Search results

That is about the nature of man without the Gospel or God's righteousness being made known. You can prove that man will never call God on his own, but how does that prove man can't answer the phone when God calls them? But not all men everywhere have done so. Job didn't, for example. God...

No, he is saying, as I have explained, that the Gospel IS the means by which God does the enabling. How will they believe unless they hear the gospel? Faith comes by hearing. Those in John 6 weren't hearing the gospel...they were hardened to it. (see John 12:39 again) He claims we have...

I haven't ever run across someone here in the decade I've been posting that would deny this. I think, as just explained in detail, that you do not understand HOW we believe God DOES enable mankind. Like I said, we simply disagree as to the effectuality of those means.

True, what's said is that we don't even know what Pelagius actually taught because all his actual teachings were burned. All we have is what his opponents said about his views. Sometimes I wonder if he was even a Semi-Pelagian. :laugh:

Actually, Van and I agree on this particular point. I was simply asking for clarity on his point of view and he gave it when he said, "Naturally, if we never hear the gospel, we were never "enabled" to trust in it." In John 6 Jesus said, "This is why I told you that no one can come to me...

No one here denies that fact. We disagree as to the effectuality of the means He has chosen to accomplish this.

I don't understand. Are you saying you DON'T believe we must be enabled to come to Christ? Good thing I didn't say that then, huh? :)

Well obviously they didn't think it was the HS working, or they wouldn't have resisted it. What I think he is asking is why would the HS even work on them if (1) they aren't elect (2) He knows they will resist and (3) His works won't even be realized or acknowledge or have effect. Make sense...

Come on Winman, you've been doing this long enough to know the verses they alway appeal to. John 6 (the passage where the gospel hasn't even been revealed to the world, by which to draw/enable men to respond) Romans 8 (the passage that speaks of man's inability to submit to the law, which...

And that is a much simpler and shorter way to say what I just tried to explain... :)

Well, it's kind of like John 3:16. It can fit within the Calvinistic framework, but it SEEMS to be contradictory unless great pains are taken to explain it. It doesn't APPEAR to make sense for God to love everyone and send his Son to die for the world and to send a message to every creature...

What's interesting in when you run across those who dress casually who automatically assume that those who do dress nice are being legalistic, yet isn't it the one who judges the motive of the other who is being the "legalist" on this issue regardless of which dress is preferred? Personally I...

I understand that is the view of Calvinism, but I don't find it supported in the scripture. Can you find me the passage that teaches the work of the Spirit to draw or enable men to come to Christ through the work of the Gospel is not sufficient? In John 6 the gospel was being blinded from the...

JF, go back to your last response to me. Push the edit button. Put my words in quotes (that is a box like this [] with the word "quote" in it before and after my words. The one at the end has a / before the word quote.") Once you make those corrections I will respond. :)

It wasn't my intention to represent the ordo salutas, just to summarize the concept of "I" and the opposing view. We can discuss that in another thread if you'd like. Well, the reason I avoided that term is because some "Calvinists" deny the "pre-regeneration" view. They promote the concept...

That could be the case in some situations, yes. Some think if they find any instance of man resisting God's grace they have found a contradiction to Calvinism's doctrine of "Irresistible Grace," and that would be an error, because Calvinists aren't making the claim that Grace in general can't...

Aaron, here is the problem with your argument: Aaron’s view of a “Natural man” ←-- Hears mere words without power of any kind because you don’t believe words should really be regarded as a “work of the Holy Spirit,” so any positive response is of his own power…or by his “nature.” My view of a...

Yes. His grace to regenerate or "effectually call them" is irresistible, but I think most Calvinists would agree that even the elect can "resist" or "rebel" other aspects of God's grace. The point of "Irresistible Grace" is specifically regarding the effectuality of God's work in regenerating...

Here it is in a nutshell: In both Calvinism and Non-Calvinism, we affirm the need of the Holy Spirit to draw or enable man to come to Him in faith. Calvinists believe that Holy Spirit's work of drawing is through a secret, inward irresistible working by which the heart is changed and thus the...

It is a bad title and many Calvinistic scholars recognize that and explain it carefully. They believe that grace is resisted all the time. What they are talking about is the "effectual working" of the Holy Spirit by which the elect are regenerated or born again so as to give them a new heart...