A simple fact

Saving ourselves is not even an option, so that is out.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL

 

But, if your choice makes the difference between salvation and being lost, you become your own savior and your will becomes the idol you trust in.

 

Sure, in the Calvinist's world.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL

 

No, it is common logic. If you determine your salvation by an act of your will, you are the savior. If you cannot will anything but sin, and God gives you a new will, he is the savior.

 

Monergism (a.k.a. Calvinism) is throughout scripture. Synergists like yourself are the ones who have twisted it to fit their faulty soteriology. You cannot accept the fact that sinful man has no ability to breath life into himself; that he is completely dead (spiritually) according to Ephesians 2:1 and Colossians 2:16. You cannot understand the truth that God is completely justified in His redemptive choice without the individual's consent or refusal (Romans 9:14-33). You miss the point that God's redemptive plan included the calling of all God predestined to eternal life since before the world began (Ephesians 1:4). It is only Synergists who concern themselves with the supposed injustice that is done to those who are non-elect. That is not the emphasis of Monergists. Monergists understand that God has ordained the means of salvation (the preaching of the gospel) in order to bring in the full number of the elect. Monergists place no condition on the sinner other than that of scripture (Acts 11:18; 16:31; 2 Corinthians 7:10). Monergists preach the gospel without guilt and with full confidence in the power of the Holy Spirit to convert sinners (Romans 1:16). Your brand of Synergism has bought into a bunch of sensationalism and hype that has no basis in scripture. It whips up a frenzy in fellow Synergists like yourself but accomplishes little else.

 

So why not just provide a third choice like he requested and prove that the dichotomy is false? Either people are able to believe before they are regenerated or people are not able to believe before they are regenerated ... seem like the only two options to me ... I’d love to hear the third choice.

 

this is what YOU say it means without any clear exegetical proof. You say that these scriptures fit your theological lens therefore it must mean what you say it means. That is not an honest way to interpret the Scriptures. Man responding to the Gospel is not being discussed in the context of the Scriptures you provided. Man can respond to the Gospel call...God provided the means to do so...through the preaching Of His Word. Do you doubt the power of God? It seems as though you do.

 

Why the accusations and assumptions at the end? What exactly do you think that adds to the conversation?

 

I believe God is so powerful that His Word can even be heard by a spiritually dead man and He is so merciful and loving that He gives them the opportunity to respond to Him in faith WITHOUT regenerating him.

Calvinists believe God's Word is impotent in that a person must be regenerated BEFORE they can respond to the Gospel.

Whose view demonstrates the Power of God more accurately concerning God's Word?

Hint...Hebrews 4:12

No bias here...Calvinism shows God's Word to be impotent.

 

This post shows a complete lack of understanding of biblical salvation.
Your bias is on display for sure. You can make up fables as you do here, but know you are devoid of biblical truth..as you post such nonsense.

Those comments were accurate and factual. We have seen this before.

 

And your post means nothing without Setting forth Scriptural precedence.

Yall can bully with your philosophical mumbo jumbo, but I will no longer allow you tell me what Scripture is 'saying' unless you can back with it up with sound hermeneutics.

The statements of "This is what this verse means because my theological framework says it does" will no longer fly bro.

 

You have an agenda that has now become manifest.I do not like when a person pretends to be one way, then switches mid stream....no one likes that.

You have failed up and down the line to answer the scriptures...case in point....Reformed justposted biblical facts that you have no scriptural answer for...try and respond

 

And secondly

If Calvinism produces all of these "mature" disciples as I've seen on this board...Then count me out. If your theology does not produce brotherly love and compassion I'd say it's time to turn it in and exchange it for something else. Period.

Jesus says "They will know that you're my disciples by your love one towards another." Yea, I understand it's difficult to read in attitude during online discussions, but many posts straight up lack any sort of love. And it's from both sides of the discussion. But the post I'm quoting is a sample of just a jab without any justifiable proof. Fables? Come on bro.

 

The guy has me blocked. What's my agenda? It's a legitimate statement. I gave good exegetical break Downs of John 5 and 6 and you selected the "funny" icon on every single one of them. What's so funny bro? I'm not trying to be a comedian on here.

 

Also, the passage in Ephesians 2 gives commentary itself on what it means to be Spiritually dead...vs. 2-3.

And it says NOTHING about being able to respond to the Gospel. nothing.

We were led by the flesh, the world, and Satan. That's what it means to be spiritually dead.

 

JonShaff,

And no one cares what you believe...unless you show it in scripture...show how unregenerate persons welcome the word of God, when the word of God declares the natural man CANNOT RECEIVE the word of God...
You assert the direct opposite of what scripture declares...and by doing so deny the biblical description of those dead in Adam.

So it is you with your false free will ideology being super-imposed on scripture.

Calvinists understand the proper relationship between the word and Spirit...you evidently do not.

The readers know the answer to that question. The only one who believes that error is RM.

 

The funny icon is the only one that can be used. the politically correct censors removed the icons that show dislike or disapproval...
your breakdowns were not solid.you basically look to explain away the passages rather than see the clear implications.
If someone has blocked you, it is for a reason as i have seen him have all manner of discussions without having to block the people.

 

I always wondered about that! Now I know that your funny emojis mean disapproval. Strange things are afoot at the Circle K.

 

There is not one icon left, a thumbs down, a sad face,not one that shows you object...

 

You can always just say you disapprove.