Receiving a gift is not also part of the giving

Luke 13:24
“Strive to enter through the narrow door; for many, I tell you, will seek to enter and will not be able." - Jesus

“Grace is not opposed to effort, it is opposed to earning. Earning is an attitude. Effort is an action.” - Dallas Willard

 

Talk about mischaracterization!

Even the worldly psychology teaches a dramatic change in a person does not occur prior to a change in the basic core valued systematic holdings of a person.

The ONLY one that can effect such a spiritual change that a person “confesses salvation” (unto, of, about, to, ...) is the work of the Holy Spirit using the Word.

There is no belief first, no confess first, no receive first.

Anyone who places that humankind must DO prior to God first doing, has made the work of God based upon human effort.

God first loved humankind then respond.
God first gave so humankind could then be saved.
God first uses the Holy Spirit to convict of sin, righteousness, and judgment then humankind respond.
God first prepares the offering humans respond.
There is not a time in the whole of the Scripture in which God was second in line of authority and not the final authority.

God is first the author and the finisher of what?

Is it not “our FAITH?”

Who then can claim some human effort of what they might generate and think as faith in comparison to that authored, originated, founder of delivered by God.

Does not the OP call into question the reliability of Hebrews 12:2?

Author- the originator, the founder, the Prince, the leader
Finisher- the profector, the completer, the sole owner.

2fixing our eyes on Jesus, the author and perfecter of faith, who for the joy set before Him endured the cross, despising the shame, and has sat down at the right hand of the throne of God.​

Hebrews 12:2

 

Since Calvinism made its way back into the SBC.

 

As the other poster’s words were actually quoted on the other thread, you are providing a mischaracterization of what he wrote.

Basically, his view as stated was BEFORE God did anything at all, the individual heathen FIRST had to ...

No mischaracterization. By me, but of what was posted in the Op certainly was.

Is it permissible to lift the direct quote of that person and place it in this thread for the respondents?

 

Actually, I responded to your OP.

I showed that the OP did not accurately report the issue from the other thread, and related to that is the assumption of incorrect thinking.

Now about your question, frankly at this point it is not an issue, for before that can be addressed, the issue raised in the other thread and what I pointed out in the few posts in this thread must be resolved.

Should I or you had actually (or been permitted for I don’t know the rules) to quote from one thread to another, then you and I can actually look at what was posted.

I really am puzzled that this post made by that person is not a huge red flare illuminating the sky. For it exposes the very fault of that which he espoused.

You want to press that salvation is not of human effort, AND I AGREE; yet, that is exactly what was posted in the other thread, and that which I consistently exposed by quoting the author.

That author definitely stated that before anything else, the human had to first offer prayer and then God, if such a prayer meet some unknown level of His approval, would respond.

That is work based salvation.

There is no other rational way to read what was written.

THAT is the issue.

Would you not agree that the Holy Spirit using the Word of God is first?

 

No, I did and do not avoid the question

But until you can accurately state the problem in which the OP gives an inaccurate account, then the basis from which to conduct such a question is faulty.

For though satisfactory agreement may exist between us, the author, of which this thread seeks to validate, wrote of salvation originating from human effort. That has not been recanted, but you have stepped in to show support for the view.

Again, his words are quoted in the other thread.

If rules permit, lift them and place them in this one, that you can rightly defend human effort is the first step to salvation.

Or, why would you support such a view if it is disagreeable?

I certainly don’t.

 

Though I would agree with Packer, the only change would be in the aspect of just what takes place in the regeneration.

There are many who hold that the old is made new. Such is as Packer describes.

Rather, I take 1 Cor. 5:17 very literally.

The That is that the old is not made new as something rebuilt, but the believer is presented completely new as if never existing before.

The old nature remains to harass and “war” against the new, until that time in which the believer sheds this mortal body and is given the new body to enclose the new nature.

Therefore, not a single smudge of this fallen gains the eternal home. Only that which is totally of Him and in Him.

This is a small difference between Packer’s statement and my own thinking, but I am unanimous in agreeement with myself in this matter.

 

If anything, I have clearly answered in more than one thread. And will even in this one.

My position has not migrated. It will not change.

ONLY those who do not turn from the light (of God) are given the power to be His (John 1:12)

Such is not within the ability, authority, or innate capacity of humankind (John 1:13)

Faith COMES (is not innate) by hearing the Word of God. (Romans 10)

The unmerited gift of God is salvation. It is not acquired by human effort, or instigated by human endeavor.

Therefore. FAITH is what is granted by God when unmerited humankind are given the ability to hear and are changed by the work of the Holy Spirit. Such express the results of the change in belief (in, about, unto, ...) salvation. (Romans 10].

Salvation does not occur from human effort. But is totally the work of God from start to finish. (Heb. 12:2)

If you can’t find your answer in what was given, then I am perplexed at what you desire.



Now, concerning a greater matter, is this statement below what you hold?

Do you also hold that FIRST an unregenerate heathen must offer, to some level of acceptability, some work of prayer or offering in order that God’s attention may possibly be acquired; and He pronounces approval on that which is offered by the human and in some manner transfers or credits that unregenerate heathen as worthy of salvation?

I have attempted to paraphrase the quote by giving the essence of the quote.

Should you have a variant interpretation, then post the quote and your own interpretation.

 

Does God not love us first that we might love others to the end they too might become His own?

Does the Lord give that one also give back from what they have received?

Does not the psalmist state that all God's works shall praise Him (Psalms 145:10)?

Does not one who is merciful have mercy given to them? (Matthew 5)

Does the lamp not give light that that others glorify God?

Does not the practical work of the farmer show that receiving the gift of nature is part of the giving of the gift to nature?

Your question has now been answered from both Scripture and practice.

You may not like or agree with the answer, but it never the less has been answered.

Now, take it upon yourself to deal with the real issue of the work to gain salvation that was posted on the other thread. That which you have yet to respond other than claim what was written was not what was actually written.

Do you in fact agree that, prior to salvation, the unredeemed heathen must gain the attention of God in some manner; thereby, having gained the attention, they may demonstrate such effort as to become God approved of the human effort, upon which God is obliged to "transfer" the person and "credit" them as saved?

 

Your quote of Willard contradicts the Scripture you posted.

Strive is taken as "make every effort." Effort cannot be divorced from earning anymore than the distribution of earned wages cannot be divorced from the effort of the hired.

Typical of a philosopher, the practice may not be consistent with the practical.

 

What Mitchell is attempting to do is use a debate tactic that fails to recognize distinctions. For instance, his question, "Where in the world or in the depths of history and time has the receiving of a gift ever been also considered part of the giving of the gift?" is an attempt at a 'gotcha! moment. It also is a nonsensical question, because it seeks to trivialize a momentous theological truth. The free gift of salvation is dependent upon the receiver of the gift being able to actually receive it. God is the One who makes the receiver capable of receiving the free gift through regeneration. The Holy Spirit regenerates the sinner, making it possible for the receiver to accept the gift by faith. The fact that salvation is a gift, and received by faith (Romans 2:24), does not negate the need for the sinner to be made able to believe.