Synergist and Monergist: Better Terms

Glory to God!

 

God. But I had a choice which you will deny.

 

If I may -- using your analogy, the monergist (Calvinist) position is that the individual on the operating table has deceased; the actions of the doctor are to bring a person whose heart has stopped beating, back to life. In such an analogy, there is no consent given, or required, of the patient.

The proper analogy that you're attempting to introduce is akin to an ambulance bringing in two or more unconscious patients on death's door. The doctor may choose to perform actions to save one, but determine the other cannot be saved. Neither patient is awake or aware, and cannot ask the doctor to choose them; the doctor makes the decision, without cooperation or consent from either patient.

But there are holes in that analogy as well, because no analogy is perfect.

 

This is grace - all of grace! While I was God's enemy, He plucked me from the fire. Out of the filth of my sin, He pulled me, and He washed me by His Word. He clothed me in white, and He restored my sight so that I might gaze upon His majesty. Not waiting for me to come to Him, He came to me.

"This is love, not that we loved God but that He loved us. . ."

 

Hi, Don, (and others too)

Yes, of course you may, and thank you. I have to agree that analogies are imperfect and thus fail to tell the whole story. Your and Reformed's observations are certainly valid. The problem is that, though spiritually dead to God, as thatbrian pointed out, we are yet God's enemies, blind and hostile, that is, willfully sinning more than we know. So, though your analogy might be useful, the heart of stone yet allows for some very negative spiritual activity prior to the operation, and I still think my analogy apt. And the upshot is, this still leaves me label-less.

I also think we all fully concur with thatbrian's closer, but I will never tire of it.

"This is love: not that we loved God, but that he loved us and sent his Son as an atoning sacrifice for our sins." (1 John 4:10, NIV)

By the way, I wonder who and what Peter had in mind when saying, “Save yourselves from this untoward generation.” (Acts 2:40b) Can anyone actually save himself?

RT&

 

RT& -- you made mention of "negative spiritual energy." Would you elaborate?

 

Hi, Don,

I think you are referring to my phrase "very negative spiritual activity," by which I meant to indicate sin. It was merely a restatement in other words. Is it that important here?

Have we lost sight of the purpose of the OP? The two labels were supposed to sufficiently cover all views. It seems apparent they are not. Neither of the understood definitions match the description of my view. The task is not to try to change my view, but to find the right label based on its description.

I believe that our enmity toward God was real, and also our surrender. I do not affirm that there is any human effort in surrendering. That is much too strong a word. If anything, it is the opposite, that is, we give up fighting against God’s will that we be saved. Perhaps we find Him simply irresistible. Did I just say that? Hallelujah!

RT&

 

Hi, Reformed,

My point is that the lifeless corpse analogy Don offered does not fully describe the situation, as the sinner is still quite actively sinning. You said practically the same thing I did, but just did not make the connection. The sinner can still surrender to God, that is, agree to the operation. This does not at all equate to him co-operating as a surgeon, or even as some sort of assistant--no energy, no ergo.

Again, it’s OK if you do not like the analogy, since it does not fit your view, but it is quite apt for the discussion of my view, and is a reasonable interpretation of Scripture.

RT&

 

RT& - thanks for the clarification. "Activity" was what I needed pointed out.

I think you miss the point of the monergist view. Please consider, the monergist doesn't ascribe to "actively" sinning before salvation. Before salvation, being spiritually dead, all actions are sinful, no matter how "good," because for the spiritually dead, any righteousness is as filthy rags. Thus, the monergist cannot accept your analogy.

Does that make sense?

Reformed -- please correct this if it's wrong.

 

@Reformed. I think we win because the Arminians now all sound like Calvinists.

(it probably has much more to do with not wanted to be nailed down, and being a moving target)

 

You've been asking for an arminian to present the Calvinist point of view for weeks, haven't you? I take it I've succeeded?

 

In my view, No, he cannot do anything to change it, only God can change it.

I am not asking anyone to agree with my analogy, only accept that I have it. I am using it to illustrate my view, not to push my view. I am not asking anyone to accept my view, only accept that I have it.

(emphasis mine) These sound like restatements to me. But again, I was just explaining my own analogy and view, not pushing them. I do not say that the sinner is doing anything good.

Thanks for the replies; sorry for anything that sounds rude here. I actually had a lot to say, but, because of the seeming confusion, would rather come back when I’ve thought a bit more about how to address it.

RT&

 

The Arminian does not want to take credit for his salvation. He knows that he was saved by grace, so he gets put into a very uncomfortable spot with threads like this. He mustn't move left or right, yet he does squirm around quite a bit. When the reality of his beliefs are pressed hard, he finds himself between that old rock and hard place.

 

You don't even recognize how intellectually dishonest you are, do you?

 

Why don't you leave Baptist Board for a couple of days and have arguments with this Ar Minian fellow that you know so well? Since you can read his mind you should do fairly well in the debate.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk