Decisional Regeneration: Stated and Refuted

[John of Japan]

No, I don't believe it is. Salvation is an act of God. This does not negate a person coming to Jesus, believing on Him, repenting of their sins, et. But salvation is of the Lord.

Edited in: And I guess skypair will be the first one to affirm decisional regeneration for you.

RB

I finally noticed that you were answering my post in this. It would have helped if you had mentioned my name here.

So please clarify. Are you disagreeing with what I quoted from JM? Are you saying that one does not decide to believe, it just "happens?" Then are you saying people not only don't have a free will, they don't have a will at all? Because that's the only way I can see that one can believe without deciding to.

Also, can you give me a quote from someone you believe teaches "decisional regeneration" that shows they believe the decision is what regenerates, that man regenerates himself as opposed to being regenerated by the Holy Spirit? The only quote given in the article you linked to was from Jack Hyles, and whatever you may think of his methods, he didn't say these things.

Jack Hyles often preached on the Holy Spirit and His power to help the personal soul winner and to save the sinner. I know. I heard him preach about it many times. He wrote in one place, "What a motivation this is for the believer to yield himself to that Christ Who lives in him, as the Holy Spirit has wrought the amazing work of regeneration!" (Jack Hyles, Meet the Holy Spirit, p. 20).

 

[Rippon]

I realize this is to John - but if I may clarify something...

It is not that man is 'enabled from birth' to believe but that we from birth have the capcity to believe. However due to our sin nature man does not nor will not seek after God on his own nor will he of himself understand anything spiritual. Thus man can and does believe but only as far as he is able of himself via his sin nature.


IOW- Man is only 'enabled' when God moves upon man by grace through revelation and conviction. The capcity to believe is there from birth but man is not 'enabled' to believe savingly because of the restictions his sin nature forces upon him (man is blinded to God and true righteousness by his sin nature, therefore man is bound to his sin). Thus that capcity to believe only extend as far as man of and by himself can go. That is why we need God to first seek us out and reveal and convict us that we might believe and be saved through a work not of ourselves nor obtained by ourselves but through God who is mighty to save whosoever will...

That's double-speak.Folks do not have the "capacity to believe" from birth.You contradict yourself by saying in your next breath that because of our sin nature we do not seek after God and can't understand anything spiritual.Then you back away from that and claim that man can and does believe but only as far as he is able of himself"."Via his sin nature is a puzzling comment.The word 'via' means by way of.The sin nature (TD) is not an access-route.Perhaps you meant "despite the sin nature."

"Restrictions his sin nature forces upon him" is kind of biblically weak view of our bondage in sin before the new birth.Man is just sick in sin as far as you are concerned.

That capacity to believe only extends as far as man of and by himself can go." And that would be -- Nowhere! Your explanations are bearing-out what I have said before.You really don't believe in TD.Your allegiance is toward Partial Depravity.Man has the capacity to believe (from birth)you contend.

You got decidely more biblical near the end of your post.That's where you said that God needs to seek us out -- to convict us to believe -- to be saved through a work not of ourselves ( monergistically?) --but through God who is mighty to save.I can endorse that with a caveat that the Lord will save all of those of His choosing.

 

[skypair]

My decision goes before the counsel of God? My decision goes before the decree of God? You've got to be kidding. I wasn't even born when God decreed. In fact, nothing was created at all when God decreed.

You're pretty much "muddling up" the whole issue, aren't you? :laugh:

Perhaps I might get through to you this way: In the OT, a decision was still required in order to receive "the righteousness of God" -- JUSTIFICATION, eternal life, salvation -- all these come via MAN'S decision about what he is going to do with his knowledge of God (which has been already concluded from Rom 1:19-20 that he has) which is why God says they are "without excuse.

But in the OT, there was NO regeneration, no Holy Spirit indwelling, no new birth, no born again, etc. Why? Because it is God that confers it in God's own time. They will be "regenerated" in the resurrection to earth. One (Mt 19:28) of only 2 times the word regeneration is used in the Bible describes regneration as the resurrection.

The other, Titus 3:5, explains that we are regenerated while we live. This is the one your theologists cling to as if it were just always so. Well, it's not. In the ordo saludis it never occurred during this life way in the OT (much less could they have been regenerated BEFORE they had faith!).

So you see, the basic "framework" on which you hang your "decisional regeneration" is a total misunderstanding of a) what the Bible says and b) of what non-Cals believe.

As to "ordained before the foundation of the earth" -- again, you make it out that God chose irrespective of what He in His omniscience could foresee regarding each of us. If you weren't so totally committed to "fate" over free will, you would never be able to hold such a view by reading the Bible. As someone has already pointed out, there is not "all-encompassing decree" that Covenant Theologists presume to "see" whilest they ignore 7 others that do appear in scripture.

skypair

 

[Tom Butler]

To Allan and John of Japan,

I'm glad both of you acknowledge the role of the Holy Spirit in conversion. The only reason I even brought this up is that your views in this area seemed to vary from most non-Cals.

The impression I get is that most non-Cals present the gospel to the lost as solely their choice, independently of any work by the HS. Thus soul-winning is reduced to strategies, methods and powerful tools, designed to bring the lost person to a "decision." Or, to lead them to the point of praying a prayer.

Now i could be wrong about that, but that's the impression I get. And I hasten to say that, given what you have written, it certainly is not true of you, John, or Allan.

And I'm sure that non-Cals will say that my impression is wrong. They do believe the HS has a role. Yet their soul-winning methods don't seem to reflect that belief.

And John, I'm curious. I know you rely on the Scriptures to guide how you present the gospel to the Japanese. My question is, has your experience in Japan had any effect on how you witness to them? Are you doing the same things today that you did at the beginning of your ministry there? No agenda here, just asking.

 

[ReformedBaptist]

The counsel of the Lord shall stand. How is this an eternal decree?

The previous verse helps context

Pro 19:20 Hear counsel, and receive instruction, that thou mayest be wise in thy latter end.

Counsel, as in, advice, guidance. This doesn't support your overlord theory.

We are all growing in faith and knowledge. Negatively characterizing my theology doesn't help your argument. However, the Lord's counsel, biblically speaking, is more than just advice and guidance. God is not a guidenence counselor. He is the Sovereign Lord.

Apparently whatsoever he pleases is something along the lines of damning millions of souls to hell by not choosing to regenerate them, according to your theology.

You might think this is the teaching of the Sovereignty of God, but it is not. God is under no obligation to save anyone, including you. But you should take notice here that what you replied to by quotes was the Scripture, not my theology.

Like the previous verse, this in no way implies a singular eternal sovereign decree. Used of itself, this verse implies that God just does whatever he wants, whenever he wants.

And how often and over what does He do according to His will in heaven and earth? As I asked you before, what or whom do you suppose God has no control?

These men seemed to

Act 7:51 Ye stiffnecked and uncircumcised in heart and ears, ye do always resist the Holy Ghost: as your fathers did, so do ye.

There is a difference between resisting the outward call of God and being able to resist the inward call.

You haven't even shown any decree of God yet. You have referred to His counsel, His will, but no all sovereign eternal singular decree.

I guess you don't see God working all things according to the counsel of His will as His decree.

Yes, true, but once again, it seems as though you are promoting a God that just does what He wants, without regard for His Holy Holy Holy nature.

Nothing could be further from the truth. I have said repeatedly that God does according to His own good pleasure.

No singular eternal sovereign decree here.

I don't think you understand the passages. God works all things according to His will and all things are of Him, through Him, and for Him. This leaves nothing outside His sovereignty.

When you read this verse, this is what you see. "We have obtained an inheritance because we are predestinated according to his eternal sovereign decree".
It's not anywhere in the passage, chapter, book or Bible. There is no singular eternal sovereign decree of God.

Re-read the verse. That's exactly what it is saying.

I'm not arguing that God has a will. Of course He does. But I do not believe for a second that God's will is contained in some singular eternal sovereign decree.

I think it was Pink that said something along the lines of - God knows everything that is going to happen because he ordained it to happen. That's a mighty big paraphrase there, and I can find the actual quote later if you want (It might have been calvin...) but basically, he limited the Sovereign God by saying that His omnipotence was only because He had a really good memory, because he knew everything He said He was going to do.

That's stupid. If I say, I go to the shop, and intend to go to the shop, then I go to the shop, that's not power. That's just me saying I am going to do something, and then doing it.

God is omniscient. He knows everything.

I'm not going to argue here anymore.

God bless.

God has both a revealed and secret will. See Deut 29:29.

You probably should stop debating this until you have grasped the Sovereignty of God, predestination, foreknowledge, election, et. These are weighty doctrines and our remaining sin always causes us to resist the teaching. From your recollection of Pink it sounds like he was saying that nothing happens because it was foreknown, but because God decreed it. Foreknowledge presupposes God's decree.

 

[ReformedBaptist]

John of Japan

I finally noticed that you were answering my post in this. It would have helped if you had mentioned my name here.

Sorry about that.

So please clarify. Are you disagreeing with what I quoted from JM? Are you saying that one does not decide to believe, it just "happens?" Then are you saying people not only don't have a free will, they don't have a will at all? Because that's the only way I can see that one can believe without deciding to.

I don't study JM's teaching so I can't say whether I agree with him or not. I suppose there are a great many things I agree with him about and many things I don't. But to answer you other questions here, no I don't believe salvation "just happens" In fact, I don't believe anything "just happens" or is outside the Sovereign Decree of God. Nor are people saved apart from the Lord's appointed means. Nor am I saying people do not have free will. I am saying people do not have an absolute free will. If they did, they would be God. I have never stated that choice is not involved in the process. I have stated that salvation of anyone, its cause, is the will of God, not the will of man.

Consider one biblical text. Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second. Hebrews 10:9

I think we are both agreed that this passage is referencing the Lord Jesus Christ and is a quote of OT Scripture. This is a prophecy of the Son of God speaking to God the Father stating that He has come to do the will of the Father. We both could multiply numerous Scriptures from the Gospels showing that Jesus came to do the will of the Father.

By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. Hebrews 10:10

It is not by the will of man that we are sanctified, or set apart, but by the will of the Father. Again, we both could multiply many Scriptures that show that in Jesus doing the will of the Father including the unfailing and unfrustratable salvation of a people. Unless, of course, we suppose that God's will can be frustrated.

Also, can you give me a quote from someone you believe teaches "decisional regeneration" that shows they believe the decision is what regenerates, that man regenerates himself as opposed to being regenerated by the Holy Spirit? The only quote given in the article you linked to was from Jack Hyles, and whatever you may think of his methods, he didn't say these things.

Probably not. The concept of decisional regeneration and the term was coined by the author of the article, nor do I think you will find one instance in a systematic theology or otherwise of someone affirming the concept under the said term. Nevertheless, what the article states and present experience bear out the truth of what is being proposed, namely, that salvation is preaching as hinging on the choice, or decision, of a person, making regeneration a decisional act. Have you not seen this? I have....I have done this in the past in my witnessing. We go out, preach the Gospel, reason with some soul, and try to get them to "make a decision for Jesus." Once they do, as long as they prayed and asked sincerely, we welcome them into the kingdom of God. Men like Rick Warren have gone further suggesting a mere whisper of a few words is sufficent to save a man and he welcomes them into the Kingdom.

Jack Hyles often preached on the Holy Spirit and His power to help the personal soul winner and to save the sinner. I know. I heard him preach about it many times. He wrote in one place, "What a motivation this is for the believer to yield himself to that Christ Who lives in him, as the Holy Spirit has wrought the amazing work of regeneration!" (Jack Hyles, Meet the Holy Spirit, p. 20).

If I am not mistaken, Jack Hyles was quoted postively in the article. I agree that regeneration is the act of the Holy Spirit. And I agree we can take comfort that when we preach the Gospel by the Holy Spirit we are not beating the air so to speak. I also gain a large amount of confidence that the salvation of man does not depend on his ability to choose to Christ while in an unregenerate state, at enmity with God, unable to understand the Gospel being blinded by satan, and dead in their trespassaes and sins. I am full persuded that God by the preaching of the Gospel to sinners calls men, women, and children to Himself and will certainly accomplish that end through Jesus Christ.

RB

 

[ReformedBaptist]

Allan,

I would love to engage you on this RB as I have been trying to get someone to debate it for almost a year now

I would be glad to discuss the subject as time allows me. Although I haven't stated it plainly, many of my recent posts are a bit of an personal exercise. I am working though a symbolics class with the Midwest Center for Theological Studies. This class is, as it were, an introductory class to my overall degree with them and is designed to work though the 1689 London Baptist Confession with Pastor Sam Waldron.

I think at some point we will address the subject of ordus salutis. I have looked though discussions/debates on that subject and have purposefully held back from engaging them because I don't see this tension in Scripture--yet. Does regeneration happen before faith or after faith, et. et. Right now, if I was pressed for my OPINION on the matter I would think they are simultaneous. I do not believe that a person dead in their trespasses and sins has the innate ability to savingly trust (believe into) Jesus Christ apart from them being quickened by the Holy Spirit. Nor do I believe the Holy Spirit quickens anyone who will not be ultimately saved.

RB

 

[ReformedBaptist]

Skypair,

Nothing changes...

You're pretty much "muddling up" the whole issue, aren't you?

*begin sarcasm* Oh yes master skypair, that's exactly what I am doing. Oh gee wizz highly intellectual one, you found me out. *end sarcasm*

Perhaps I might get through to you this way: In the OT, a decision was still required in order to receive "the righteousness of God" -- JUSTIFICATION, eternal life, salvation -- all these come via MAN'S decision about what he is going to do with his knowledge of God (which has been already concluded from Rom 1:19-20 that he has) which is why God says they are "without excuse.

If I understand you correctly, because you said "In the OT..." you mean the Law of God. Back to theology 101 for you. :laugh: The righteousness of God is not by the Law for justification, but through the Gospel by faith.

But in the OT, there was NO regeneration, no Holy Spirit indwelling, no new birth, no born again, etc. Why? Because it is God that confers it in God's own time. They will be "regenerated" in the resurrection to earth. One (Mt 19:28) of only 2 times the word regeneration is used in the Bible describes regneration as the resurrection.

I have never met anyone, until you, that denied regeneration for OT saints.

The other, Titus 3:5, explains that we are regenerated while we live. This is the one your theologists cling to as if it were just always so. Well, it's not. In the ordo saludis it never occurred during this life way in the OT (much less could they have been regenerated BEFORE they had faith!).

Great example here of theology gone amuck. You seem to have an entirely different salvation for OT saints.

So you see, the basic "framework" on which you hang your "decisional regeneration" is a total misunderstanding of a) what the Bible says and b) of what non-Cals believe.

As to "ordained before the foundation of the earth" -- again, you make it out that God chose irrespective of what He in His omniscience could foresee regarding each of us. If you weren't so totally committed to "fate" over free will, you would never be able to hold such a view by reading the Bible. As someone has already pointed out, there is not "all-encompassing decree" that Covenant Theologists presume to "see" whilest they ignore 7 others that do appear in scripture.

Nice strawman. Back to theology pre-school for you. :laugh: Go learn what it is calvinists really believe regarding God's Sovereignty and stop characterizing it as pagan fate vs. free-will. Foreknowledge presupposes God's Decree, as I told that other brother. Nothing happens because God foreknew it would happen. All things happen because God decreed they would happen, therefore God foreknows.

RB

 

[donnA]

Seems to me decisional regeneration is the same as baptismal regenerations, works, not grace.

 

[Allan]

Allan,



I would be glad to discuss the subject as time allows me. Although I haven't stated it plainly, many of my recent posts are a bit of an personal exercise. I am working though a symbolics class with the Midwest Center for Theological Studies. This class is, as it were, an introductory class to my overall degree with them and is designed to work though the 1689 London Baptist Confession with Pastor Sam Waldron.

I think at some point we will address the subject of ordus salutis. I have looked though discussions/debates on that subject and have purposefully held back from engaging them because I don't see this tension in Scripture--yet. Does regeneration happen before faith or after faith, et. et. Right now, if I was pressed for my OPINION on the matter I would think they are simultaneous. I do not believe that a person dead in their trespasses and sins has the innate ability to savingly trust (believe into) Jesus Christ apart from them being quickened by the Holy Spirit. Nor do I believe the Holy Spirit quickens anyone who will not be ultimately saved.

RB

RB,
Does not the Reformed belief of regeneration preceding salvation stand primarily on a "logical order" than a scripturally stated one? I have looked a great deal into this and found that though phrases like 'born-again' are used to hold to something pre-salvation they are hard to pressed on this issue since it holds the same characteristics of one who 'is' saved but also at the same time. Thus most Reformers/Calvinists will agree that they are simultanious as this is the closest thing given scripturally and that it being pre-salvation is based primarily upon 'logic' and not so much scripture.

I wouldn't mind even doing e-mails or PMs with you on it - to sharpen both our views and to take a look at something in a different perspective. Not with the intent of maligning one another. As I have said, it has been very hard to get anyone to actaully debate on 'this' topic. I understand (fairly well - though I'm sure I can be corrected on some things) the position of Calvinists/Reformers on what regeneration is supposed to be and what it primarily is supposed to do, but it is the 'how it does this' that always 'seems' to be avoided.

 

[Allan]

Seems to me decisional regeneration is the same as baptismal regenerations, works, not grace.

That is because there is no such thing a 'Decisional Regeneration'.

 

[donnA]

That is because there is no such thing a 'Decisional Regeneration'.

I quite agree, no such thing as regeneration because of a decision.
Grace.

 

[ReformedBaptist]

RB,
Does not the Reformed belief of regeneration preceding salvation stand primarily on a "logical order" than a scripturally stated one? I have looked a great deal into this and found that though phrases like 'born-again' are used to hold to something pre-salvation they are hard to pressed on this issue since it holds the same characteristics of one who 'is' saved but also at the same time. Thus most Reformers/Calvinists will agree that they are simultanious as this is the closest thing given scripturally and that it being pre-salvation is based primarily upon 'logic' and not so much scripture.

I wouldn't mind even doing e-mails or PMs with you on it - to sharpen both our views and to take a look at something in a different perspective. Not with the intent of maligning one another. As I have said, it has been very hard to get anyone to actaully debate on 'this' topic. I understand (fairly well - though I'm sure I can be corrected on some things) the position of Calvinists/Reformers on what regeneration is supposed to be and what it primarily is supposed to do, but it is the 'how it does this' that always 'seems' to be avoided.

Allan,

I will correspond anyway you like. I have not intentionally avoided it, but I just don't see the Scriptures making an emphasis on the order. What do you think is the importance of having the order correct?

RB

 

[Allan]

I quite agree, no such thing as regeneration because of a decision.
Grace.

You remind me alot of Skypair anymore.

A person isn't regenerated because they 'chose' to be so, but because they 'chose' to believe God and HE regenerated them.

Do you believe that a person must choose to believe before they will:
1. Love the Lord God
2. Obey Him
3. Cleave unto him
4. To be placed into Life, (Christ/God) since He is life

OR

Do you believe one must be rengerate first so that the above 4 will take place and therefore you will believe?

Let us look at Duet for a short but detailed look at the truth:

Deu 30:19 I call heaven and earth to record this day against you, [that] I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing: therefore choose life, that both thou and thy seed may live:

Deu 30:20 That thou mayest love the LORD thy God, [and] that thou mayest obey his voice, and that thou mayest cleave unto him: for he [is] thy life, and the length of thy days: that thou mayest dwell in the land which the LORD sware unto thy fathers, to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob, to give them.

Notice in verse 29 it states "Choose" and in verse 30 it states "that you may or might.."

God told them to choose Life so that they might Love Him..cleave (or cling) to Him as He is their life - (spiritual not physical).., obey His voice.., live long (no temporal judgments against your life)..

And guess what - They "Choose" to live.. and took the land.

Notice also that unless they choose to believe or choose life.. they were not 'alive in Him', for He is life and they would not have it unless they choose life as says the passage explictly.

 

[ReformedBaptist]

You remind me alot of Skypair anymore.

A person isn't regenerated because they 'chose' to be so, but because they 'chose' to believe God and HE regenerated them.

Do you believe that a person must choose to believe before they will:
1. Love the Lord God
2. Obey Him
3. Cleave unto him
4. To be placed into Life, (Christ/God) since He is life

OR

Do you believe one must be rengerate first so that the above 4 will take place and therefore you will believe?

Let us look at Duet for a short but detailed look at the truth:


Notice in verse 29 it states "Choose" and in verse 30 it states "that you may or might.."

God told them to choose Life so that they might Love Him..cleave (or cling) to Him as He is their life - (spiritual not physical).., obey His voice.., live long (no temporal judgments against your life)..

And guess what - They "Choose" to live.. and took the land.

Notice also that unless they choose to believe or choose life.. they were not 'alive in Him', for He is life and they would not have it unless they choose life as says the passage explictly.

You do realize that your reasoning presupposes that ability must be necessary in a person for God to command them to repent, choose, believe, et.

RB

 

[John of Japan]

To Allan and John of Japan,

I'm glad both of you acknowledge the role of the Holy Spirit in conversion. The only reason I even brought this up is that your views in this area seemed to vary from most non-Cals.

The impression I get is that most non-Cals present the gospel to the lost as solely their choice, independently of any work by the HS. Thus soul-winning is reduced to strategies, methods and powerful tools, designed to bring the lost person to a "decision." Or, to lead them to the point of praying a prayer.

Now i could be wrong about that, but that's the impression I get. And I hasten to say that, given what you have written, it certainly is not true of you, John, or Allan.

And I'm sure that non-Cals will say that my impression is wrong. They do believe the HS has a role. Yet their soul-winning methods don't seem to reflect that belief.

I have close about 50 books on evangelism in my library. Very few were written by Calvinists. Among those are: James Kennedy, J. I. Packer, Spurgeon. I would that more Calvinists would write about the subject. At any rate, I don't find much difference between Cal. and the best non-Cal. writers on the subject (there are some lousy books by non-Cals.), when Cals. do write. But the fact that so few Cals. write on the subject does indicate that in general they lean more towards God's work in salvation than the human side, Christians working. And without going into detail, that hurts the Cal. position. We can do nothing about God's side, but we can do much about our side (and I do know that many Calvinists are active in evangelism).

And John, I'm curious. I know you rely on the Scriptures to guide how you present the gospel to the Japanese. My question is, has your experience in Japan had any effect on how you witness to them? Are you doing the same things today that you did at the beginning of your ministry there? No agenda here, just asking.

Wow, it would take a whole essay to answer that one! But in brief, I do the same things spiritually that I did when we came 27 years ago: I pray, I seek the Holy Spirit's fullness, I witness (though I am getting less and less zealous as time marches on, and that saddens me), I look for the Holy Spirit's work in the life and heart of the sinner before inviting them to salvation.

Practically speaking, over the years I've tried many different "methods," tracts, programs, etc. But Japan is a country of less than 1% Christian after 140 years of evangelism, which is much less than Iran and other Islamic countries. I am resigned to never seeing many saved here. But I praise God for those precious Japanese souls He brings to Himself. (See my thread in Missions/Evangelism on this.)

 

[Allan]

Allan,

I will correspond anyway you like. I have not intentionally avoided it, but I just don't see the Scriptures making an emphasis on the order. What do you think is the importance of having the order correct?

RB

Brother, I wasn't saying that 'you' were avoiding it..

Order is important for the understanding of the operation or process of salvation.
I'm sure you would agree that if you believed regeneration actaully preceded faith you would have to change much of your theological understanding, would you not?

I do believe that scripture teaches faith precedes regeneration but that also they happen almost instantaniously but that faith can only be accomplished by the work of the Holy Spirit in revelation and conviction.

 

[donnA]

A person isn't regenerated because they 'chose' to be so, but because they 'chose' to believe God and HE regenerated them

this would be what I said, yet you want it to say something else, obviously, so you make it up.

 

[donnA]

You remind me alot of Skypair anymore.

A person isn't regenerated because they 'chose' to be so, but because they 'chose' to believe God and HE regenerated them.

Do you believe that a person must choose to believe before they will:
1. Love the Lord God
2. Obey Him
3. Cleave unto him
4. To be placed into Life, (Christ/God) since He is life

OR

Do you believe one must be rengerate first so that the above 4 will take place and therefore you will believe?

Let us look at Duet for a short but detailed look at the truth:


Notice in verse 29 it states "Choose" and in verse 30 it states "that you may or might.."

God told them to choose Life so that they might Love Him..cleave (or cling) to Him as He is their life - (spiritual not physical).., obey His voice.., live long (no temporal judgments against your life)..

And guess what - They "Choose" to live.. and took the land.

Notice also that unless they choose to believe or choose life.. they were not 'alive in Him', for He is life and they would not have it unless they choose life as says the passage explictly.

You seem to misunderstand, Deut was written to a jewish audience, not to unbelievers. quite different.

 

[Allan]

You do realize that your reasoning presupposes that ability must be necessary in a person for God to command them to repent, choose, believe, et.

RB

No, it is a presupposition to assume it does not when the context and explictness of the passages dicates otherwise.

What I showed is exactly what God stated. It is stated plainly "choose.. that you may..." Nothing in the passage declares that man can not choose as God is revealing and convicting but in fact states they 'can' and that only when they choose to believe they will love Him, obey Him, have life, ext..