Four questions for Calvinists.

[rsr]

When I speak of faith in terms of conversion, I tend to think only of an established belief in Jesus as Lord and Savior.

In one sense that is true; that is what is required. But it cannot be only an intellectual faith. To think otherwise is to come dangerously close to the error of the Campbellites, who think intellectual assent is sufficient to establish conversion.

[quote}But I also consider this drawing of God to be pre-belief. Once someone believes (repents and believes) I think that they are found to be washed by regeneration, renewed by the Spirit and in Christ…not because of that faith but through that faith.[/quote]

Of course the drawing of God is pre-belief. God may draw for years (as in the case of Bunyan or C.S. Lewis) or may accomplish his will in an instant. But when he finally imparts faith, regeneration and justification occur in an instant.

I believe that some have taken analogy too far and developed a process of salvation where the spiritual corpse must be made alive so that it can be saved (ignoring that this life itself is salvation).

Well, this is the rub. That's exactly what Augustinians believe, We are dead in our trespasses and sins and must be revived to come to God."Life itself is salvation) is nonsense, except in describing common grace, which simply means that God has every right to strike down each and every one of us should he desire.

 

[rsr]

I can't but see the logical order as also chronological when comprised of events leading to or resulting in other things. If one is necessary before another, calling it a "logical order" of things does not resolve the fact that one truth is dependent on the other to occur before it can happen.

That is why I say that I believe conversion is not a process.

You are verging on incoherence. I never said conversion is a process, unless you impose our temporality upon it. It is instantaneous. We can try to explain the exact steps, but it is all wrought of God in an instant.That's what I said.

 

[TCassidy]

You are verging on incoherence.

Well, after all, it is JonC!

 

[JonC]

...We are dead in our trespasses and sins and must be revived to come to God."Life itself is salvation) is nonsense, except in describing common grace, which simply means that God has every right to strike down each and every one of us should he desire.

I absolutely disagree .In my post I was speaking of this “life” that is the work of God in the life of the believer (Jn 10:10). Common grace is not this work (all are not “made alive in Christ”, all do not take part in “this life”, all do not have “life” and that life abundantly). I do not believe that God gives everyone “life in Christ” and then removes those who do not believe, if that is what you mean.

You are verging on incoherence. I never said conversion is a process, unless you impose our temporality upon it. It is instantaneous. We can try to explain the exact steps, but it is all wrought of God in an instant.That's what I said.

Ok, I have no problem with people explaining conversion “in steps”….as long as they acknowledge that, while their “steps” may be correct, their explanation is unbiblical.

To clarify this “incoherence”, I am saying that the argument of “logical order” is very often a façade for chronological order. People will present as “logical order” that the indwelling of the Spirit is a result of faith (faith leads to this indwelling). Others will argue a “logical order” that one must be “regenerated” (forgiven and made anew) before one can believe because dead people can’t believe. What is nonsense is calling these ideas anything but chronological. Logical order shows purpose, not steps.

 

[JonC]

Well, after all, it is JonC!

Always here to help.

 

[glad4mercy]

Gal. 3:2. 'This only I want to learn from you: did you receive the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith.' What this text cannot mean is that unregenerate Galatians heard, responded savingly to the Gospel, and then received the Spirit. That would contradict 1 Corinthians 2:14 and Ephesians 2:4-10. Some commentators are of the opinion that Gal. 3:2 is referring to the 'Sign Gifts' which were about in those early days. God must give us eyes to see and ears to hear before we can come to faith in Christ (cf. Deuteronomy 29:4; Matthew 11:15 etc.).


My friend, I've tried several times to explain this to you. Yes, it is God alone who regenerates. But under your system, and that of Wesley, Man, as it were, holds an armlock on God and He cannot regenerate unless Man cooperates by not resisting His grace. That is Synergism. I am well acquainted with your Wesley quote, but it does not actually mention Monergism or Synergism. A very helpful book on this subject is John Wesley: in the Reformation Tradition by Roland Burrows (Tentmaker Productions. ISBN 978-1-901670-88-2). It explains his views in great depth. I have much admiration for Wesley; he did an amazing work in Britain and was used by God in the salvation of thousands, but alas, it was flawed in various ways, and the baneful results may be seen to this day.


'No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him' (John 6:44). God must give life to the dead before they can hear the Gospel.

quote- What this text cannot mean is that unregenerate Galatians heard, responded savingly to the Gospel, and then received the Spirit.

Ephesians 1:13 also says that receiving the Spirit is connected to faith.

quote- That would contradict 1 Corinthians 2:14 and Ephesians 2:4-10

Not at all, when you realize that faith is the result of God DRAWING US. You all confuse "drawing" with "regeneration". Drawing precedes both faith and regeneration. Elementary stuff, man.

quote- God must give us eyes to see and ears to hear before we can come to faith in Christ (cf. Deuteronomy 29:4; Matthew 11:15 etc.).

Yes, through the Father drawing us by means of the Holy Spirit. NOWHERE in the Bible does it say regeneration before faith.

Quote-But under your system, and that of Wesley, Man, as it were, holds an armlock on God

RIDICULOUS STRAWMAN.

To say that is the same as saying that if I as a Christian pray for something without believing, and God does not answer due to my lack of faith, that I have an armlock on God and am controlling Him. No, we do not hold to your erected strawman argument. We hold that GOD is free to LIMIT HIMSELF by choosing not to save unbelievers. Not that THEY limit Him, that He decreed their salvation, but they hinder His decree (that is a silly strawman), rather that He decreed that he would only save those who receive the gift of faith and repentance that EVERYONE WHO THIRSTS MAY COME TO THE WELL AND DRINK.

quote- and He cannot regenerate unless Man cooperates by not resisting His grace.

WHERE does it say that God CANNOT SAVE someone. Give me the quote and page number. As far as I know, the correct position is that God WILL NOT (NOT CANNOT) save such a person.

If Wesley said "cannot", then I would disagree with Him on that. But you need to establish that He used such words. I say HE WILL NOT, which is MUCH DIFFERENT THAN than the words CANNOT.

Or do you not know the difference?

It's not a question of Divine Ability. It is a question of what God will and will not do.

Where does the Bible say that "drawing" is the act of giving spiritual life? Book, chapter, and verse please.

We are drawn that we might eat the bread of life. It is the bread of life that gives life, not the drawing.

Your extrabiblical traditions are clouding your reading of the text.

 

[glad4mercy]

Now maybe we're getting somewhere. But what is "the hearing of faith"? That's not a term I'm familiar with and can't define. I would prefer to call it the impartation of faith or the gift of faith or the creation of faith. It is God's work. Whether you want to consider that faith precedes regeneration or vice versa, the ultimate truth that it is all the work of God and we have nothing to do with it. Logically, it seems that regeneration must precede faith; in fact they are simultaneous.



Of course there is, because salvation encompasses more than justification; and it includes both temporal and eternal aspects. We have been saved (justification), we are being saved (sanctification) and someday we shall be saved (glorification). No one disagrees with that.

quote- Now maybe we're getting somewhere. But what is "the hearing of faith"? That's not a term I'm familiar with and can't define. I would prefer to call it the impartation of faith or the gift of faith or the creation of faith.

The hearing of faith that regenerates is in Galatians 3:2, and I would rather use Biblical Terminology than my own (or Calvin's, or Luther's, or anyone elses)

quote- It is God's work.

So the subject of the verb "believe" in John 3:16 is God? I thought God already has (nay, God is) eternal life. What need is there for God to believe?

quote- Whether you want to consider that faith precedes regeneration or vice versa, the ultimate truth that it is all the work of God and we have nothing to do with it.

Who is the subject of the verb "believe" in John 3:16? God or us?

If you want to say that God grants us faith, I will agree. If you are trying to say that He believes on our behalf, I would say that that is a stretch.

quote- Logically, it seems that regeneration must precede faith;

Regeneration cannot occur without receiving the Spirit, and the Spirit is received by the hearing of faith. SO logically, faith precedes regeneration. (Galatians 2:3, Ephesians 1:13)

quote- in fact they are simultaneous.

Yes, I agree with that. But one never receives the Spirit BEFORE they believe, which would be the case if regeneration is the cause and faith is the effect.

quote- Of course there is, because salvation encompasses more than justification; and it includes both temporal and eternal aspects. We have been saved (justification), we are being saved (sanctification) and someday we shall be saved (glorification). No one disagrees with that.

And we are KEPT by the power of God through faith in the state that we entered into by the power of God through faith.

 

[glad4mercy]

A man is never said to be saved.....because of faith....
He is saved..... by, or though faith....never....because of faith.
It happens at one point in time....a person can be convicted and drawn for awhile....but when the Spirit quickens him, it is game over.

A lost sheep lives as a lost person, until Jesus seeks and saves him.
EZK34..... For thus saith the Lord God; Behold, I, even I, will both search my sheep, and seek them out.

So if a person is regenerated by or through faith, it cannot be said that faith is the result of regeneration. Otherwise, it would be faith by or through regeneration.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

Your extrabiblical traditions are clouding your reading of the text

Well, we can all say that about each other can't we? It's like conjugating some French irregular verb:

I have a perfect understanding of the text.
You have extra-biblical traditions that cloud your judgement.
He is a heretic.

But it doesn't really contribute to the argument, does it?

We are actually not so very far away from each other. It may be a few days before I can reply in full to your post, but may I refer you again to this link? https://marprelate.wordpress.com/2010/08/15/new-birth-7-the-order-of-the-new-birth/ I think it answers some of your points. In my understanding, 'drawing' or 'awakening' is a part of the process of regeneration.

But the Lord Jesus Christ says, "All that the Father gives Me will come to Me.' (John 6:37; cf. v.39; John 10:25-30; 17:1-2). It is absolutely certain. He does not say, "All that the Father gives Me will come to Me unless they refuse." Praise God for Irresistible Grace!

 

[Martin Marprelate]

So if a person is regenerated by or through faith, it cannot be said that faith is the result of regeneration. Otherwise, it would be faith by or through regeneration.

It is the grace of God that saves us, through the life and death of the Lord Jesus Christ and the regenerating power of the Holy Spirit (Titus 3:3-7). Faith is certainly our response to that grace, but, as has so often been pointed out, our faith itself is the gift of God (Ephesians 2:8).

 

[glad4mercy]

Well, we can all say that about each other can't we? It's like conjugating some French irregular verb:

I have a perfect understanding of the text.
You have extra-biblical traditions that cloud your judgement.
He is a heretic.

But it doesn't really contribute to the argument, does it?

We are actually not so very far away from each other. It may be a few days before I can reply in full to your post, but may I refer you again to this link? https://marprelate.wordpress.com/2010/08/15/new-birth-7-the-order-of-the-new-birth/ I think it answers some of your points. In my understanding, 'drawing' or 'awakening' is a part of the process of regeneration.

But the Lord Jesus Christ says, "All that the Father gives Me will come to Me.' (John 6:37; cf. v.39; John 10:25-30; 17:1-2). It is absolutely certain. He does not say, "All that the Father gives Me will come to Me unless they refuse." Praise God for Irresistible Grace!

I do not think we are far apart either, but again, I am not the one making false accusations (like synergism being imputed to me). I have shown that Classical Arminianism is not synergistic, and you call me a synergist because you incorrectly think that we affirm that one's unbelief ties God's hands, making Him unable to save. But that is a strawman, for we do not say that God is UNABLE, we say that He is UNWILLING to save the one's who will not believe.

BIG DIFFERENCE.

thank you for the link. I will read and reply asap.

Of course all that the Father gives to Jesus will come to Him, being foreknown from eternity (God being OMNISCIENT and all)

quote- Praise God for Irresistible Grace!

If your children are not elect, will you rejoice with a big smiley face therein or be filled with sorrow But Paul did not rejoice about the unbelieving jews (Romans 9) nor did Jesus, nor did the Father take pleasure in the death of the wicked. And I will not either.

For there is always another side to irresistible grace.

 

[Iconoclast]

So if a person is regenerated by or through faith, it cannot be said that faith is the result of regeneration. Otherwise, it would be faith by or through regeneration.

Faith.....is only the .....instrumentality.....
Do not let it confuse the issue....
A dead sinner needs life to exercise the God given instrumentality.
A blind sinner needs......eyes to see.......God heals the blind eyes.
A deaf sinner.....ears to hear....etc.
In Adam.....we have none of these things.....we need the mercy and grace of God to remove our philosophical and carnal reasoning.....and for God to implant the new heart, so we are now able to welcome the engraved word which can save our soul.James1

 

[glad4mercy]

Faith.....is only the .....instrumentality.....
Do not let it confuse the issue....
A dead sinner needs life to exercise the God given instrumentality.
A blind sinner needs......eyes to see.......God heals the blind eyes.
A deaf sinner.....ears to hear....etc.
In Adam.....we have none of these things.....we need the mercy and grace of God to remove our philosophical and carnal reasoning.....and for God to implant the new heart, so we are now able to welcome the engraved word which can save our soul.James1

Received the Spirit by the HEARING OF FAITH.

No regeneration without receiving the Spirit.

No receiving the Spirit without faith.

Therefore, a person cannot be regenerated BEFORE faith, therefore INITIAL faith is not the result of regeneration.

I can go along with "simultaneous", but if they are simultaneous, then it cannot be said that faith is the result of regeneration. Faith and regeneration are simultaneous results of effectual DRAWING!

Drawing and regeneration are not the same thing.

It says "no one can come unless drawn",

IT DOES NOT SAY "no one can come unless regenerated". Nowhere in the Bible.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

I do not think we are far apart either, but again, I am not the one making false accusations (like synergism being imputed to me). I have shown that Classical Arminianism is not synergistic, and you call me a synergist because you incorrectly think that we affirm that one's unbelief ties God's hands, making Him unable to save. But that is a strawman, for we do not say that God is UNABLE, we say that He is UNWILLING to save the ones who will not believe.

BIG DIFFERENCE.

We can go on like this indefinitely, but if grace is resistible, that is synergism, end of story.
I don't know why you're so squiffy about that. I you think synergism is correct, don't be ashamed, stand up for it.

'That which we call a rose would smell as sweet
By any other name.'

Of course all that the Father gives to Jesus will come to Him, being foreknown from eternity (God being OMNISCIENT and all)

Gosh! This is like wading through treacle! The Father gives the sheep to the Son. The Son lays down His life for the sheep. The sheep hear His voice and follow Him. That is Monergism. If some of the sheep do not hear His voice, not only is it unbiblical but it becomes synergistic because salvation depends- to some degree at least- on Man and not God.

If your children are not elect, will you rejoice with a big smiley face therein or be filled with sorrow But Paul did not rejoice about the unbelieving jews (Romans 9) nor did Jesus, nor did the Father take pleasure in the death of the wicked. And I will not either.

Perhaps you have been up to heaven and had a quick look at the Book of Life to see whose names are written there. I have not had that privilege. But it is the sovereignty of God that gives hope. When all our arguments and pleadings have fallen on deaf ears, one door still lies open. We can pray to an omnipotent God- "We gave them life in the flesh; You, Lord, must give them life in the Spirit." Again, praise God for irresistible grace!

For there is always another side to irresistible grace.

Two sides, and both of them good.

 

[Iconoclast]

Received the Spirit by the HEARING OF FAITH.

No regeneration without receiving the Spirit.

No receiving the Spirit without faith.

Therefore, a person cannot be regenerated BEFORE faith, therefore INITIAL faith is not the result of regeneration.

I can go along with "simultaneous", but if they are simultaneous, then it cannot be said that faith is the result of regeneration. Faith and regeneration are simultaneous results of effectual DRAWING!

Drawing and regeneration are not the same thing.

It says "no one can come unless drawn",

IT DOES NOT SAY "no one can come unless regenerated". Nowhere in the Bible.

Could Lazarus come forth by himself...?

 

[JonShaff]

Could Lazarus come forth by himself...?

if he was already Spiritually regenerated, this is a picture of The Resurrection of believers, not salvation. Right?

 

[glad4mercy]

We can go on like this indefinitely, but if grace is resistible, that is synergism, end of story.
I don't know why you're so squiffy about that. I you think synergism is correct, don't be ashamed, stand up for it.

'That which we call a rose would smell as sweet
By any other name.'

Gosh! This is like wading through treacle! The Father gives the sheep to the Son. The Son lays down His life for the sheep. The sheep hear His voice and follow Him. That is Monergism. If some of the sheep do not hear His voice, not only is it unbiblical but it becomes synergistic because salvation depends- to some degree at least- on Man and not God.

Perhaps you have been up to heaven and had a quick look at the Book of Life to see whose names are written there. I have not had that privilege. But it is the sovereignty of God that gives hope. When all our arguments and pleadings have fallen on deaf ears, one door still lies open. We can pray to an omnipotent God- "We gave them life in the flesh; You, Lord, must give them life in the Spirit." Again, praise God for irresistible grace!

Two sides, and both of them good.

Again, it is only synergism if I help God regenerate me. Since I believe that regeneration is a work of God alone, then synergism does not apply to me. See the sig below...

How regeneration is monergistic.

"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 changewrought 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." (The New Birth- John Wesley)

see? Nothing about us sharing in the work of regeneration. All a work of God.


quote- Gosh! This is like wading through treacle! The Father gives the sheep to the Son. The Son lays down His life for the sheep. The sheep hear His voice and follow Him. That is Monergism. If some of the sheep do not hear His voice, not only is it unbiblical but it becomes synergistic because salvation depends- to some degree at least- on Man and not God.

I thought synergism had to do with Regeneration.

a. Is practical/progressive sanctification a part of salvation?
b. Is practical/progressive sanctification monergistic or synergistic? (see 2 Cor. 7:1)

Regeneration is monergistic because it is the work of God alone. Faith is not the same as regeneration, because it is the means by which God regenerates us. (Ephesians 1:13 and Galatians 3:2)

No regeneration before receiving the Spirit, and no receiving the Spirit before faith.

Elementary...

 

[glad4mercy]

Could Lazarus come forth by himself...?

No, but he also could not have rejected the outward call by himself either, but sinners can. Therefore, the analogy is invalid.

A corpse cannot hear, sin, disobey, choose, or reject, but SINNERS CAN.

Plus, I agree with what Jonshaff said in post 56

 

[Iconoclast]

if he was already Spiritually regenerated, this is a picture of The Resurrection of believers, not salvation. Right?

Yes.....physical resurrection . .....did he will himself to rise?
The unsaved are ......@ corpse
Physical miracles are illustrations of spiritual truth's

 

[Iconoclast]

No, but he also could not have rejected the outward call by himself either, but sinners can. Therefore, the analogy is invalid.

A corpse cannot hear, sin, disobey, choose, or reject, but SINNERS CAN.

Plus, I agree with what Jonshaff said in post 56

Corpses can hear God.jn5