Is Calvinism's "Total Inability" and Biblical Hardening Compatible?

[Skandelon]

You or somebody closed the other thread right after you made your last post- whether it was so you could have the last word or not, I do not know- I typed this statement and tried to submit it only to find out that it was closed before I could respond to your last statement.

It fits here so here it is:

Well, at least you have abandoned that tired old erroneous argument that me saying "God DID IT" puts me out of the mainstream of Calvinism.

Bruce Ware reresents the mainstream ON THIS ISSUE- he is CERTAINLY not to the RIGHT of MOST of us.

And he says EXACTLY what I and Calvin and Edwards and Piper and Sproul and Pink, etc.... say about it.

Now that you've come to terms with the fact that I am in the mainstream and that you did not really know this whole time what the mainstream of Calvinism says now and historically- now we can have some fruitful exchanges.

Ask me what you will- I will answer it to the best of my ability.

You misinterpreted my intent. It wasn't an admission that you have properly represented mainstream views...I know too many mainstream Calvinists who have told me otherwise....plus its obvious to any casual non-biased observer that you are not careful with your terms and explanations regarding these matter, but I'm tired of going over it again and again. BTW...since when did we all vote to make Ware the arbitrator of the mainstream views? Some would call Pink representative of mainstream views, but MacArthur takes issue with his views. Is Ware more in line with Pink or MacArthur? I can't tell based on that one clip.

So, let's move on. I specifically addressed Ware's points...will you?

 

[Skandelon]

No one says that everyone is as evil acting as possible.

Agreed. You are not implying that is something Steve is arguing, are you?

The doctrine of total inability simply states that man has no innate (in our fallen Adamic sin nature) to repent and believe

Right, and that's the part that the doctrine of hardening appears to contradict for reasons already mentioned.

If we are going to do either, there must be a heart-change, from dead to alive, from stone to living flesh, etc (lots of metaphors in the Word).

Interesting that you mention the "Word," because that is what I believe has the power to bring that heart change. Just because some stubbornly resist that change thus causing their hearts to grow hardened to the word, doesn't deny that point of agreement.

Without that change in nature, there can be no change in will or action. We hear the Gospel call, we hear the pleading to repent and are utterly unable to respond correctly. All the righteous things we do are, in reality, filthy rags to God.

Sounds like a perfect excuse for someone standing before God facing judgement for NOT responding correctly.

If you simply acknowledge that they were able to willingly accept but resisted, rebelled, grew hardened and then were "given over" to their defiled hearts, rather than being born in that condition then they would truly be "without excuse."

When someone continually rebells against the revelation of God their hearts grow hardened, "Otherwise they might see with their eyes, hear with their ears, understand with their hearts and turn, and I [God] would heal them.' (Acts 28) This is clearly the condition of the Jews because they have been sent God's revelation for generations, but 'now' the gospel is being taken to the the Gentiles and the "Gentiles will listen." (Acts 28:28), thus proving the doctrine of Total Inability is not a universal condition of all mankind from birth.

 

[Skandelon]

You are exactly right.

Cornelius must have been regenerate but the process of his salvation was not complete (in time that is) until he heard the words of Peter.

The same type of thing is said of Lydia prior to Paul's visit. For instance, she is called a "God-worshipper" prior to when the Lord opens her heart to hear Paul's message.

Acts 16:14:
One of those listening was a woman named Lydia, a dealer in purple cloth from the city of Thyatira, who was a worshiper of God. The Lord opened her heart to respond to Paul's message.

If she, like Cornelius, was ALREADY regenerate then why do Calvinists use this passage as a proof text supporting their doctrine of pre-regeneration?

 

[Skandelon]

To take away from the story of Cornelius that he was a righteous man BEFORE salvation is sad. He did good stuff so God said, I will save him.

I think the argument was, "Abraham believed and it was credited to him as righteousness?" Except the name was changed.

 

[Robert Snow]

Nice try. You set out to disprove Dr. Bob saying man cannot do any good concerning salvation.

You then said Cornelius refutes this.

You're in serious and grave error Winman.

You do know it is another "grave" sin to lie about someone repeatedly.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

It is perfectly clear that neither Cornelius nor Lydia were saved before Peter and Paul spoke to them.

C and L were 'God fearers.' That simply means that they were non-Jews who attended the local synagogue. Cornelius did lots of good deeds but probably no more that the Pharisee in Luke 18:11-12. Maybe God had already put Cornelius under conviction of sin; maybe not. But he had not put his faith in Jesus Christ which is why Peter was sent to preach to him. 'Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you will be saved.' Not otherwise. While Cornelius and his family were listening, the Holy Spirit came upon them. That surely suggests that He hadn't come before, and, 'If anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he is not His' (Rom 8:9). Therefore the Spirit must have come first and opened the hearts of Cornelius & Co to trust in Christ for salvation.

As for Lydia, we hear that 'The Lord opened her heart.' What does that tell us about her heart before God opened it? That's right! It was closed.

As for the expression 'hardening,' I think Skandelon and others are making too much of it. There are only two classes of people; the saved and the unsaved. God saves some and not others. 'Therefore He has mercy on whom He wills and whom He wills He hardens' (Rom 9:18). There isn't some strange third realm where God neither has mercy not hardens. In this context, hardening means simply leaving folk in their unsaved condition, dead in trespasses and sins, with hearts of stone (cf. Ezek 36:26).

Steve

 

[preacher4truth]

You do know it is another "grave" sin to lie about someone repeatedly.

You don't know what you're talking about. I've quoted him and his rebuttal of Dr. Bob, with his objective.

Concerning salvation we are incapable. Your friend set out to prove otherwise.

Go back and read what they said. Dr. Bob said we can do no good concerning salvation. Winman argued that he is wrong and set out to prove we are capable concerning salvation, which words were the platform of the argument. Win is misusing Cornelius as proof.

This is where I get the "good ol' boys" prior to salvation nonsense bleeding through this type of teaching. This stems from his theological deficiency. The Bible teaches a different state of lost man.

If you want to defend that theological position, then go for it. In fact, I think that is what you are doing.

Salvation isn't an invite for good ol' boys a la joining a lodge. We are lost, hostile toward God, enemies toward Him in our minds, in the kingdom of darkness, and at enmity with Him.

...until a work of Grace within our hearts.

 

[quantumfaith]

I am reminded of the ole southern saying, "like a blind dog in a meathouse."

 

[kyredneck]

It is perfectly clear that neither Cornelius nor Lydia were saved before Peter and Paul spoke to them.

If you mean these two were unregenerate dead alien sinners, that's absurd:

....Cornelius...a devout man...that feared God...who gave much...and prayed... Acts 10:1,2

....Lydia....one that worshipped God....whose heart the Lord opened.....Acts 16:14

Quite the opposite. It is perfectly clear that God had already wrought [Jn 3:21] within the hearts of both, BEFORE they came to the light.

C and L were 'God fearers.' That simply means that they were non-Jews who attended the local synagogue. Cornelius did lots of good deeds but probably no more that the Pharisee in Luke 18:11-12.

Incredible. Cornelius, described as a DEVOUT man, who FEARED GOD, who GAVE MUCH, and who PRAYED, and you actually put him on that same level of the self righteous Pharisee depicted in Luke 18.

Maybe God had already put Cornelius under conviction of sin; maybe not. But he had not put his faith in Jesus Christ which is why Peter was sent to preach to him. 'Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you will be saved.' Not otherwise.

You do err here as does the majority of mainstream evangelical Christianity when you force 'saved' to mean the moment of the birth from above and the acquisition of the free gift of eternal life. This is conversion (saved), the entering into the spiritual kingdom of heaven here on earth, not the birth of the Spirit. Only those who have [already] been born from above are capable of seeing and entering into that kingdom.

While Cornelius and his family were listening, the Holy Spirit came upon them. That surely suggests that He hadn't come before, and, 'If anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he is not His' (Rom 8:9). Therefore the Spirit must have come first and opened the hearts of Cornelius & Co to trust in Christ for salvation.

Once again, you do err here as does the majority of mainstream evangelical Christianity when you equate/confuse the spiritual birth from above [Jn 3] with the gift/baptism/empowerment of the Spirit. What's described here is no different than Peter's experience.

Peter proved his Spiritual birth here:

16 And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.
17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-jonah: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father who is in heaven. Mt 16.

Peter was later baptized of the Spirit here:

And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance. Acts 2:4

As for Lydia, we hear that 'The Lord opened her heart.' What does that tell us about her heart before God opened it? That's right! It was closed.

No, the fact that she was already worshiping God shows that she had been born not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God, and her giving heed unto the things which were spoken by Paul in order to be brought into the spiritual kingdom of Christ was also of God.

 

[preacher4truth]

If you mean these two were unregenerate dead alien sinners, that's absurd:

....Cornelius...a devout man...that feared God...who gave much...and prayed... Acts 10:1,2

....Lydia....one that worshipped God....whose heart the Lord opened.....Acts 16:14

Quite the opposite. It is perfectly clear that God had already wrought [Jn 3:21] within the hearts of both, BEFORE they came to the light.



Incredible. Cornelius, described as a DEVOUT man, who FEARED GOD, who GAVE MUCH, and who PRAYED, and you actually put him on that same level of the self righteous Pharisee depicted in Luke 18.



You do err here as does the majority of mainstream evangelical Christianity when you force 'saved' to mean the moment of the birth from above and the acquisition of the free gift of eternal life. This is conversion (saved), the entering into the spiritual kingdom of heaven here on earth, not the birth of the Spirit. Only those who have [already] been born from above are capable of seeing and entering into that kingdom.



Once again, you do err here as does the majority of mainstream evangelical Christianity when you equate/confuse the spiritual birth from above [Jn 3] with the gift/baptism/empowerment of the Spirit. What's described here is no different than Peter's experience.

Peter proved his Spiritual birth here:

16 And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.
17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-jonah: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father who is in heaven. Mt 16.

Peter was later baptized of the Spirit here:

And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance. Acts 2:4



No, the fact that she was already worshiping God shows that she had been born not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God, and her giving heed unto the things which were spoken by Paul in order to be brought into the spiritual kingdom of Christ was also of God.

Amen. I agree. Context of Acts 10-11 also show God teaching Peter how He saves gentiles, and they also by good works show this work of Grace within their hearts. Other passages show this also, as you've provided.

- Peace

 

[Martin Marprelate]

If you mean these two were unregenerate dead alien sinners, that's absurd:

....Cornelius...a devout man...that feared God...who gave much...and prayed... Acts 10:1,2

....Lydia....one that worshipped God....whose heart the Lord opened.....Acts 16:14

Quite the opposite. It is perfectly clear that God had already wrought [Jn 3:21] within the hearts of both, BEFORE they came to the light.

A while ago I started a thread on the subject of 'elongated regeneration.' I couldn't find anyone who agred with me so I let it drop. As I wrote, it is quite possible that God had started a work in Cornelius' heart, but Mormons and JWs fear God are devout, give much and pray. It doesn't mean they are saved.

Incredible. Cornelius, described as a DEVOUT man, who FEARED GOD, who GAVE MUCH, and who PRAYED, and you actually put him on that same level of the self righteous Pharisee depicted in Luke 18.

The Pharisee prayed, tithed, and kept various commandments (Luke 18:11f). I will deal with 'Fearing God' a little later on.

You do err here as does the majority of mainstream evangelical Christianity when you force 'saved' to mean the moment of the birth from above and the acquisition of the free gift of eternal life. This is conversion (saved), the entering into the spiritual kingdom of heaven here on earth, not the birth of the Spirit. Only those who have [already] been born from above are capable of seeing and entering into that kingdom.

I don't know what you mean by 'mainstream evangelical.' FYI, I hold to the 1689 London Confession. I don't think we are in disagreement on this point. I wrote: 'Therefore the Spirit must have come first and opened the hearts of Cornelius & Co to trust in Christ for salvation.' Regeneration must come before faith. However, salvation comes when one believes on Christ, and this Cornelius and his household could not do until Peter came and preached to him (Rom 10:14).

Once again, you do err here as does the majority of mainstream evangelical Christianity when you equate/confuse the spiritual birth from above [Jn 3] with the gift/baptism/empowerment of the Spirit. What's described here is no different than Peter's experience.

Peter proved his Spiritual birth here:

16 And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.
17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-jonah: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father who is in heaven. Mt 16.

Amen! Peter trusted in Christ. God the Holy Spirit opened his heart to receive Him.

Peter was later baptized of the Spirit here:

And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance. Acts 2:4

I do not believe in a separate baptism of the Spirit post Pentecost. Every Christian has been baptized in the Spirit (cf. 1John 2:20).

Now on to Lydia.

No, the fact that she was already worshiping God shows that she had been born not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God, and her giving heed unto the things which were spoken by Paul in order to be brought into the spiritual kingdom of Christ was also of God.

What you don't seem to understand is that 'God fearer' or 'God worshipper' is a sort of semi-technical term meaning those Gentiles who attended the Jewish synagogue. See Acts 13:16 and also verses like Acts 13:50; 17:4, 17, where the word 'devout' is used. These people were not necessarily any more born from above than the Jews whose synagogue they shared. They needed to hear the words of life concerning Jesus Christ, and they needed, like Lydia, God to open their hearts to receive that word.

Steve

 

[kyredneck]

...I do not believe in a separate baptism of the Spirit post Pentecost. Every Christian has been baptized in the Spirit (cf. 1John 2:20)....

Jn 3:8 was no new phenomena. How else could there have been more of the children of the desolate than of her that hath the husband? How else could have Gentiles who had not the law, have that law written in their hearts? For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

Jn 3:8 was no new phenomena. How else could there have been more of the children of the desolate than of her that hath the husband? How else could have Gentiles who had not the law, have that law written in their hearts? For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified.

I'm not quite sure what you're on about here, but I think we're also off-topic. If you want to discuss John 3:8, why not start a new thread, or maybe read http://marprelate.wordpress.com/2010/07/16/the-new-birth-5-the-way-of-the-wind/

Steve

 

[JesusFan]

No one says that everyone is as evil acting as possible. I was an evil sinner, an enemy of God, but not a Hitler or Stalin.

The doctrine of total inability simply states that man has no innate (in our fallen Adamic sin nature) to repent and believe - both crucial parts of the whole package we call "salvation". If we are going to do either, there must be a heart-change, from dead to alive, from stone to living flesh, etc (lots of metaphors in the Word).

Without that change in nature, there can be no change in will or action. We hear the Gospel call, we hear the pleading to repent and are utterly unable to respond correctly. All the righteous things we do are, in reality, filthy rags to God.

No, I'm no Hitler. But in me, that is in my flesh, there is nothing good. Rom 3 described ol' self-righteous Bob's condition to a 't'. Every part of me ("t" = totality) is captive of Satan. Now some may "harden" their will even further - like Pharaoh or like my example of Hitler. I was not there.

But still without hope. Not a Romans 1 reprobate sinner, but a Romans 2 rational sinner and Romans 3 religious sinner. But a sinner. And all sinners are completely unable to do any good (concerning salvation)

My understanding on this doctrine is that man still has the means to think, see God in nature, can make up God in mans own image, by the gact that man will see that God exists , but in unable to "understand" God as he is, and what the Gospel is, unless God graces him to permit him to be able to do that!

 

[DHK]

If you mean these two were unregenerate dead alien sinners, that's absurd:

....Cornelius...a devout man...that feared God...who gave much...and prayed... Acts 10:1,2

....Lydia....one that worshipped God....whose heart the Lord opened.....Acts 16:14

Quite the opposite. It is perfectly clear that God had already wrought [Jn 3:21] within the hearts of both, BEFORE they came to the light.

Incredible. Cornelius, described as a DEVOUT man, who FEARED GOD, who GAVE MUCH, and who PRAYED, and you actually put him on that same level of the self righteous Pharisee depicted in Luke 18.

Absurd? No.

Unregenerate? Yes. They were religious. They were sincere. They were men and women of good works. But sincerity and religiosity will not get you to heaven. Many Sikhs, Hindus and Muslims have both of those combinations--sincere religious people who do good works. But like Cornelius, they knew not God, that is, Christ.

One cannot be regenerated without knowing Christ--doesn't matter if you are a Calvinist or a non-Calvinist: You cannot be regenerated if you do not know Christ.
Cornelius did not know Christ. Case closed.

The only positive thing that we can say about any of these people is that the Holy Spirit may have started to work in their hearts, perhaps convicting them of sin. This would be especially true of Cornelius. The account says that he was devout. Devout to who or what? He was probably a convert to Judaism, and had heard the Word many times. Faith comes by hearing and hearing by the Word of God. The Holy Spirit also works through the Word of God. Thus God may have started a work in his heart via the Holy Spirit working in Him. But if he did not know Christ he could not have been regenerated.

 

[Winman]

You don't know what you're talking about. I've quoted him and his rebuttal of Dr. Bob, with his objective.

Concerning salvation we are incapable. Your friend set out to prove otherwise.

Go back and read what they said. Dr. Bob said we can do no good concerning salvation. Winman argued that he is wrong and set out to prove we are capable concerning salvation, which words were the platform of the argument. Win is misusing Cornelius as proof.

This is where I get the "good ol' boys" prior to salvation nonsense bleeding through this type of teaching. This stems from his theological deficiency. The Bible teaches a different state of lost man.

If you want to defend that theological position, then go for it. In fact, I think that is what you are doing.

Salvation isn't an invite for good ol' boys a la joining a lodge. We are lost, hostile toward God, enemies toward Him in our minds, in the kingdom of darkness, and at enmity with Him.

...until a work of Grace within our hearts.

And the story of Cornelius proves you wrong. He was not saved, the scriptures say so. Yet he was devout, he feared God, gave much alms to the poor, and prayed always. He was hardly hostile to God.

Your position is not scriptural, is is based on a man-made theology. As I said before, your argument is not with me, it is with the word of God. Cornelius was a very good man before he was saved, the scriptures say so, not me.

 

[JesusFan]

And the story of Cornelius proves you wrong. He was not saved, the scriptures say so. Yet he was devout, he feared God, gave much alms to the poor, and prayed always. He was hardly hostile to God.

Your position is not scriptural, is is based on a man-made theology. As I said before, your argument is not with me, it is with the word of God. Cornelius was a very good man before he was saved, the scriptures say so, not me.

even though all of us are sinners by birth and choice, there are differences in how we all act...

Some do good works, others are killers...

He is a perfect example on One that god had chosen to be saved, as he was sent Apostle Peter by God, in order to hear the Gospel and be saved....

God had been 'working" with him, and had provided him botht he grace and the Gospel in order to become saved!

 

[jbh28]

And the story of Cornelius proves you wrong. He was not saved, the scriptures say so. Yet he was devout, he feared God, gave much alms to the poor, and prayed always. He was hardly hostile to God.

Your position is not scriptural, is is based on a man-made theology. As I said before, your argument is not with me, it is with the word of God. Cornelius was a very good man before he was saved, the scriptures say so, not me.

As I have said many many many many many many many........ times Total Depravity does not teach that man is as evil as he can be. So yes, man can be "devout...." yet not be saved. He does all these things outside of faith in Jesus Christ.

 

[Skandelon]

As for the expression 'hardening,' I think Skandelon and others are making too much of it. There are only two classes of people; the saved and the unsaved. God saves some and not others. 'Therefore He has mercy on whom He wills and whom He wills He hardens' (Rom 9:18). There isn't some strange third realm where God neither has mercy not hardens. In this context, hardening means simply leaving folk in their unsaved condition, dead in trespasses and sins, with hearts of stone (cf. Ezek 36:26).

Steve

Do a search of the word "hardened" (and all its forms...harden, calloused, hardening etc) and I assure you that you will find that I'm not "making too much of it." Its discussed more in scripture that election or predestination combined.

I agree that there are two groups of people, in that their are those who are justified and those who are not. But among those who are not yet justified there are those who have not even heard the gospel (or rarely) and those who have heard in numerous times and have rebelled against it thus growing hardened to it. Heb. 3 warns people not to allow their hearts to grow hardened. Who does he warn? Those who are consistently hearing God's revelations. You can't grow hardened to something you haven't been around.

 

[JesusFan]

As I have said many many many many many many many........ times Total Depravity does not teach that man is as evil as he can be. So yes, man can be "devout...." yet not be saved. He does all these things outside of faith in Jesus Christ.

yes, think that this is where Non DoG christians have a mistaken belief on just what Depravity is from the Bible...

NOT that we are all evil and do only bad acts...
its thast we can do good works, can have 'religion" practice Golden Rule etc...

just that we cannot come to Christ being fallen apart from the work of God on our behalf!