Indisputable evidence of the effectual call

[The Biblicist]

Maybe Revelation 21:24 can help in this discussion:

Tom, I don't quite know what you are trying to convey. Help me out!

 

[JamesL]

I agree with you that ‘his marvelous light’ is synonymous with ’the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ’, BUT, as you can see, there are those who have been blinded to this ‘knowledge’ so that they are unable to perceive or receive it.

There's no mention of the will of man in these passages.

I agree 100% here. Some have been blinded. The parable of the sower (or soils) would support that

I also agree there is no mention of the will. Not only in these passages, but in the entirety of scripture - as it relates to a knowledge of the truth. I believe it is humanly impossible to decide to believe something.

If I'm convinced enough to decide, then I already believe before I ever got to my "moment of decision"


But that's part of the rub. The thread title "Effectual Call" seems to point to Reformed doctrine, which is absolutely a call to "make a decision"

It's simply Arminianism rewrapped in a box of grace and tied with a Monergist bow. Nothing different except a fancy package.

The Reformed mantra is that one is "called" to commit himself to serving Christ (same as their opponent). That this servitude is required element in the scheme of "final" salvation (whatever that means)

However, we are stuck with passages which teach us that man is not to boast or take credit for "salvation"

So whatcha gonna do? Try to relieve the tension.

That's why regeneration MUST come first, according to the Protestant. Regeneration is reduced to a meager "change of will", a new disposition.

Now the Calvinist is able to require the same decision and commitment that the Arminian. The only difference is that the Calvinist can wave a Monergist banner over his works based "gospel"

 

[The Biblicist]

But that's part of the rub. The thread title "Effectual Call" seems to point to Reformed doctrine, which is absolutely a call to "make a decision"

It's simply Arminianism rewrapped in a box of grace and tied with a Monergist bow. Nothing different except a fancy package.

Ok, now I see why we are not communicating with each other. No, that is not my view or definition of the effectual call or what this text is speaking about. There is no "make a decision" involved here. Instead it is the creation of a believing heart out of a non-believing heart by divine fiat.

 

[kyredneck]

..... I believe it is humanly impossible to decide to believe something.

If I'm convinced enough to decide, then I already believe before I ever got to my "moment of decision"

Amen! You're sounding like an Old Baptist!

But that's part of the rub. The thread title "Effectual Call" seems to point to Reformed doctrine, which is absolutely a call to "make a decision"

It's simply Arminianism rewrapped in a box of grace and tied with a Monergist bow. Nothing different except a fancy package.

The Reformed mantra is that one is "called" to commit himself to serving Christ (same as their opponent). That this servitude is required element in the scheme of "final" salvation (whatever that means)

However, we are stuck with passages which teach us that man is not to boast or take credit for "salvation"

I believe probably your 'rub' would be with Andrew Fuller's corruption of Particular Baptist theology, i.e., Cal-Minianism:

What is the problem with Fullerism

Why I am not a Follower of Andrew Fuller

 

[JamesL]

Ok, now I see why we are not communicating with each other. No, that is not my view or definition of the effectual call or what this text is speaking about. There is no "make a decision" involved here. Instead it is the creation of a believing heart out of a non-believing heart by divine fiat.

I agree wholeheartedly, and I formally apologize for interfering

 

[JamesL]

Amen! You're sounding like an Old Baptist!

Hey, I'm not as old as I sound - lol

I believe probably your 'rub' would be with Andrew Fuller's corruption of Particular Baptist theology, i.e., Cal-Minianism:

What is the problem with Fullerism

Why I am not a Follower of Andrew Fuller

I'll have to go back for a refresher. It's been at least 12 years since I took a walk through Fullerism, back when I was studying church history and the history of doctrine.

Thanks for the links