Can You Come to Christ on Your Own

[DaveXR650]

Their testimony is that of simply being purely ignorant
of The Revelation of God to mankind, the Bible,
whether saved in spite of what they "believe",
or lost.

This is the opposite of How God is to be Worshipped.

They would be A.) Infinitely Incorrect, unsound, and in the position of,
of simply being purely ignorant
of The Revelation of God to mankind, the Bible
and if they can't be Taught, potentially of
B). being deceived and lost,
or C.) deceiving others to another Gospel/ a "decision"
without conviction, repentance, or Regeneration, i.e., without GOD.

That being said, it is entirely possible for an unteachable soul to be lost.

That is the best explanation for people
not being able to Spiritually grasp "the things of God",
as plain as, to understand "dead".

Romans 8:14 "For as many as are led by the Spirit of God,
they are the sons of God".

If a preacher, or anyone else "believes" another Gospel, without Conviction of their sins, being Given Repentance and Spiritually Saving Faith from God and REGENERATED, by The New Birth, what do you expect?

That they will be a Bible Expert?

Thanks Alan.

 

[RighteousnessTemperance&]

…
No, "free will to choose Jesus or not" is not given by God.
…

Yes, I understand you don’t hold that position, but that wasn’t the point of the post. Again, the recommendation is to respond to the point of the post.

 

[Alan Gross]

God’s command is to repent

both repent and believe

The Gift of Spiritual Repentance and Spiritual Faith/ Spiritual Belief
are "Twin Doctrines" that take place simultaneously.

The first time I have ever referenced Calvin:
from The Gift of Repentance by Burk Parsons

The Word of God teaches us that
God requires repentance and faith for salvation.

They are two sides of the same coin;
we cannot express true faith without genuine repentance and vice versa.

On this point, John Calvin writes in his Institutes of the Christian Religion:

“Now it ought to be a fact beyond controversy that repentance not only constantly follows faith but is also born of faith” (3.3.1).

"... We who have been justified by God through faith in Christ have been saved, fully and finally, and we have been forgiven completely, just as the apostle Paul writes: “And you, who were dead in your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, God made alive together with him, having forgiven us all our trespasses” (Col. 2:13).

"In meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth;" II Timothy 2:25

 

[RighteousnessTemperance&]

The Gift of Spiritual Repentance and Spiritual Faith/ Spiritual Belief
are "Twin Doctrines" that take place simultaneously.

The first time I have ever referenced Calvin:
from The Gift of Repentance by Burk Parsons

The Word of God teaches us that
God requires repentance and faith for salvation.

They are two sides of the same coin;
we cannot express true faith without genuine repentance and vice versa.

On this point, John Calvin writes in his Institutes of the Christian Religion:

“Now it ought to be a fact beyond controversy that repentance not only constantly follows faith but is also born of faith” (3.3.1).

"... We who have been justified by God through faith in Christ have been saved, fully and finally, and we have been forgiven completely, just as the apostle Paul writes: “And you, who were dead in your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, God made alive together with him, having forgiven us all our trespasses” (Col. 2:13).

"In meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth;" II Timothy 2:25

OK, but the point really being made is that these posts are just speaking past those they are supposedly responding to.

That one in particular is a defense of an omission. The one earlier was critical of an omission. But alas, this point too will likely not be grasped.

 

[RighteousnessTemperance&]

I think you make a good point because the Westminster Confession of Faith say "When God converts a sinner and translates him into a state of grace.... he enables him freely to will and to do that which is spiritually good".

I’m sure I agree with the gist of that. My own point is more akin to boasting of giving oneself existence, life, birth, etc. The notion is ludicrous. There is simply no foundation for it.

If one has been given free will that he may turn to Christ and believe when confronted, there is no boasting in having that, or in so turning and believing. The only good done was and is in the saving work, and that was and is all one-sided, God-done through the Son. It is ludicrous to imagine there is some sort of praise owed the hell-bound sinner, or that he would want any.

We could take it even further. It would make more sense to heap praise on those who betrayed, arrested, mocked, spat on, crowned, beat, scourged, cursed, crucified Jesus. But no believer would ever consider such a thing any more than they would praise the devil.

A self-praising believer is an oxymoron.

 

[AustinC]

This is what happens when I did what you asked and expressed 1 simple direct theological truth.

You made an assertion that you cannot show to be Biblical truth. Your statement left grace and God out of the picture. What "theological truth" you feel you stated is in question.

You went on the attack using verses that said what I had said, supposedly as rebuttal and then demanded that I defend my misinterpretation of verses that I had not even mentioned. This is just unreal.

Are you sure you understand theology? The scripture I shared does not state what you asserted.

Your ranting on "man being the cause agent" simply shows your bizarre tendency to elevate the order of salvation to primary status.

You consider God being the cause of your salvation bizzare?
I elevate God as the sole Savior without man doing anything to save himself.

I said nothing but that you come by faith.

You should re-read your post then.

You cannot ever think about anything but this higher understanding that you think you have.

It's not a "higher understanding." It's what God teaches. Do you not see this in the Bible?

Would you have corrected Paul when he answered the Philippian jailer.

No. The jailer was already made alive when he asked the question. His heart was broken and he was brought to repentance. He wanted to know what he must do. Paul tells him. Believe. That's the effect of God's gracious salvation. Rebels don't ask the question DaveX.

My original quote, in which I indicated that the second choice - the the Holy Spirit enlightened them... and so on. So from that you go on this rant about man being the cause.

Re-read your original comment that I quoted.
DaveX, thank you for finally being honest with us. At least we now all know your actual theological position. When you bring up Calvinism, we'll know you are a "semi-Calvinist, semi-Arminian, semi-Pelagian.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

I own it. Sorry. I guess it's only OK when you think it's funny.
A lot of Baptists who like the 1689 Confession also like Fuller. I'm not that familiar with him myself. The first time I heard of him was while reading Martyn Lloyd Jones. You seem to have something against Fuller. If so share it, now that I seem to have permission to bring in other references again.

Ahh, Martin is a fellow Welshman, my great grandmother ( a Welsh Calvinist Methodist) loved the guy!

Regarding Fuller, he is reported to have attempted to discredit Gill and his followers by calling them Hyper Calvinists blah blah blah. There is a lot more that was two faced about the guy but…as we say in NJ forget about it!

 

[DaveXR650]

Ahh, Martin is a fellow Welshman, my great grandmother ( a Welsh Calvinist Methodist) loved the guy!

You mean to tell me, after all these posts you made knocking my indefinite, all over the place theology, that you are a fan of Martyn Lloyd Jones and you know what a Welsh Calvinist Methodist is? This is truly astounding.

 

[DaveXR650]

Re-read your original comment that I quoted.
DaveX, thank you for finally being honest with us. At least we now all know your actual theological position. When you bring up Calvinism, we'll know you are a "semi-Calvinist, semi-Arminian, semi-Pelagian.

This is why what you are doing is so mistaken. Of course you can't be all the above at the same time. But all the above can be saved if they come to Christ by faith, or:

When it comes to Calvinism the centerpiece of my theology is that salvation is by faith in Christ.

Which is my original quote. People have even said it's by faith alone.
There is a lot of disagreement over whether regeneration comes before faith, exactly how free and autonomous the will is, whether a man has the ability to at least call on God for salvation, how much and what exactly is the work of the Holy Spirit in this, but at a point the person will believe in Christ. I assert that the Bible, while being very clear about faith, is not always clear, but contains enough verses that can be taken one way or another that good, honest, intelligent people can come to different conclusions in those other specific areas.

My question to you is: Are you capable of commenting on what I just said, or are you going to keep pretending that you are some kind of guardian of orthodoxy, who alone, has an understanding of scripture?

 

[JD731]

How many different ways of Duty Faith/ Easy "Believism"/ Decisionism do you have, altogether?

A dead soul just "gives their consent" to something, without acknowledgement of their sin, by CONVICTION of the Word of God, being Granted REPENTANCE from their sin debt against God, or Regenerated by the Holy Spirit?

How do you think you "came to be a Christian?" Can you share a testimony of salvation?

You seem to have a difficult time of processing information. Here is some very interesting facts relative to the information I posted about justification by faith. God the Father justified every Israelite who believed that Jesus was the Christ, the Son of God, during his earthly ministry. No one believed that he would die and be buried and rise again from the dead, not even his closest disciples who had preached with him since the days of John the Baptist. The Father was the agent of drawing the Israelites to Jesus through the OT prophets because it was his word they had written.

Jn 6:44 No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day.
45 It is written in the prophets, And they shall be all taught of God. Every man therefore that hath heard (the prophets), and hath learned of the Father (in the writings of the prophets), cometh unto me.

Now, here is an AMAZING truth that is breathtaking. The DRAWING of the Father ended when Jesus was crucified. There is no instance in the scriptures where God drew anyone to Jesus after the cross and resurrection like he did during his earthly ministry to Israel. The great apostle Paul wrote 13 epistles to the gentiles telling us about God's willingness to save us from our sins, and get this, he never one time in all those epistles used the word "draw." How can this be a foundational doctrine of salvation and not even be used during the time of the gospel preachers?

At some point there has to be some logic and thinking and reasoning, and finally some faith to believe that what God had his men to write actually makes sense.

Finally, I came to be a Christian in the exact same way all sinners come to Christ for salvation. I believed the record that God the Father gave of his Son, and his promise to save all who will come in repentance and faith in what our Lord Jesus Christ did for us by dying as the substitute for all men. This may not be what you believe, but it is what God says. He said "whosoever will, let his come," and I came to God through Jesus Christ when I was 14 years old. Praise God for his wonderful salvation.

The reason God does not draw men through the OT prophets during this age is because this age is a "mystery," meaning it was not written about in the OT. What we have now is "the mystery of the faith." His apostles were made stewards of this mystery age while he is away. Take a look at these verses as a primer for reason.

Mt 13:9 Who hath ears to hear, let him hear.
10 And the disciples came, and said unto him, Why speakest thou unto them in parables?
11 He answered and said unto them, Because it is given unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given.
12 For whosoever hath, to him shall be given, and he shall have more abundance: but whosoever hath not, from him shall be taken away even that he hath.
13 Therefore speak I to them in parables: because they seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand.
14 And in them is fulfilled the prophecy of Esaias, which saith, By hearing ye shall hear, and shall not understand; and seeing ye shall see, and shall not perceive:
15 For this people’s heart is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes they have closed; lest at any time they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and should understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them.
16 But blessed are your eyes, for they see: and your ears, for they hear.

1Co 4:1 Let a man so account of us, as of the ministers of Christ, and stewards of the mysteries of God.
2 Moreover it is required in stewards, that a man be found faithful.

1Co 13:2 And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries, and all knowledge; and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not charity, I am nothing.

1Ti 3:9 Holding the mystery of the faith in a pure conscience.

1Ti 3:16 And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.

You cannot fathom how deceived you are by your teachers. All sinners have a command from God to repent and believe the gospel and be saved. They must obey the gospel by believing it to be saved. That is just the truth.

 

[AustinC]

Now, here is an AMAZING truth that is breathtaking. The DRAWING of the Father ended when Jesus was crucified. There is no instance in the scriptures where God drew anyone to Jesus after the cross and resurrection like he did during his earthly ministry to Israel.

*Acts 2:37-39*
Now when they heard this they were cut to the heart, and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, “Brothers, what shall we do?” And Peter said to them, “Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. For the promise is for you and for your children and for all who are far off, everyone whom the Lord our God calls to himself.”

*Acts 13:48*
And when the Gentiles heard this, they began rejoicing and glorifying the word of the Lord, and as many as were appointed to eternal life believed.

 

[AustinC]

This is why what you are doing is so mistaken. Of course you can't be all the above at the same time. But all the above can be saved if they come to Christ by faith, or:

DaveX, the unsaved do not have faith. The unsaved hide in the presence of the lamb and cry out for rocks to fall on them. (Revelation 6).
Since they don't have faith, they don't come to God. God must drag them to himself, like a person drags a bucket of water up from a well.

Which is my original quote. People have even said it's by faith alone.

The Bible tells us we are justified by faith. Justification is after Salvation. Dead men don't have faith.

There is a lot of disagreement over whether regeneration comes before faith, exactly how free and autonomous the will is, whether a man has the ability to at least call on God for salvation, how much and what exactly is the work of the Holy Spirit in this, but at a point the person will believe in Christ.

This is purely because men desire to claim power and don't like the idea that God can save without their assistance.

I assert that the Bible, while being very clear about faith, is not always clear, but contains enough verses that can be taken one way or another that good, honest, intelligent people can come to different conclusions in those other specific areas.

I don't agree. The Bible is clear. Humans love to rule, therefore we look for ways to climb to the top of the tower to be with God. But, no matter how high we attempt to lift our position...God always descends.

My question to you is: Are you capable of commenting on what I just said, or are you going to keep pretending that you are some kind of guardian of orthodoxy, who alone, has an understanding of scripture?

I just did. What I note is that you have abandoned addressing scripture and have never actually spoken to the scripture that has been shared with you.
Clearly I have offended your ego.

 

[Alan Gross]

There is no instance in the scriptures where God drew anyone to Jesus after the cross and resurrection like he did during his earthly ministry to Israel.

The drawing in Salvation is from Eternity Past until all are Saved.

"The LORD hath appeared of old unto me, saying,
Yea, I have loved thee with an everlasting love:
therefore with lovingkindness have I drawn thee." Jeremiah 31:3

Romans 8:30 "Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called:"

 

[Alan Gross]

Finally, I came to be a Christian in the exact same way all sinners come to Christ for salvation. I believed the record that God the Father gave of his Son, and his promise to save all who will come in repentance and faith in what our Lord Jesus Christ did for us by dying as the substitute for all men. This may not be what you believe, but it is what God says. He said "whosoever will, let his come," and I came to God through Jesus Christ when I was 14 years old. Praise God for his wonderful salvation.

All sinners have a command from God to repent and believe the gospel and be saved.

Thank you, for sharing your testimony.

 

[DaveXR650]

DaveX, the unsaved do not have faith. The unsaved hide in the presence of the lamb and cry out for rocks to fall on them. (Revelation 6).
Since they don't have faith, they don't come to God. God must drag them to himself, like a person drags a bucket of water up from a well.

What is that? Don't do that. I know you feel this need to try to find something I have said that is wrong but that has nothing to do with anything. The term "Coming to Christ, or Closing with Christ is a common way of describing faith.

When it comes to Calvinism the centerpiece of my theology is that salvation is by faith in Christ.

Philippians chapter 3 describes how Paul has come to discover "the righteousness of God that depends on faith". That chapter shows how Paul considers faith to be of utmost importance in justification, as you mentioned, and in salvation, which encompasses a whole life lived for Christ. But even the life lived for Christ - the sanctification, service for Christ, the striving for holiness, is all done by faith. That's why I said faith was so central in this. Read the whole chapter. See if you don't agree.
Justification coming after salvation - I'm not sure what you are getting at.

I don't agree. The Bible is clear. Humans love to rule, therefore we look for ways to climb to the top of the tower to be with God. But, no matter how high we attempt to lift our position...God always descends.

That's fine. And I agree that it is a danger for those who think they came to faith based on their natural free will. I'm not sure it always is that way though. I do know there is also a tendency for Calvinists to have a pride in being "elect" and to display an arrogance in theology that is equally dangerous. We all have to be careful.

I just did. What I note is that you have abandoned addressing scripture and have never actually spoken to the scripture that has been shared with you.
Clearly I have offended your ego.

You did. That's more like it. You indeed are offensive but not so much to my ego. If you made me look bad it would offend my ego but since your reasoning is so cringeworthy that didn't happen. So I appreciate the concern, but I'll be OK.

 

[DaveXR650]

Finally, I came to be a Christian in the exact same way all sinners come to Christ for salvation. I believed the record that God the Father gave of his Son, and his promise to save all who will come in repentance and faith in what our Lord Jesus Christ did for us by dying as the substitute for all men. This may not be what you believe, but it is what God says. He said "whosoever will, let his come," and I came to God through Jesus Christ when I was 14 years old. Praise God for his wonderful salvation.

I think I can say that everyone would say "Amen" to that.

 

[Alan Gross]

Some quick notes from pg. 375
http://www.ntslibrary.com/PDF Books II/Simmons - A Systematic Study of Bible Doctrine.pdf

II. THE LOGICAL ORDER OF QUICKENING AND CONVERSION

As stated above, quickening and conversion seem to be the divine and human sides of regeneration or the new birth. It is our purpose at this time, therefore to consider the question as to which is logically first, the divine side or the human side, in regeneration. To propose this question is to answer it for all that are capable of logical thinking. The divine side is most certainly logically prior to the human side. In consideration of this position let us note:

1. PROOF STATED (1) Conversion Involves Turning From Sin, and Man By Nature Is Unable To Do This.

Man by nature is able to reform his life to some extent. He can turn from some forms of sin. But he is unable by nature to change the governing disposition of his nature. This is proved by Jer. 13: 23, which reads: "Can the Ethiopian change his skin, or the leopard his spots? Then may ye also do good that are accustomed to do evil." The sinner is accustomed to do evil. Therefore it is impossible for him to turn from evil (or sin) until his governing disposition is changed. This is just as impossible as it is for the blackest Negro to make himself white, or the leopard to divest himself of his spotted robe.

(2) Conversion is Pleasing to God, and the Natural Man Cannot Please God. No one can doubt the first part of the above statement. The last part is proved by Rom. 8:8, which says: "They that are in the flesh cannot please God." This includes all to whom God has not given a new nature.

(3) Conversion is a Good Thing, and no Good Thing Can Proceed from the Natural Heart. Paul said that there was no good thing in his fleshly nature (Rom. 7:18). This is the only nature man has until God gives him a new one. And since no good can come out of that in which no good exists, conversion cannot proceed from the fleshly nature. Therefore the giving of the new nature, or quickening, must come before conversion. To affirm otherwise is to deny total depravity, which means that sin has permeated every part of man's being and poisoned every faculty, leaving no good thing in the natural man.

(4) Conversion Involves Subjecting Oneself to the Will or Law of God, and This is Impossible to the Natural Man. That such is impossible to the natural man is established by Rom. 8:7, in which we read: "The mind of the flesh is enmity against God; for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be."

(5) Conversion Involves Receiving Christ as One's Personal Saviour, which is a Spiritual Thing, and the Natural Man Cannot Receive Spiritual Things. This latter truth is declared in 1 Cor. 2:14, as follows: "The natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him; and he cannot know them, because they are spiritually judged." If the truth of Christ's saving power through faith is not a thing of the Spirit of God, that is, a thing which man can understand only through the revelation of the Spirit then what truth is a thing of the Spirit of God?

(6) Conversion is a Spiritual Resurrection, and in a Resurrection, the Impartation of Life Must Always Precede the Manifestation of Life in Coming Forth. Conversion is represented as a spiritual resurrection in Eph. 2:4-6, which says: "God, who is rich in mercy, for his great love wherewith he loved us, even when we were dead in sin, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved); and hath raised us up together and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus." The raising up here represents conversion. So the question we are considering is as to which is first, the quickening or the raising up. There can be no reasonable doubt that the quickening is first in a logical sense.

Directly per the OP:

(7) Conversion Involves Coming to Christ, and the Act of the Father in Giving Men to Christ Precedes Their Coming to Christ.

In John 6:37 we read as follows: "All that the Father giveth me shall come unto me."

This passage certainly places the Father's act of giving men to Christ logically prior to their coming to Christ.

This act of the Father is a discriminative, effective act, for all that are given come and all men do not come.

Thus this act of giving could not allude to the mere giving of the opportunity of coming to Christ nor could it allude to so-called "gracious ability which is supposed by its advocates to be bestowed upon all men.

This act can refer to nothing short of the actual giving of men over into the immediate possession of Christ by quickening them into life.

Men come to Christ in conversion.

Thus quickening must precede conversion.

(8) Conversion Involves Coming to Christ, and no Man Can Come to Christ Except God Give Him the Ability to do so. In John 6:65 we read: "No man can come unto me, except it be given unto him of my Father." This passage, as the one just noticed, does not refer to the mere giving of the opportunity to come to Christ, nor to the impartation of so-called "gracious ability" for the same reasons stated above in comment on John 6:37.

This latter passage, like the former one, refers to a discrimative act. The context makes this clear in the case of John 6:65. The words of this passage were spoken in view of and as an explanation of the fact that some believe not. Neither of these latter passages can refer to any kind of mere assistance that God might be supposed to bestow on the natural man, for repentance and faith cannot proceed from the natural heart, as we have shown. Both passages can refer to nothing short of the quickening power of God, in which men are enabled to come to Christ."

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

You mean to tell me, after all these posts you made knocking my indefinite, all over the place theology, that you are a fan of Martyn Lloyd Jones and you know what a Welsh Calvinist Methodist is? This is truly astounding.

So Dave, Im astonished that you are astonished … that just verified my read on you

 

[DaveXR650]

So Dave, Im astonished that you are astonished … that just verified my read on you

You didn't get what I was talking about at all, did you. You posted this earlier:

What would you call them then? Perhaps Arminians!

oh I have it, Cal-Minian, a coined term that attempts to depict a theological ground half-way between Calvinism and Arminianism! Personally, It’s a very shrewd posture to take if you want to capture more people for your new religious agenda.

Martyn Lloyd Jones called himself a Welsh Calvinistic Methodist. He said that Calvinism, without a dose of Methodism, becomes dry and intellectual. He spent a lot of time praising Wesley and Richard Baxter in his writing and preaching. He spoke a lot on the conflict between Wesley and Whitfield and how much they both helped spread the gospel and how much they respected each other. Lloyd-Jones was the successor to G. Campbell Morgan who was a card carrying Arminian, and who helped get Martyn the position at Westminster.

And then you come on my thread, trolling, and start insulting me and acting like it's some kind of heresy to, if not be open minded, at least try to listen to other people's opinions; and then YOU are going to bring in Martyn Lloyd-Jones?

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

You didn't get what I was talking about at all, did you. You posted this earlier:


Martyn Lloyd Jones called himself a Welsh Calvinistic Methodist. He said that Calvinism, without a dose of Methodism, becomes dry and intellectual. He spent a lot of time praising Wesley and Richard Baxter in his writing and preaching. He spoke a lot on the conflict between Wesley and Whitfield and how much they both helped spread the gospel and how much they respected each other. Lloyd-Jones was the successor to G. Campbell Morgan who was a card carrying Arminian, and who helped get Martyn the position at Westminster.

And then you come on my thread, trolling, and start insulting me and acting like it's some kind of heresy to, if not be open minded, at least try to listen to other people's opinions; and then YOU are going to bring in Martyn Lloyd-Jones?

Did I say I liked him… no I didn’t! I said a great grandmother liked him, probably because he is of her Welsh people. So what? Are you miffed at that, tough! I couldn’t care less.

just answer me one question, do you believe that Jesus was an idealist? Yes or no is sufficient.