To Non Cals here:Does Man Need Prevenient Grace or Not To Accept Jesus ?

What is prevenient grace? It might be defined differently by Calvinists, Arminians, and non-Cal/Arms.

I use the term to refer to a supposed grace whereby God enables, but does not compel people to receive and understand the gospel. The idea being that a natural man, i.e man of flesh (in a fallen state) is not able to respond appropriately to the gospel. In my opinion it is false doctrine.

Now revealing grace must come before a person could trust in that revelation, but I believe scripture teaches fallen men are able to understand that revealing grace, the milk of the gospel.

As far as the Calvinist take, the prevenient grace is irresistible, that too is false doctrine.

I Corinthians 2:14-3:3 teaches men of flesh, i.e. not babes in Christ or spiritually mature Christians, can understand the milk of the gospel, but not other spiritual things discerned only with the aid of our indwelt Spirit.

And I believe Matthew 23:13 teaches men can be entering heaven, thus able to enter, yet be turned aside, thus the enabling is resistible.

In summary, my view of "prevenient grace" is the revealing grace of God which is necessary in order to have something in mind to trust in. But it does not supernatually alter (enable) a man of flesh to respond, they are able to respond in their fallen state. Thus regeneration does not come before faith.

 

JesusFan,

There is NO biblical reason to believe that a person cannot understand and believe the gospel when it is presented.

Why do you think Jesus hid the gospel truth in parables from others "lest they repent and believe and be saved?" He HAD to hide it because it is powerful enough to save, but it was not time for them to be saved, otherwise they wouldn't have crucified Him.

Understand?

 

Then explain why Jesus said that he must hide the truth in parables lest they repent and be saved?

I think you may have the words internal and external mixed up. The gospel is an external working produced and carried by the HS. It affects those who hear it internally by giving them the knowledge they need to respond in faith, but not irresistibly so.

I agree its both, but one works in and through the other...never apart. The gospel is the means of the so-called "prevenient" grace.

 

Well, prior to the gospel being sent there were those whose faith was credited to them as righteousness (i.e. Abraham and the list of those in Heb. 11), so I'm sure it's possible, but what we know is that God's clear plan for redemption is for people to hear the gospel appeal to be reconciled and to respond to that message. Those who perish do so because they refused to love the truth and so be saved, not because God refused to love and save them.

 

Right, and explain why it was necessary to use parables to hide this truth, if indeed they were born unable to understand and receive it?

 

I am seeing claims but no scriptural support Jesusfan. As Skandelon pointed out, Jesus had to speak in parables to prevent people from understanding. Thus your assertion that people are unable to understand and respond without some supernatural enabling by the Holy Spirit is unbiblical.

How many scriptures are you willing to nullify to cling your unbiblical beliefs? Scripture says those who do not respond are unwilling to do so, not unable to do so. A Calvinist would claim they were unwilling because they were unable, thus rewriting scripture to fit their doctrine. Christian Minimalist Theology says accept scripture as written, thus they were unwilling is doctrine, they were unable is unbiblical.

Recall Romans chapter 11 where God intervenes and hardens hearts to preclude them from trusting in Christ. Thus yet another scripture teaching men of flesh are able to respond to the gospel message. Verse after verse, passage after passage.

 

Way to miss the point of the OP... :thumbs:

 

BTW, if I remember correctly, there are many Calvinists who argue that the gospel is also the means of their so-called "irresistible grace." Meaning that God only irresistibly calls the elect through the means of the gospel. They are careful not to in any way separate the power from the gospel by suggesting that God does some 'prior effectual' inward working which somehow makes the gospel effective for them only. Obviously, I disagree with this view, but I thought it should be noted because it points to the biblical evidence that must be accounted for regarding the POWER OF THE GOSPEL.

 

Should I take you to task over the word "many" for several pages of this thread as you've done to me in the past? :love2:

Can you clarify this? "They are careful not to in any way separate the power from the gospel by suggesting that God does some 'prior effectual' inward working which somehow makes the gospel effective for them only."

That needs elaboration, its a little murky.

Obviously we were set apart for Him before the foundation of the world. Could any elect be lost? Did he set us apart by the Spirit for salvation, and to obey Him? 1 Peter 1 teaches this, and I don't think it means at the very moment of salvation, as there is no reason, contextual or otherwise, to believe so. After all, it was Christ's Spirit working on Saul of Tarsus prior to his conversion.

Also, in Galatians 1:15, Paul, set apart to preach, from the womb, which was God's purpose for His life.

Many people look back on their salvation experience and prior and see God's workings in their lives. I personally believe this is what Paul partly sees and meant in Galatians 1:15.

I also believe the call of Abram, chapter 12 Genesis, and the promise he received in that chapter all to be "prevenient grace" and Gods promise to him would stand. We are all "children of promise," Gods promise, not children of "if you choose Me." It is all according to His purpose and calling. His elect simply obey.

God meant for all of it to happen and to save those whom He chose.

- Peace

 

Christ told us why. It wasn't to hide the Gospel from them. Their gross hearts, dull ears and closed eyes did that already. They did not have the capacity to render due benevolence to the things He would offer. Worse than that, they would tramble them under their feet, turn again and rend Him. He would not take the pearls of the mysteries of the Kingdom, and cast them before swine. They pervert Moses and the Prophets, therefore they don't even get to hear these things in a straightforward and natural manner. But whosoever hath not, from him shall be taken away even that he hath. Therefore speak I to them in parables:

Not to blind and deafen them, but because they're blind and deaf.

because they seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand.

To say that a man has a natural capacity to respond to the Gospel is erroneous enough. To say that Christ was compelled to speak in parables because of man's natural capacity to respond to the Gospel is gross ignorance. . . and might I add, antithetical to all that Christ and His apostles taught us.

 

Right. And why did Christ NEED to hid the gospel from them? He tell us plainly: "otherwise they might turn and be forgiven!'"

Agreed. They rebelled freely which cause their hearts to GROW HARDENED and CALLOUSED. They weren't born that way.

Once self hardened in their rebellion despite God's long-suffering toward them as He patiently held out his hands to them and desired to gather them under his saving wings (Rm 10:21; Matt 23:37), they remained unwilling and rebellious. Only then do we see Christ purposefully and actively BLIND them from the clear truth so as to accomplish a greater redemptive purpose. By sealing them (hardening them) in their already rebellious condition he accomplishes redemption through the Passover, in the same way he hardened Pharaoh to accomplish the first passover.

Then why does it say, "otherwise they might turn and be forgiven!???" Further, why does Paul anticipate that many of those hardened from Israel might be provoked to envy and saved, as he explains in Romans 11:14?

 

Scripture never says the gospel's power is limited to a select few.

 

Actually, it does teach this.

"For the word of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God." 1 Corinthians 1:18

So its power is limited to a select group (I won't say few), i.e. His elect.

- Peace

 

Skandelon, one of the 5 articles of the Arminian doctrine include this:

Do you disavow an article of doctrine that is from your own specificed theology?