Why did Peter begin to sink?

Yes, we quote scripture to them endlessly, they come back with a statement from their creeds. Here is more scripture to show that faith comes by hearing the word of God.

Rom 10:14 How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher?
15 And how shall they preach, except they be sent? as it is written, How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things!
16 But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Esaias saith, Lord, who hath believed our report?
17 So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.
18 But I say, Have they not heard? Yes verily, their sound went into all the earth, and their words unto the ends of the world.
19 But I say, Did not Israel know? First Moses saith, I will provoke you to jealousy by them that are no people, and by a foolish nation I will anger you.
20 But Esaias is very bold, and saith, I was found of them that sought me not; I was made manifest unto them that asked not after me.
21 But to Israel he saith, All day long I have stretched forth my hands unto a disobedient and gainsaying people.

In vs. 14 Paul asks "how" (he is addressing ability with this word) shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard?

Does Paul mention the need of being regenerated here? NO. And he NEVER addresses that in all of scripture. He implies simply that a man must hear of Jesus to believe in him.
Then in vs. 18 through 21 Paul shows the problem is obstinance and stubborness, an unwillingness to listen, not an inability to believe. God spoke to them, they heard, so you can't argue they didn't hear the "effectual calling". No, they were stubborn and did not want to listen, that is all.

No magic here folks, just plain ol' stubborn pride.

This belief that faith is magical is straight from the RCC. And that is from the mystical religion of Babylon.

You fellows should look up "The Two Babylons" by Alexander Hislop online. You will learn where all the mystery and magic in the RCC originated, and you will see that this mysticism has carried over into other churches.

http://www.piney.com/His22.html

http://www.piney.com/HislopTOC1.html

The language is a little difficult and complex, but this is well worth reading.

 

Thank you. I will agree that on first glance this verse supports your view, however it does not say a person must be regenerated to believe. But more than that, if you read this verse in context you will see it is not speaking of faith at all, but knowing the "things of the Spirit of God". There is a difference. Let's look at one verse at a time starting with vs. 11

1 Cor 2:11 For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God.

This verse does seem to support your view at first glance. But what is it speaking of? Is it speaking of faith? No. It is speaking of knowing "the things of God".

1 Cor 2:12 Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God.

Now, this verse refutes your doctrine. It says that they have received the Spirit "that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God".

Now read that again carefully, which came first, receiving the Spirit, or knowing the things of God?

It says they first received the Spirit doesn't it? And we know from Gal 3:2 that we receive the Spirit by faith.

Gal 3:2 This only would I learn of you, Received ye the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith?

So, obviously these persons had believed BEFORE they could understand the things of God. Isn't that correct? Yes, or no?

Now go to your famous vs. 14 and read in context.

1 Cor 2:14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

Is this verse speaking about faith? NO! It is speaking about receiving "the things of the Spirit of God". It is not speaking of faith at all.

So, going back to vs. 12 we see a person can believe and receive the Spirit by faith, and only after doing so can he "receive the things of the Spirit" or know "the things" that are freely given to us of God.

So, Calvinism pulls 1 Cor 2:14 out of context to prove natural man does not have the ability to believe, when that is not what this verse says at all. It is not talking about faith, it is talking about "the things of the Spirit of God". This is a deeper knowledge of God.

But it is not faith, and this verse is not saying the natural man does not have the ability to believe. It does not mention faith whatsoever.

 

No, it says the dead THAT HEAR shall live. "THAT HEAR" means those who LISTEN and BELIEVE. The dead that simply hear the audible sound but do not listen and believe remain dead.

Hbr 4:2 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.

These persons heard the same exact gospel, but it did not profit them because they did not believe.

The word of God only effectually works in those that believe.

1 Thes 2:13 For this cause also thank we God without ceasing, because, when ye received the word of God which ye heard of us, ye received it not as the word of men, but as it is in truth, the word of God, which effectually worketh also in you that believe.

You can hear the word of God all day, won't do you a bit of good unless you believe it. But if you do believe it, it will effectually work in you.

Calvinism teaches God sends out an effectual calling, and another "general" or "ineffectual" calling. That is false, God's word is ALWAYS quick and powerful. But it only effectually works in those that believe. The problem is "effectual believeing" not an "effectual calling".