Featured If faith is predestined and cause by God, then answer me this.....

No that's what I think. But why is that causing an issue of God causing the faith? I don't understand your hangup.

 

No I agree with your definition. I am asking how that is in conflict with God causing/giving/gifting faith 100%? What is the hangup for you on that?

 

This is your hangup. What in the world are you talking about? I don't see your point.

Man is not righteous. God gives him faith and credits that faith as the righteousness that man does not have. In other words, he makes us righteous.

 

Why did you ignore the second part of my post?

 

That's just it, I DO get it. You are the one making things complicated because it doesn't fit your theology. Not to mention your logic is not logical at all.

 

At first, it did to me as well.

Then over the years, I saw that if anything is partly of men, then it's not all of God and all of His grace and mercy.

If it's partly of men, instead of being a gift, it raises the possibility of man being able to take credit away from God for saving him.

I agree that faith, in and of itself, is not meritorious...but if men are saved by faith, instead of through it ( Ephesians 2:8 ), then something one person has in their possession, gives them an "edge" over their fellow man when it comes to gaining God's favor.
God then has to exercise partiality and reward that person for using what He gave them, correctly.
With election, God bypasses the way we do things, and simply does as He wishes with sinful and guilty men.

This results in the person being saved, seeing that they had nothing to do with any of it... and we as believers then fall on our face in genuine gratitude for His gifts.

He gets all the glory.

 

You are contrasting the Mosaic Law with Grace which gifts us faith.

 

Because His word states that He does ( Romans 4 ).

As for why, I imagine it's because He wants it that way.
Think of it like this...

God not only wants His children totally dependent upon Him for everything...
In reality, all men, whether we know it or not, are dependent upon Him for every bit of good that we have as His creation.

That goodness even leads those who refuse to repent, to repentance ( Romans 2:4 ).

No gift of God is "inadequate".
Each and every gift is perfect ( James 1:17 ), and suited for the task at hand.

Paul's gifts were evangelism, preaching and teaching, among others.

They suited him for what God had him do...go around and bring God's elect into little groups, teaching them doctrine, encouraging them in their faith and correcting them when they sinned.
He reminded them of God's great love for His children in the midst of this nasty ( and very temporary ) world that we live in...

To run the race set before them, and to run it well.

 

There is your trouble. You are relying on what "makes more sense to me" that's not how you should go about theology.

 

But that's not what you are doing when you say, "It makes more sense to me...."

If I give you a gift it is now yours. No contradiction there.

 

Amazingly enough, I agree with you in this statement.

There's where we disagree, unfortunately.
Again,
If man can choose, we then go right back to man's salvation being dependent upon what we have done, possessed, "exercised", etc.
One man can now gain an "edge" over his fellows, and procure ( yes, buy ) his escape from God's wrath.

According to the "legal language" of God's word, He is obligated to save those who believe, from the heart ( Romans 10:9-10 ).
He is obligated to save those who have genuine faith ( notice that I differentiate between genuine, and false faith ).

He obligates Himself ( that's what covenants are, God obligating Himself to a set of promises that He is determined to keep and will unfailingly keep ), we cannot force Him to make obligations.



So, if faith is available to all men, and salvation partly a work of men and partly of God, then that takes impartiality off the table....and puts it in the hands of men who will then climb all over each other in a mad dash to "get saved", as I see it.

That's man-made religion at its finest, if you ask me.
Mankind doing all sorts of things to gain His favor.

 

There is a difference between reaching out and taking something that is offered, and going about one's daily life and having it dropped into one's lap.

I believe, in the light of Romans 10:20, that eternal life is such a gift.
Unexpected, unsought ( Romans 3:10-18 ), and totally of God.

To me, that's the only way that it can truly be a gift, instead of being a reward.

Answered above, and I've already gone through this in another thread, if you care to have a look at past ones.

Romans 4:4, Romans 11:5-6.
Where is it declared as anything but being received, passively?

If you don't mind me asking,
Where do you get the idea that accepting a gift is part of the giving?

God's word, or man's way of doing things?