The Monergist View of the Human Will

The Pelagians and Semi-Pelagians on here go into hyper-Calvinism when they bend, twist. and warp Romans 1:19 to fit their ideology.

 

Please elaborate.

 

When asked about those who died never hearing the gospel, they quickly run to Romans 1:19 and use that to say they can know Him savingly via natural revelation.

 

I asked this in the now closed "What is Total Depravity, part deux" thread...

And this was the reply I got...

Notice that that response had no exegesis whatsoever. Just a few verses spouted off and that's it.

If they can be saved this way, then missions are a waste of time and $$$. That's hyper-Calvinism coming from a Pelagian.

 

You said the real question is whether all can believe the Gospel. That brings us back to the question human will/free will.

 

That is also a teaching of many Calvinists. I would not by any means consider D. James Kennedy a Hyper Calvinist and he taught it. This teaching is common among Cals and Non-Cals. I don't think either group is blameless on this point.

 

Which is easy. Man's will is only as free as God allows it to be.

 

Thanks for the conversation. Peace to you

 

Your argument is seriously flawed. There are no Pharisees mentioned in the context of John 6. In fact the last mention of them before John 6 is John 4:1 and the next mention of them is John 7:32. So, your argument that Jesus is talking to the Pharisees in John 6 is simply wrong.

The Archangel

 

Do folks make people hear the gospel at gunpoint? Or do they make a choice to hear it?

 

I'm sure it was a mixed multitude, particularly many unbelieving Jews. That still does not make my point less valid.

 

It was an assumption on my part. Regardless, Christ was speaking to a mixed multitude, particularly unbelieving Jews.

 

Reformed,

I was addressing JonShaff about the Pharisees, not you. I've enjoyed reading your posts.

Blessings in Christ,

The Archangel

 

But, you originally said this:

The entire point you were trying to make in the above post is negated if Jesus isn't talking to the Pharisees specifically. In fact, If Jesus is talking to a mixed group, for Him to say "All that the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never cast out" means precisely what @Reformed and the rest of us says it does. It is a statement of election--a statement about God choosing whom He will.

The Archangel

 

I believe you read into it "election."

 

How is it not there?! Later Jesus Himself will restate His position: No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him. And I will raise him up on the last day. (John 6:44 ESV)

Your idea here:

Assumes your premise without trying to prove it. There is no discussion that those who follow Yahweh were being drawn to Christ. In fact, since Jesus says later "If you have seen me you have seen the Father" indicates you are creating a false dichotomy. If one was rightly worshiping the Father, he or she would worship the Son. If one didn't receive Christ, it demonstrates that they never knew the Father, for if they did, they would welcome the Son.

So, what Jesus is saying here is that the Father chooses to save and the Son is the means of that salvation.

It is not we who are doing violence to the text.

The Archangel