Featured Biblical Assertion

No. The point I am making is that if you believe that the Holy Spirit convicts or in some way "helps" a person to be saved and without such help the person would not get saved - then the question is why didn't the Holy Spirit provide enough help to actually result in the salvation of the person. Why wasn't the work of the Holy Spirit effectual or overcoming. So suddenly, the WCF doesn't look quite as illogical, does it?

 

@Van . I really don't have a problem with your position. The idea that all men are given some light, enough to decide they need to obey God and believe the gospel, is what I grew up with. The Holy Spirit draws and convicts where and when he wants and we can see the results. I think the only difference is that I put more emphasis on how forceful God draws and I have a lower view of our free will. I tend to think the conviction or drawing is decisive, not just helpful.

I mean, how do you resolve the idea that men have enough light to choose life, yet to be saved they were drawn by the Father? All men who hear the gospel don't believe it. Why? Is it a difference in their virtue or goodness? Or was the drawing of the Holy Spirit different in some than others? If I pray that some be saved, what am I asking God to do if it is really up to the person?

 

I am of the point of view the sanctification work of the Holy Spirit precedes if one is or is not going to believe.

 

[/QUOTE]No, but you have your own to work out. If God "helps" or convicts, why doesn't he help enough to effect salvation in everyone he helps? Why does he stop short sometimes?[/QUOTE]
God does help enough for all to be able to trust in Him. If He did as you suggest then it would no longer be help but causation. That is why God does leave the choice to us, God does not force us to trust in Him. When I pray for God to open someone's heart or ears I am not expecting that He will force them to repent. Were that the case then everyone would be saved as all we would have to do is pray that God save everyone and He would do as we told Him to do. But that is not what the bible tells us is it. We must have faith, we must believe.

[/QUOTE]is it fair the way some hear the gospel 100 times a year and some never hear it?

 

Then you are a Calvinist. Which is fine.

 

". . . God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth: . . ." Per John 17:17, ". . . Sanctify them through thy truth: . . ."

 

But that's the whole crux of the matter. Isn't it. Help, when it makes something possible that would not have been possible without it, is causation. If I help a toddler get to the top of the steps, when he's at the age where he could not have made it on his own, then in a sense I did cause him to get up the steps. That's why you have strong language in the WCF in the section on irresistible grace. If by help, you mean like if I see you picking up groceries you dropped and I stop and help you, but you would have done it anyway, then that is not essential help and it is not causative. You guys that say the work of the Holy Spirit is necessary for salvation have to decide which type of help you mean. The fact is, it either is essential, or causative, or not truly necessary. I'm just trying to show you that the Calvinistic system, while man made and not perfect, is indeed well done, and logically no worse than any other system.

 

That's a well thought out answer. You just made a statement that is at the core of Calvinistic theology. And that is your answer?

 

Revelation 22:17 And let him that is athirst come.

John 7:37 If any man thirst, let him come unto me, and drink.

 

There is a sense in the order of salvation that the first thing that happens time wise, is that those who are going to be saved, the elect, are chosen, or separated out. Thus Owen said that the first thing that happens is "sanctification", which is a separating out for a holy purpose. It's used a little different there than when referring to our personal sanctification that is a process occurring after salvation. So it can be confusing.

 

Ken those are not command. Notice what is being said "let him that is athirst" "If any man thirst, let him come" Those are invitations.

 

But not all who were sanctified believe, Hebrews 10:29, ". . . Of how much sorer punishment, . . . shall he be thought worthy who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace? . . .

 

I see that you are still conditioning salvation based on the sinner and not on Christ alone.

Apparently, your idea of God remains basically Him pleading like a helpless human - "Please come. Won't you please come? Pretty please, won't you come? Pretty, pretty please with a cherry on top?"

I enjoyed studying Greek mythology in school, but I sure don't think of the God of the Bible, the Creator of the universe, as basically like Zeus.

 

There are reams of good stuff written on that passage. Some say it means you can lose your salvation. Some say it's a dire warning to keep you on the right path and is actually something that won't happen so it's hypothetical. Owen was talking about an order of salvation where God is sovereign and logically the first thing would be a decree to save some. Separating out for a holy purpose is one definition of sanctification so he used the term. If you wish to reject that that is perfectly OK. He was just a man.

 

Help that makes something possible is not causation. The person still has to avail themselves of the offered help. We are not toddlers we are thinking individuals who have the capacity to make logical choices. Help offered via conviction of sin does cause the person to repent but it can give them the motivation to do so. Logically if conviction caused a person to repent then all would repent and trust God. But practically all are convicted but all do not repent.
John 16:8 And when He has come, He will convict the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment:

Now as to your "irresistible grace" we have two options,
1] The HS is not sovereign as we know that all do not come to repentance
or
2] God is disingenuous when He say that He desires all to come to repentance.

Via your "irresistible grace" we have God forcing people to repent as they have no option. You can't say well they would have repented anyway, but how can you know that.
The Gospel call in Calvinism is not a well meant or sincere offer. Only those that are included in the Unconditional Election will partake of the Limited Atonement and will be drawn to God by His Irresistible Grace. So all men do not have an equal chance to know or trust in God.

The Calvinist system is man-made and is logically flawed. Augustine was influenced by Manichaeism, a Gnostic deterministic philosophy. He brought those ideas into the church and Calvin and the reformers just carried them on.

 

Perhaps you should have spend more time in the study of English. Salvation is all of God man can not save himself. But He only saves those that trust in His son. Your determinism cannot provide a logical reason why Christ had to go to the cross. You can't say it was the means of salvation as your determinism has people chosen before the foundation of the world. You even have to be given faith so once again why the cross, it serves not purpose in your theology.