Featured Can You Come to Christ on Your Own Part II

No you can’t!

 

We give the Lord all the glory further knowing that “that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth; It was said unto her, The elder shall serve the younger. As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated. What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid. For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion. So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy,” Rom. 9:11-16.

 

In the original thread the starting question involved whether fallen man can believe the gospel without any internal work of grace. In 220 replies I don't know that anyone took the position that you can so I don't know where you can really go with this. It seems like a decree of election would be an external work of grace since it occurred before any of us were born.

If anyone knows much about this, I would be interested in what the WCF means in Chapter 10 part 4 where it says that "they may be called by the ministry of the Word, and have some common operations of the Spirit, yet they never truly come to Christ, and therefore cannot be saved."

It seems difficult to imagine that the Holy Spirit would actually work on a person internally, and then just stop short of bringing them to salvation. My quick answer would be that they resisted such grace, or loved their sin too much to consider leaving it but that would be resisting the grace. This is a Calvinist document so this still has to be at a sovereign level of operation. I understand people being passed over as far as election. We know that many people never hear the gospel even. But this looks like a true work of the Holy Spirit on someone who is totally dependent on such work for salvation, and then a decision to stop short. I have never seen an explanation of that offered.

 

Dave you answered your own question but you, for some reason, will just not accept the answer. The person used their God given free will to resist the offer of salvation. The bible tells us that the Holy Spirit convicts the world and that God desires all come to repentance and we know that faith comes by hearing but nowhere are we told that God forces someone to trust in Him.

The Holy Spirit is not the one stopping short it is the person that rejects the offered gift.

In the context of salvation, the concept of free will in the Bible means that individuals have the ability to choose whether to accept or reject God's offer of salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. This choice is not predetermined by God or any external force, but rather it is up to each person to decide.

The Bible affirms the existence of human free will in various passages, such as in Deuteronomy 30:19, where God tells the Israelites: "I have set before you life and death, blessing and curse. Therefore choose life, that you and your offspring may live." God gives the Israelites a choice, and encourages them to make the right one.

We see this again in John 3:16, it says: "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life." This verse presents salvation as a gift from God that is available to all who believe in Jesus. It implies that people have the free will to accept or reject this gift, and that the consequences of their choice are significant - eternal life or eternal death.

Similarly, in Joshua 24:15, it says: "Choose this day whom you will serve...but as for me and my house, we will serve the Lord." which emphasizes the importance of making a conscious choice to serve God, rather than simply following a predetermined path.

However, it is important to note that while the Bible affirms the existence of free will in the context of salvation, it also acknowledges the role of God's grace in the process. In Ephesians 2:8-9, it says: "For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast." So although individuals have the free will to accept or reject salvation, it is ultimately God's grace that makes it possible. Man can not save himself.

So what we can conclude is that the Bible presents salvation as a complex and dynamic process that involves both individual choice and divine grace. While individuals have the free will to accept or reject God's offer of salvation, one is only saved by the grace of God.

 

That's what I'm wondering. My question was meant more to be in line with whether anyone knows how that fits within the parameters of the Westminster Confession of Faith. The Puritan preachers who wrote the WCF didn't seem to have a problem warning people not to resist the workings of the Holy Spirit in your life. They seemed to be of the opinion that the Holy Spirit was operating in real time with individual people in individual ways, and that it was truly possible to mess this up.

I don't see any evidence that they taught though that you were equally free to initiate coming to Christ. Which is why they took the drawing of the Holy Spirit so seriously. They seemed to think that this was evidence of "calling" and should be viewed with utmost seriousness. Other than that point, what you said above makes sense to me.

 

How many offered gifts are known by people in communist, Islamic, and other totalitarian States?

How then shall they hear?

If God wills that everyone comes to Jesus, but the gospel is never preached, do people blindly reject what they have never known?

If salvation is all about "free-will" choosing and people don't even know their choices, can they be accused of rejecting Jesus as the reason they are not saved?

 

Rom 1:18 The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness.
Rom 1:19 For what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them.
Rom 1:20 For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood from His workmanship, so that men are without excuse.

Man does not have an excuse for not knowing God. But by the same token man can know God and trust in Him.

Austin for someone that keeps going on about the sovereignty of God you sure do not seem to think He can accomplish what He wants to do. Do you not trust Him enough to believe He can reach those that actually trust in Him? He is God after all.

 

Yep, they can see a Creator exists, but they cannot know Christ.

*Romans 10:14,17*
How then will they call on him in whom they have not believed? And how are they to believe in him of whom they have never heard?

And how are they to hear without someone preaching? So faith comes from hearing, and hearing through the word of Christ.

Sliverhair, you need to read the whole word of God and believe it. The very text you quoted tells you that people never believe by observing nature.

*Romans 1 : 18,21-28*
For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth.

For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened. Claiming to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man and birds and animals and creeping things. Therefore God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, to the dishonoring of their bodies among themselves, because they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever! Amen. For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature; and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error. And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a debased mind to do what ought not to be done.

So tell me, if God wills that everyone comes to Jesus, but the gospel is never preached, do people blindly reject what they have never known?

If salvation is all about "free-will" choosing and people don't even know their choices, can they be accused of rejecting Jesus as the reason they are not saved?

 

I agree. I don't think that passage is intended to suggest that someone could come to Christ just by observing nature. You have to have revealed truth in the form of the written or spoken word and you have it revealed to your heart by the Holy Spirit.

 

The first part is true for sure. I don't know about the second part. Even verses like Joshua 24:15, would it be a stretch to say that Joshua was under tremendous influence of the Holy Spirit when he said that? I don't think that's a free will supporting verse at all. The other question I have for you or anyone with a strong desire to defend free will or free agency would be this. As a Christian, I imagine you pray, like I do that God would help you grow in grace, improve in avoiding sin, increase in love toward God and fellow men. Are you not praying that God would manipulate and change your will for the better? You might say that it is still you choosing to pray that but really, you either had to be already given some kind of grace and inclination to pray that or you would not have done so. And if you didn't need God's grace and wisdom to pray that then why don't you just go ahead on your own and improve yourself in those areas without bothering God. Is there a reason it is offensive for God to have over ridden your will so you could be saved - yet as a saved person you pray as I do - to have our wills overridden by God?

 

As I said Austin, for one that continues to preach the sovereignty of God you do not seem to think He is actually sovereign. Do you think He is restricted to what is written in the bible or do you really believe He is sovereign. You do realize that He is aware that not all will hear the gospel message when He says He desires all to come to repentance? And why would the Holy Spirit even bother convicting the whole world of their sin if it were not possible for them to trust in the God of creation? You have way to limited view of the sovereignty of God.
The approach you come to the bible with actually makes God disingenuous and untrustworthy.

 

Dave when I read what you say it seems to me that you think that man is so disabled that he has no ability to think on his own. You do remember that we are made in the image of God and have the God give capacity to make real choices. If we do not have that ability then God would be unjust to judge us for things He caused us to do or not do. You do seem to forget that as a Christian we are to humble ourselves before God and would that not include us asking for His strength and guidance, I think it does. On the flip side of what you said, does that mean that if someone does not ask for God's help for them to grow in grace, improve in avoiding sin, increase in love toward God and fellow men that God does not want them to do that? If so why not? I am not denying the grace of God in my life but the way you are presenting your argument is just a red herring. Which is a tactic that I see a number of Calvinists use to try and support their view.

That as I see it is the major problem with the Calvinist view, you do not think you have any responsibility to do anything. If you praise God or if you sin it is because God caused it for some reason that only He knows. It starts with your salvation as you did not trust in Christ Jesus, God gave you faith after you were saved. Bottom line is that for the Calvinist it is not the death and resurrection of Christ that you are trusting in but rather your election before the foundation of the world. Dave I do not want to sound harsh but this seems to be a continuing line of thinking that I see coming from Calvinists.

 

That part of the WCF does seem to align far more with free-will faith than with the I of TULIP.

I don't see anywhere that one initiates his own "coming to Christ." It isn’t possible. Christ came to us, first from heaven, then back from the grave. Next (by those sent) through preaching, including the written word, where the Holy Spirit actively works to bring us to Christ. Without that, one wouldn’t even know to come to Christ.

 

You can't say that when I am becoming known as "Mr. Duty Faith". There are two other threads discussing this at present. But there IS a branch of Calvinism that believes exactly what you said. And you are correct to call it out.

I see that a lot. It is something to watch out for if you adhere to the Calvinist system. But then again, there are hyper-Calvinists even, who I know do not do that. Just like there really are free will believers who do not boast in their good sense and wisdom in coming to Christ. But that is a possibility for them also. "Total depravity" means we can mess up everything and we all do it somewhere - no exceptions.

 

Total depravity is illustrated in a piece of paper that has a stain on it and when it's put in the copy machine, the same stain is on the copy. Copy the copy and the stain of the original still remains.
We are corrupted. We cannot remove the stain except by dipping the paper into the blood of the Lamb.

 

Define Hyper- Calvinism.

 

Many times I find that when I ask someone to define Hyper Calvinism I get the answer that they follow The 5 Points of Tulip (Calvinism). First, Baptists do not subscribe to Calvin ie Presbyterian theology. Next they tent to suggest that the 5 points Commonly called Doctrines of Grace will dull one’s passion for sharing the gospel. This view is mistaken in both its understanding of Calvinism & evangelism.

 

"Total depravity" is a theological concept within Calvinism that has morphed into the idea of total inability. While man is a sinner born with a tendency to sin he still has the ability to make rational choices and is expected to do so.

We have to deal with the consequences of the sin of Adam & Eve and man does everyday. Whether physical, sickness and death or spiritual, separation from God. So while we do, as you say, copy the sinful nature that we inherited from our first parents that has not taken away our free will.

Because of our sinful nature we have a tendency to choose evil over good. Even with that we still have the ability to choose the good as we see in Deuteronomy 30:19 “...Now choose life, so that you and your children may live.” or again in Joshua 24:15 “But if serving the Lord seems undesirable to you, then choose for yourselves this day whom you will serve...”. We see this same expectation to make real choices in the NT in Matthew 23:37 “Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you who kill the prophets and stone those sent to you, how often I have longed to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, and you were not willing.”

These verses suggest that humanity has the ability to choose between good and evil, and that our choices have consequences, even after the fall. So while as you said we copy the sinful nature that does not negate the ability to exercise our God given free will.

So man can choose as you say to remove the stain by dipping the paper into the blood of the Lamb.

 

My first answer is "anyone more Calvinistic than me", but in all seriousness it would be those who believe that justification of the elect takes place either before the start of time in the mind of God, or at the time of Christ's death on the cross. Those who are the elect realize this at the appropriate time in their own lives and exercise God given faith and repentance at that time. The word is often used as an insult but I don't mean it that way. @KenH , I think it was, had posted an article by a self labeled hyper-Calvinist defending the theology. I have noticed that a lot of Primitive Baptists are offended at the term hyper-Calvinist because of the "Calvinist" more so than the "hyper".

A 5 point Calvinist can be either for or against the "free offer" of the gospel. A 5 point Calvinist who is solid on the "L" limited atonement is often called a "high" Calvinist. Within that group you have various interpretations of how the atonement applies, whether regeneration has to come before faith, and whether faith is a duty. Those who hedge on the application of the atonement and believe in the "free offer" are sometimes called "moderate" Calvinists but here you have to be careful.

Many Baptists call a "4 point" Calvinist a moderate Calvinist but most 5 point Calvinists do not believe you are a Calvinist at all if you don't believe in a limited atonement and they do not even accept 4 point as a legitimate coherent system to argue with.