can the natural man. a sinner, overcome the Flesh by His own works and deeds?

[JohnDeereFan]

I cannot answer for what arminians believe.

Then stop telling us we don't understand what they believe.

However initiating salvation and the false teaching of effectual calling are two completely different things.

The effectual calling is a false teaching???

And Adrian Rodgers was not an Arminian.

Actually, he was. He has several sermons condemning Reformed theology and his successor, Steve Gaines, is even more aggressive in his hatred for Reformed theology.

 

[InTheLight]

In the Calvinist salvation scheme an individual must repent. Thus man participates in his own salvation.

 

[Revmitchell]

Then stop telling us we don't understand what they believe.

I never did I am saying you do not understand what non cals believe. Two different people.

The effectual calling is a false teaching???

The way cals teaching...yep

Actually, he was. He has several sermons condemning Reformed theology and his successor, Steve Gaines, is even more aggressive in his hatred for Reformed theology.

Condemning reformed theology does not make one an arminian. Not all non cals are arminians

 

[JohnDeereFan]

In the Calvinist salvation scheme an individual must repent. Thus man participates in his own salvation.

You left out one small detail: You forgot to mention that, included in the Reformed call to repentance is the Biblical teaching that repentance is a work of God, not of man.

I never did I am saying you do not understand what non cals believe. Two different people.

LOL...Kind of like the little boy who knocks the cookie jar off the counter and then, with all the sincerity and earnestness a six year old can muster, looks at his mother and says, "But I didn't break the cookie jar, mommy! The floor did!"

Condemning reformed theology does not make one an Arminian.

I never said it made him one. It was the result of his Arminianism, not the cause of it.

 

[Revmitchell]

repentance is not a work. Works are a reference to OT law and is never a reference to anything else.

 

[InTheLight]

You left out one small detail: You forgot to mention that, included in the Reformed call to repentance is the Biblical teaching that repentance is a work of God, not of man.

The Bible:
Luke 13:3 NKJV
I tell you, no; but unless you repent you will all likewise perish.

Matthew 4:17
From that time Jesus began to preach and to say, “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.”

Mark 6:12
So they went out and preached that people should repent.

Luke 15:7
I say to you that likewise there will be more joy in heaven over one sinner who repents than over ninety-nine just persons who need no repentance.

 

[kyredneck]

....They don't come any more Arminian than Mr. Wesley. This comes from the same message I linked in post#2. I just want to highlight what Wesley says about being born again:

From hence it manifestly appears, what is the nature of the new birth. It is that great change which God works in the soul when he brings it into life; when he raises it from the death of sin to the life of righteousness. It is the change wrought in the whole soul by the almighty Spirit of God when it is "created anew in Christ Jesus;" when it is "renewed after the image of God, in righteousness and true holiness;" when the love of the world is changed into the love of God; pride into humility; passion into meekness; hatred, envy, malice, into a sincere, tender, disinterested love for all mankind. In a word, it is that change whereby the earthly, sensual, devilish mind is turned into the "mind which was in Christ Jesus." This is the nature of the new birth: "So is every one that is born of the Spirit."

See, even the prince of Arminian theology gives credit where credit is due. The only time man is mentioned here is when Wesley speaks of the transformation wrought by the new birth. When He brings to life speaks of God working in us. The change wrought in the whole soul is accredited to the work of the Holy Spirit.

....To the same degree a duck is a goose. Pelagianism teaches the first steps are taken by natural man and grace follows. Arminianism teaches that the first steps of grace are taken by God.

Good posts, good articulations, thank you.

 

[pinoybaptist]

In the Calvinist salvation scheme an individual must repent. Thus man participates in his own salvation.

provide scriptures that can be caused to show, by all context, that the "repentance" called for is a necessary component of salvation and redemption UNTO eternity, the one Christ shed His blood for, and maybe I'll become a Calvinist.

 

[pinoybaptist]

in answer to the OP. a natural man can "reform" but that is not a regenerate repenting.

 

[Don]

Wow. This is the second time I've seen a calvinist say that arminians and pelagians are one and the same (the other one was evangelist).

I ascribe to most, but not all, of Arminius' teachings; and I ascribe to most, but not all, of Calvin's teachings. I'm somewhere between Arminius and Calvin. What does that make me?

The simple answer to the OP: No man can save himself. All our righteousness is as filthy rags. The question is: We all know this, so what was the purpose of the OP?

 

[InTheLight]

provide scriptures that can be caused to show, by all context, that the "repentance" called for is a necessary component of salvation and redemption UNTO eternity, the one Christ shed His blood for, and maybe I'll become a Calvinist.

I would not want you to become a Calvinist, but here's your verse:

Luke 13:3 NKJV
I tell you, no; but unless you repent you will all likewise perish.

 

[kyredneck]

I would not want you to become a Calvinist, but here's your verse:

Luke 13:3 NKJV
I tell you, no; but unless you repent you will all likewise perish.

You've taken this out of context. The Prophet was warning 'that generation' of the wrath that was soon to come and how to escape it; it's in the same vein as:

40 And with many other words did he testify and exhort, saying, Save yourselves from this untoward generation. Acts 2

,,,and:

23 And it shall be, that every soul that shall not hearken to that prophet, shall be utterly destroyed from among the people. Acts 3


3 I tell you, Nay: but, except ye repent, ye shall all in like manner perish
5 I tell you, Nay: but, except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish Lu 13

The phrases “in like manner” and “likewise” are in reference to the violence of war, which indeed came to pass, and not to random incidents of chance. I would amplify the passage with vv. 3 & 5 to read:

1 Now there were some present at that very season who told him of the Galilaeans, whose blood [Pilate's soldiers] had mingled with their sacrifices.
2 And he answered and said unto them, Think ye that these Galilaeans were sinners above all the Galilaeans, because they have suffered these things?
3 I tell you, Nay: but, except ye repent, ye shall all in like manner [by the sword] perish [in the wrath that is to come upon this generation; i.e. the war of AD 66-70]
4 Or those eighteen, upon whom the [soldiers garrisoned in the tower in Siloam] fell, and killed them, think ye that they were offenders above all the men that dwell in Jerusalem?
5 I tell you, Nay: but, except ye repent, ye shall all likewise [by the sword] perish [in the wrath that is to come upon this generation; i.e. the war of AD 66-70] Lu 13

 

[Baptist Believer]

in answer to the OP. a natural man can "reform" but that is not a regenerate repenting.

This is an excellent, succinct response.

 

[Yeshua1]

I do not know a non cal that believes man takes the initiative. That is false.

Would say that the bottom line difference would be tht we calvinists hold to the Lord meaning the death of jesus obrained certain salvation for just his elect, while arminians hold to God potentially using that to save none or all, depending on how we respond to him!

 

[Yeshua1]

Your Question:
“Can the natural man. a sinner, overcome the Flesh by His own works and deeds, or will he always be caught up to sin, just a matter of by his self efforts limiting that to some degree?”

The wording of your question is tortured and vague, and seems to assume some things that may not necessarily be true.

Let me define some of these terms in your question, as I understand your meaning, so I won’t be misunderstood:

“Natural man” – I assume you mean a man who has not re-aligned themselves (repented) for living according to their own desires and aligned themselves with the Kingdom of God.

“…a sinner…” – A person whose bent is toward sin by nature and by habit – a person who does not have access to the resources of the Kingdom of God (grace).

“…overcome the flesh…” – Come to a place where they have mastery over their mind and body to do good in all circumstances. This does not necessarily involve a change in desires or nature.

“…caught up in sin…” – To be someone who regularly commits specific acts of sin (rebellion against the good).

“…self efforts limiting that to some degree.” – The possibility that disciplines that build character can be somewhat effective against specific acts of sin.

In short, a person can exercise character-building disciplines that help control and regulate their external lives in such a way that they do not commit many overt acts of sin. Many religious people are in exactly this position. (There is some social and moral benefit to being a person of good character, but inwardly, that person is still in rebellion against God and may develop a hardness toward God because of pride.) However the problem is that the desire to sin and the sin nature is not strongly affected by character-building exercises without the grace of God empowering the person exercising them.

was getting to what Jesus meant by ALL of us being slaves to sin, that in our 'natural" natures, cannot cease to stop sinning, just limit to how much control it has over us, but ONLY saved can experience freedom from sin as God intends for the redeemed!

The best non save dperson still sins, sometimes a lot, or big, but also has to, as flesh cannot overcome flesh!

 

[kyredneck]

Yeshua1's posts are torturous to read.... ! Who said what in the above post?

 

[Yeshua1]

Yeshua1's posts are torturous to read.... ! Who said what in the above post?

was getting to what Jesus meant by ALL of us being slaves to sin, that in our 'natural" natures, cannot cease to stop sinning, just limit to how much control it has over us, but ONLY saved can experience freedom from sin as God intends for the redeemed!

The best non saved person still sins, sometimes a lot, or big, but also has to, as flesh cannot overcome

 

[Jkdbuck76]

Or will he always be caught up to sin, just amatter of by his self efforts limiting that to some degree?

No. He cannot. A fish can't bark.

 

[Don]

Would say that the bottom line difference would be tht we calvinists hold to the Lord meaning the death of jesus obrained certain salvation for just his elect, while arminians hold to God potentially using that to save none or all, depending on how we respond to him!

Which arminians hold to a "none or all" philosophy?

From the "reply of Arminius to the Eleventh Proposal":
For since Christ is the Mediator between men and God, only as Reconciler, Redeemer, and the advocate of sinners; Mediator, I say, who, by the act of His Mediation, affords salvation to those, for whom he is Mediator. (1 Timothy 2:5 & 6; Hebrews 8:6 etc.; 9:15; 12:24.)....
It is not, therefore, proper to say that "grace has reference to those whom it establishes in good," for the grace, of which we here treat, does not refer to those whom it establishes in good, for grace established no one of the human race, it only restored those, to whom it had reference.

“Semi-Pelagianism” is more than denial of the efficacy of grace for salvation; it is the affirmation of the human initiative in salvation—which Arminians deny.
“Semi-Pelagianism” is not any denial of effectual grace (i.e., what is commonly called “irresistible grace”). Every scholar of historical theology knows that “semi-Pelagianism” is a term for a particular view of grace and free will that emerged primarily in Gallic monasticism in the fifth century in response to Augustine’s strong emphasis on grace as irresistible for the elect....John Cassian. Cassian and certain other Gallic monks (“Masillians”) argued that although God may initiate salvation with grace, for many people the initiative is theirs toward God. That is, God waits to see the “exercise of a good will” before responding with grace. This is what was condemned (along with predestination to evil) at Orange in 529.
“Semi-Pelagianism,” then, is the view that “The beginning of faith may have its source in the human agent, although it will not always have its source there.” Furthermore, to compound Cassian’s non-Augustinian view of free will and human initiative in salvation, he taught that “The free will, even in its fallen condition, is not totally unable to will the good” and “the emphasis [of Cassian’s doctrine] falls on vigilance, unceasing struggle, in the attainment of salvation.”

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/rogereolson/2013/02/r-c-sproul-arminianism-and-semi-pelagianism/

True arminians agree with calvinists that God takes the first step. Pelagians and semi-pelagians argue that man can come to God on his own.

 

[quantumfaith]

was getting to what Jesus meant by ALL of us being slaves to sin, that in our 'natural" natures, cannot cease to stop sinning, just limit to how much control it has over us, but ONLY saved can experience freedom from sin as God intends for the redeemed!

The best non saved person still sins, sometimes a lot, or big, but also has to, as flesh cannot overcome

The "best saved" also still sin....and I suspect "sin "a lot"".