Cured

You'll have to get used to the way answers are given here at times, Amity.
I see you are PB.
Glad to have you here.

 

amity, I was not trying to be hurtful. What I have referred to is straight from the Bible. I have not, to the best of my knowledge, been presenting anything else. I only found out what Calvinism was in my forties and spend a couple of years, stunned, reading the Bible front to back several times to see if it was really presenting that doctrine. I came to the conclusion it was not.

I have read authors from all over the spectrum of theologies, but what I believe I believe because of what the Bible says. Again, I did not mean to offend. I don't know what else to call it, however.

 

What is synergism?

From what you said, that sounds right, but I have really learned to be wary of labels....

 

I don't think it really matters what pigeon hole one puts it. Each statement made must stand the test of Scripture and spiritual common sense.

The Scripture indicates that everyone has at least a measure of enlightenment

John 1

6 There was a man sent from God, whose name was John.
7 The same came for a witness, to bear witness of the Light, that all men through him might believe.
8 He was not that Light, but was sent to bear witness of that Light.
9 That was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world.​

What "every man" does with that light is another thing.

John 3

19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.
20 For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved.
21 But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God.

HankD​

 

Well, let's see. It can't mean that everyone hears the gospel. It can't mean that everyone is regenerated. It can't mean that everyone comes to know Christ. So what does it mean?

What does "that they are wrought in God" mean?

 

Synergism means man works together with God for their salvation...
vs
Monergism meaning salvation is all in Gods hands...

BTW..I'm monergist and this is my weekly column...Mountain Monergism

 

The Arminian position is described as "synergism." This sounds more that it is entirely up to man to believe and respond all on his own. It is not Arminianism. It is something different.

 

Well, I certainly can't work with Him in any real sense for my salvation. I could only want it, and wanting is not a work!

After that, it is Him working in and through me whenever I do or think or am anything good.

amity wrote: Well, let's see. It can't mean that everyone hears the gospel. It can't mean that everyone is regenerated. It can't mean that everyone comes to know Christ. So what does it mean?

The Bible answers you, amity, as it must.
Romans 1 -- men know the reality of God and part of His attributes through creation itself.
Romans 10 -- Paul quotes Psalm 19 to explain why ALL have heard. Psalm 19 says the heavens declare the glory of God and the skies pour fourth knowledge.

What knowledge? People have a hard time accepting this now, but the Gospel was in the stars all along. God named the stars and the constellations, and He does nothing without purpose. Now, as Hebrews 1 tells us, although God spoke to people in the past in many different ways, now it is exclusively through His Son, Jesus Christ. So there is only a perversion of the occult left in the stars now,.....unless you go back to the original meanings. Most of them can still be traced, although a few can't. This article is a start:
http://www.ldolphin.org/zodiac/index.html

Job knew his Redeemer lived. The knowledge of a Redeemer, a Savior, has been known from the earliest times. People now have the name Jesus of Nazareth, the Christ. Before they had God's Promise. But that is the same person, the same God, the same Redeemer that men could trust from the start.

 

What a surprise. We agree on that, basically at least.

I will read the article, Helen. Thank you.

 

Jesus said in Matt 5:48 "Be ye therefore perfect, as your Father in heaven is perfect."

I have heard some say "perfect" refers to spiritual maturity. However, I think it means that Jesus is saying that we must be sinlessly perfect, like the Father. I don't think Jesus would go around saying, "I know you can't be perfect, so when you sin, I'll cut you some slack."

When Jesus demanded perfection, did he also imply that perfection was attainable? Don't think so. So Jesus commanded us to do something we can't achieve in this life. In order for us to escape the eternal penalty, Jesus died for us.

Bottom line, God commands us to do something we can't, and holds us responsible for not doing it.

 

Tom, this has to do with the way the English language has developed over the years, not with anything to do with the Bible. In English the way it was spoken in 1611, "perfect" meant the same thing that "complete" now means. The original Greek uses the word for "complete." Most more modern translations use the word "complete" in that passage as well. I love the KJV, but it does take a little figuring out sometimes.

 

Helen answered this quite well, in addition :

John 16

7 Nevertheless I tell you the truth; It is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you.
8 And when he is come, he will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment:
9 Of sin, because they believe not on me;​

Reproval/conviction of sin is a form of enlightment.

The Spirit of God reproves/convicts of sin because, as Jesus, said "they believe not on me" and have no reason for a Savior if they have no knowledge of their sin as sin (an offense to God).

Here is a modernised version, the NKJV:

NKJ John 3:21 But he who does the truth comes to the light, that his deeds may be clearly seen, that they have been done in God.​

HankD​

 

IOW, that God in reality did those deeds?

Actually, I don't have a great problem with anything you or Helen has said on this subject. Yes, the nonelect will be condemned in part for their unbelief.

 

what do you mean 'in part' for their unbelief? What is the other part?

 

All the other sins they have committed, Helen!

 

You mean Jesus was not the sacrifice for all sin?

 

No, because whatever sins He paid for, those sins are forgiven. If He paid for all the sins of everyone, then everyone would be saved, right?

So since you imply that you don't agree, what else could people be condemned for but their sins? There is something in this argument that I have never heard before, and I am trying to get to the bottom of it. Don't mean to be contentious, really.

 

Atonement and forgiveness are two different things, amity. To have something atoned for is to have justice served. Hebrews tells us that Christ was the one sacrfice for all sin, meaning all sin was atoned for. We read that He tasted death for every man.

In 1 John, we read however that if we sin and confess our sin, then He is faithful and just to forgive. So forgiveness is different. Sin was not forgiven on the Cross; it was atoned for. The wages of death were paid.

Here is an example, which I have used before here on BB. Suppose someone raped and killed your mother. Your fury and anger would, I presume, be immense. The man is caught, tried, found guilty, and put to death. Justice has been served. But this has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not you forgave that man.

It should also be noted that forgiveness requires confession and repentence. We can have a world of forgiveness in our heart for someone who offended us, and should have. But that is all we can do until the person confesses and asks for that forgiveness. Then it can be extended and received, and the exchange is complete. On the other hand, you can be incredibly sorry for something you have done and ask for forgiveness, and that is all you can do. If the person chooses not to forgive you, there is nothing you can do. We each do what we can.

But that is why it is so incredible for John to tell us that if we confess, God is faithful to forgive us. Forgiveness was not a one time for all accomplishment the way atonement was. Forgiveness is part of a personal relationship a person has with the Lord.

Which leads to this: no one goes to hell for sinning. That debt was paid by Jesus. In John 3:16 and on we read why a person is condemned: for unbelief. That's it and that's all. However 'belief' is not simply intellectual acknowledgement. It is the casting of oneself in trust entirely upon the Lord in the way the Bible uses the word. We read in James that even the demons have that intellectual acknowledgement, and it does them no good at all. So belief -- that heart-felt response of faith -- is what is necessary for the person to be able to be born again in Christ.

And without it, and without being born again in Him, there is no salvation.

In the meantime, our sins and His incredible forgiveness are ongoing things, and part of our personal relationship with Him.

 

Then why said Christ:
I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins. John 8:24


also:
Acts 3:19
Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out,

Colossians 2:13
And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses

Of course there are other verses in the same vein. '
Also, is there a difference between atonement (at-one-ment) and reconciliation?