and unmerited grace wash over you. Let’s set aside our prejudices or bias, our traditions including American Evangelicalism or Reformed Calvinism and consider what scriptures teach.

The scriptures will be examined in subsequent posts.

Yours in the Lord,

jm
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

JM

Augsburg Catholic
Site Supporter
Jun 26, 2004
17,377
3,637
Canada
✟753,130.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Others
Assuming that the Elect are foreordained (or predestined), it does not affect any of the directives in the New Testament to the unsaved or believers.

So, when you read, "those who were ordained to eternal life believed" you don't believe it? Got it.

For those reading this post the natural conclusion is that ordination to eternal life is link leads to belief. See also 1 John 5 where it reads, "Whoever believes that Jesus is the Christ is born of God..." and please noticed that regeneration (being born again) precedes faith.



Lydia's heart was opened to the Lord BEFORE she could believe. "The Lord opened her heart to heed the things spoken by Paul."

jm
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.