Featured doctrines of grace ?

We see things in a similar way. My disagreement is I believe apart from the work of the Spirit our choice will always incline to us rather than God. I believe God works in us to develop new desires.

 

You misunderstand a couple of my points. When I say “God accomplishes his purpose – not by compulsion but by transformation” I am not indicating that God transforms man in order for man to turn to him. I am saying that salvation is supernatural, not merely a decision (I believe in regeneration, that we are made a new creation in Christ).

But this is salvation, not drawing but the result of salvation. And we were discussing this "drawing" of sinners.

To illustrate – should you persuade me that I am wrong and you are right through this discussion, why do you think that this would be by compulsion? How, exactly, would you have violated my will? Why would my actual nature be different, or “transformed”, simply because I was made to see the error of my way and the correctness of your position? I do not understand you logic here, brother.


When I speak of “transformation” in salvation I mean being made something else – i.e., regeneration or “born again”. I do not mean persuaded or inclined towards a faith in God.

Adam choose poorly. And his choice, just like ours, was made freely – to sin.

The answer to your question is no. The reason is that God does not save people against their will.

We are saved through the washing of regeneration and renewing by the Holy Spirit. What part of that makes you believe “drawing” is regeneration?

 

I believe God calls all to salvation and all reject that call. God draws some to salvation and saves none against their will. And yes, God saves "through the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit" only those who willingly come (hence the work of the Spirit towards salvation).

 

Why would the cross to those not saved be mockery on God's part? I don't get your point.

Are you saying salvation was only offered to those who are saved?

 

Did I ever say that they "cannot"? I believe men's inability is a matter of will. We are inclined to our own "righteousness". As history shows, we want God but we want God on our terms. Inability here is not a matter of "can't" but "won't". Scripture says they won't because of their desire and deeds....not because of so disability rendering the offer obsolete.

 

Let’s look at your logic here. By your standard:

Those who chose not to believe in Christ in truth could not have believed because “can’t” and “won’t” are distinctions without a difference. Therefore, your logic dictates, salvation was only a legitimate possibility and Christ the Savior for only those who did believe OR God’s offer (Jesus’ death on the Cross) was but a mockery.

So, you believe that all of those people who did not believe could not believe (they lacked not just the will but an actual capacity to believe). If the lost are not judged that they have not believed, and if the judgment is not that Christ has come men loved the darkness instead because their deeds were evil as everyone who does evil hates God and does not come for fear their evil acts be expose....if all of that is false and those who reject Christ do so simply because they lack the capacity to do otherwise, then why the condemnation?

You seem to have an understanding that I would call extreme or “hyper” Calvinistic, in one way (you reject choice as being a matter of the will, but instead view "can not" and "will not" as distinctions without a difference, when in fact they are distinctions that make all of the difference.

And you are wrong. There are things I can do, but I choose not to do. And there are things I cannot do, so my desire to do them is irrelevant. And there are things I can do, but am unable to do them because of my will.

Since you believe "will not" and "can not" are the same, then you believe those who in fact would not believe could not believe. Whether will or capability, your conclusion is that those who are not saved could not have been saved. Is it because salvation was not offered to them or was God mocking them?

 

I think that I may need to make a distinction here. When I talk about Total Depravity, I am not saying that at the Fall Adam became less human (or even less what he was, per se), but that his eyes were opened to good and evil. His focus shifted towards the “flesh”, of his own desires, perhaps even needs, and away from God. Adam’s human nature was there as he stood in the Garden, and the temptation was there as the Serpent said “you will be like God”, but the sin….the Fall…was not until Adam acted in disobedience to satisfy the flesh.

Calvinism does not deny the freedom to choose as a free exercise of our will. Calvinism denies that man’s nature is God’s nature.

 

As far as I know, there aren’t any here who believes that God intervenes in an irresistible forced change of a person’s nature.

But there are people who believe that God intervenes in Creation, that it is in Christ everything exists and holds together. And there are people who believe that in terms of being drawn to salvation the Holy Spirit works within the hearts and minds of people so that they seek God. And God saves them (they are washed with the waters of regeneration and renewed by the Spirit). So, you are right that some people believe conversion is a supernatural work of God where they are "re-created" or "made new". But you are wrong in that no one (here anyway) seems to believe that God forces men by changing their nature.

Men must repent and believe. This is not just simply believing facts about God. God draws men to repentance. The Spirit drives men to a godly sorrow over their sinfulness and this leads to repentance as they turn from their sinfulness and self righteousness and to God and his righteousness. And God saves them - transforms them.