Monergism vs Synergism

[Jerome]

"But do you know the limit of it? Christ hath bought a "multitude that no man can number." The limit of it is just this: He hath died for sinners; whoever in this congregation inwardly and sorrowfully knows himself to be a sinner, Christ died for him; whoever seeks Christ, shall know Christ died for him; for our sense of need of Christ, and our seeking after Christ, are infallible proofs that Christ died for us." ---CHS

 

[Allan]

If salvation is 100% of God, then God must do it all. Not only provide the salvation by grace alone (redemption/propitiation by Christ), but then also give the newly-regenerated man repentance and faith so that he CAN make the right choice, belieer, seek, call, etc

Here again, you have man making a choice that without he decision to choose positively WILL NOT be saved. You STILL have man participating in his salvation so it is not 100% of God.

With a proper view of depravity/inability, the myth of syergism to "get saved" is eliminated and the reality of God saves and THEN we react is correctly focused on.

And here we see a false teaching revealed as is in a few Cals theological understanding.

God saves us first and then we believe. Yet Jesus states "believe and be saved". The apostle states that we are justified, sanctified, indwelt by the Holy Spirit, righteous and IN Christ, by faith - not before we believe. All of these are what make up the regeneration. Without them one is not regenate no matter how you want to parse it.

 

[Allan]

I don't see how by the provided definition you could conclude that I or it is a synergist. I could be wrong but doesn't the belief come after regeneration in the reformed view of the order of salvation. It looks to me like in order to be a "true monergist" that would be acceptable.


Thank you for this, I will have to put further study into this.



I fail to see the delima, I never said it was our decision, it is Gods. HE chose US.
If my salvation was dependant on MY, fill in the blank, then again I fail to anything but works.


But what makes their choice different? same delima




Wouldn't faith be the ultimate good work. I know, I know, I'm gonna study that earlier reference.:tonofbricks: But until then I will ask is it our faith or another's faith that was given us?




Maybe you should give me YOUR definition of the two.



I got my definition from Roger Olsen's book Arminian Theology in a effort to be fair, but I will admit I have no idea about the history of the "system" I am just now trying to learn, so I'm new at it. about the last part of the paragraph, it makes sense, not saying I agree, but I see where you are coming from. And that is what I am trying to do.



I can't imagine how one could have trouble with this. We ARE dead IN sin, we are TOLD TO BE dead TO sin. He wouldn't have told us we were dead in sin if we were not, and He wouldn't have told us to be dead to sin if that were something we shouldn't practice. This is why the answer to the "real question" is different for these two different situations.



I will look further, but at this point I see no previent grace.



AMEN!!! something we can agree on:laugh: :laugh: So why is this grace given? for Gods glory in bringing the elect of God to salvation.


SIDE NOTE: thanks for having a real, truthful conversation void of annoying sarcasm and rudeness, it annoys me a lot when I am trying to get honest information from someone I disagree with. My main goal is to understand the others view not to convert them or myself. I believe if we would all try to understand others theology we would have more in common than we think. For instance the more Arminian writings I read the more I see how they have arrived at their conclusion and at the same time the more I disagree with them. I am fairly new at theology so forgive me if I say something stupid.

I will post to you on the above a little later, I have to take my family down to Arkansas due to a family members placement into the hospital and in serious if not life threating position. However I to enjoyed out discussion and agree with your 'Side Note'. Thank you for the respect and kindess to me in your posting. God bless you richly as He fulfills He purpose and plans in your life for His glory brother.

 

[Reformer]

I will post to you on the above a little later, I have to take my family down to Arkansas due to a family members placement into the hospital and in serious if not life threating position. However I to enjoyed out discussion and agree with your 'Side Note'. Thank you for the respect and kindess to me in your posting. God bless you richly as He fulfills He purpose and plans in your life for His glory brother.

I will pray for your family, hope all is well.raying:

Reformer

 

[Reformer]

Here again, you have man making a choice that without he decision to choose positively WILL NOT be saved. You STILL have man participating in his salvation so it is not 100% of God.


And here we see a false teaching revealed as is in a few Cals theological understanding.

God saves us first and then we believe. Yet Jesus states "believe and be saved". The apostle states that we are justified, sanctified, indwelt by the Holy Spirit, righteous and IN Christ, by faith - not before we believe. All of these are what make up the regeneration. Without them one is not regenate no matter how you want to parse it.

You have got me to thinking, I will ask if you have equated "Irresistible Grace" into the equation, with out it I can see your point, while with it included it looks to me like your theory of "mans participation" falls flat.

And I have ask, was "God saves us first and then we believe." your correct definition of Monergism. I see your coming around.:laugh: :laugh:



I think Dr. Bob hit the nail squarely with these two comments.

The real doctrinal difference in much of this debate (including all of the C/A discussions) is over man's complete and total inability to do one good thing, make one right choice, seek, call, come, believe, desire, want, will, etc or NOT.
.
.
.
.
And I believe then and ONLY then does man's part kick in. AFTER the regenerating inward and private work of the holy Spirit.

 

[MB]

Salvation is all of God. He first gave men the information about Salvation in the gospel. The number one means of man's ability to understand.

Then He was raised up on the cross drawing all men unto Him. Some men rebelled against the drawing and this is man's only choice "to rebel".

God sent the preacher to preach the gospel to men. Some men listened and some rebelled and wouldn't listen.

Christ chose to die for the whole world no man took His life but He laid it down willingly that men might be saved.

If men listened at least passively they may become convinced yet some men even though they listened as did Agrippa in the book of acts still chose to rebel even though they were nearly convinced.

If man is convinced he then believes but, is still not saved yet because he must exercise that belief by placing faith or trust in Christ. He does this in surrender. Surrender is giving up control. It is allowing God to have control over our lives.

Some say the last is decision, but for me it was the only way I could go because I had already reached the bottom. The only way to go after that was up.
For me this is an all of God Salvation.

God provided His Word
God provided the sacrifical lamb atoning for my sins
God drew me to Him
God convinced me through all the above
God allowed me to reach the bottom on my own
God gave me only one way out.

Some say well I could have rebel even more and that is true but when I became convinced of Christ I didn't see any benefit in it. It would only keep me on the bottom.

On the bottom I hated myself. I couldn't stand to look at myself and the mess I had made of my life.

I understand why some believe it's there decision. To choose a life of sin or a life of justification. By choosing not to sin they assume they are choosing Christ. The choice isn't Christ or not but to rebel or not. It isn't Christ or rebel. If man must, then make your choice a surrender. Without which there can be no Salvation.

MB

 

[Rippon]

Then He was raised up on the cross drawing all men unto Him. Some men rebelled against the drawing and this is man's only choice "to rebel".

No.John 12:32 matches up with John 6 perfectly.Everyone drawn is savingly united with Christ.So when you read John 12:32 you have to understand that the "all" are His elect only -- people of all sorts -- not the entire human race,past,present and future.

This half-way drawing business is not biblical.You're not the only one teaching it --but it's scripturally wrong.

Christ chose to die for the whole world no man took His life but He laid it down willingly that men might be saved.

He laid down his life for His sheep alone.He loved and gave Himself up for the Church alone.The people whose names are registered in the Lamb's Book of Life are the very same ones who Christ died for -- no one else.

It is allowing God to have control over our lives.

Imagine that! "Allowing God"! Puny mortals will "allow God" to do this or that.That kind of thinking flies in the face of Scriptures which say He does anything He wishes and that people can't thwart His will.Get biblical!

 

[MB]

No.John 12:32 matches up with John 6 perfectly.Everyone drawn is savingly united with Christ.So when you read John 12:32 you have to understand that the "all" are His elect only -- people of all sorts -- not the entire human race,past,present and future.

This half-way drawing business is not biblical.You're not the only one teaching it --but it's scripturally wrong.




He laid down his life for His sheep alone.He loved and gave Himself up for the Church alone.The people whose names are registered in the Lamb's Book of Life are the very same ones who Christ died for -- no one else.




Imagine that! "Allowing God"! Puny mortals will "allow God" to do this or that.That kind of thinking flies in the face of Scriptures which say He does anything He wishes and that people can't thwart His will.Get biblical!

Rippon as I told you before on another thread our conversation is over. You may not like that but that's the way it is. I will not discuss theology with you any longer.
MB

 

[Dr. Bob]

To clarify my position that "Salvation is of the Lord" Period, I add that GOD saves (regenerates based on atonement/propitiation) and THEN I RESPOND. I have 0% to do with the calling by the Father, atonement transaction with the Father by the Son, or the regenerating by the Spirit. When that is DONE, then Bob (the new Bob) begins to respond

You have NOT chosen Me, but I have chosen YOU God says. The only action of man will come as a response to the newly born again nature; prior to that man WILL not and CAN not respond correctly. Now if I do NOT respond, what does this mean?

It means God didn't change me and make we willing to respond. It shows I am not one of His beloved.

So does Bob HAVE to "do" something? Only AFTER the process of my salvation (a free gift of grace, not my doing anything) is complete. Then, oh then, I am able and willing and REVEL in the chance to "do" something.

 

[MB]

To clarify my position that "Salvation is of the Lord" Period, I add that GOD saves (regenerates based on atonement/propitiation) and THEN I RESPOND. I have 0% to do with the calling by the Father, atonement transaction with the Father by the Son, or the regenerating by the Spirit. When that is DONE, then Bob (the new Bob) begins to respond

You have NOT chosen Me, but I have chosen YOU God says. The only action of man will come as a response to the newly born again nature; prior to that man WILL not and CAN not respond correctly. Now if I do NOT respond, what does this mean?

It means God didn't change me and make we willing to respond. It shows I am not one of His beloved.

Because he didn't change a man only indicates that the man rebelled. It doesn't mean that it wasn't God's intention to convince the man and convict him. This is God enduring the vessels of wrath by allowing man to rebel instead.

So does Bob HAVE to "do" something? Only AFTER the process of my salvation (a free gift of grace, not my doing anything) is complete. Then, oh then, I am able and willing and REVEL in the chance to "do" something.

It's not what Bob does but what Bob doesn't do. Bob's only choice is to rebel or not to rebel. If Bob doesn't rebel Bob has done nothing to stop the process. Bob becomes convinced and convicted and the conviction drives Bob to his knees in repentance and surrender to God. The whole process is all of God however there is no regeneration before surrender Unless you're willing to admit that being regenerated, is being saved, but if you admit this is true then you'll have to admit that being saved happens by grace and is always through faith. If it is through faith, then man can't be saved with out it. No faith, no Salvation, No faith, No regeneration. This is the gospel truth.
MB

 

[Rippon]

Rippon as I told you before on another thread our conversation is over. You may not like that but that's the way it is. I will not discuss theology with you any longer.
MB

Feel free not to converse.I will still respond to error from your keyboard.

And for those of you who don't know -- on another thread I had made a passing reference to C.H.S.And because of that grave sin MB said:"Try trusting in God instead of old dead men."I told him that was dishonest.It's actually a lot worse than merely being dishonest on his part.

 

[MB]

Feel free not to converse.I will still respond to error from your keyboard.

And for those of you who don't know -- on another thread I had made a passing reference to C.H.S.And because of that grave sin MB said:"Try trusting in God instead of old dead men."I told him that was dishonest.It's actually a lot worse than merely being dishonest on his part.

The reason I said "Try trusting in God instead of old dead men." is because you certainly do not adhere to scripture but you do the saying's of old dead men. Particular election isn't in scripture yet you still falsely claim that it is. You said I'm being dishonest. That's really ironic because it is you who has made a false claim and you can't prove it to be true. You present Jacob and Esau when there story had nothing to do with Salvation but was instead a choosing of a nation. Not to mention I never called it sin. You did that yourself.
MB

 

[Rippon]

The reason I said "Try trusting in God instead of old dead men." is because you certainly do not adhere to scripture but you do the saying's of old dead men.

I have listed plenty of Scripture to refute your ideas.Some of the biblical texts which I furnished for you were brand-new to you.

Particular election isn't in scripture yet you still falsely claim that it is.

The Bible speaks over and over on the subject of election.Eph.1:4;Matt.24:22,24,31;Luke 18:7;Ro.8:33,Ro.9:11;2Tim.2:10;Titus 1:1 are just some examples.I'm just warming up.

Your false claims notwithstanding --the Holy Word of God is true and anyone (that includes you) who is against it opposes God.

You said I'm being dishonest.

Yes.Indeed you are.

You present Jacob and Esau when there(sic) story had nothing to do with Salvation but was instead a choosing of a nation.
MB

Over and over again I have to repeat myself for you.Your ears and eyes must be stopped up.Certain people were named in Romans 9.The Lord wasn't speaking of people en masse.Jacob and Esau were pinpointed.

If verses 22 and 23 were not dealing with eternal destinies and salvation I don't know how much the Scripture has to be for you to yield to it.

 

[Thinkingstuff]

I have a few questions about this topic since I'm not versed in it.
Did God dictate the bible or was there participation?
Did God just appear as a man or did he have Mary participation for the incarnation?
Did God spread his word or was their participation with the Apostles and christians since?
Did God raise up rocks to create the nation of Isreal or was there participation through Abraham's faith?
Did God deliver Israel from Egypt apart from Moses' participation?

In any of these events does participation limit God's control in the events of human affairs or diminish his supremecy over creation.

Why would salvation be any different?

 

[Reformer]

I have a few questions about this topic since I'm not versed in it.
Did God dictate the bible or was there participation?
Did God just appear as a man or did he have Mary participation for the incarnation?
Did God spread his word or was their participation with the Apostles and christians since?
Did God raise up rocks to create the nation of Isreal or was there participation through Abraham's faith?
Did God deliver Israel from Egypt apart from Moses' participation?

In any of these events does participation limit God's control in the events of human affairs or diminish his supremecy over creation.

Why would salvation be any different?

No, mans participation in the events you listed doesn't limit Gods control.

Why should it be different in Salvation?
So that no man can boast, Because human works in salvation is unbiblical, Because that would assume human
ability "pre-conversion" ect. ect.

I would also ask how would God use a sinner, (dead spiritually) to cooperate with Him to salvation?
He is the the Potter we are the clay, what does clay do?

If He chose us before time began explain how we participated.

Maybe it would help me understand if I could figure out how people explain that God and His grace PLUS man and our participation get us TO conversion, without works.

Please note, I am not saying we don't participate, I am saying our participation is a RESULT of our conversion, NOT one of the causes of it.

 

[MB]

I have listed plenty of Scripture to refute your ideas.Some of the biblical texts which I furnished for you were brand-new to you.

Nothing you presented refuted anything but about what you claim to be true. None even hinted at your claims. Just scriptures that you've obviously been taught that they support your claim by someone who is biblically illiterate.

The Bible speaks over and over on the subject of election.Eph.1:4;Matt.24:22,24,31;Luke 18:7;Ro.8:33,Ro.9:11;2Tim.2:10;Titus 1:1 are just some examples.I'm just warming up.

Not one of these support particular election. Election is real I don't deny that but I do deny it being particular

Your false claims notwithstanding --the Holy Word of God is true and anyone (that includes you) who is against it opposes God.

Your the only one in this conversation who opposes what God's word says by adding your own words too it.

You said I'm being dishonest.

Yes.Indeed you are.

Right back at you rippon What is dishonest is to add to scripture

Over and over again I have to repeat myself for you.Your ears and eyes must be stopped up.Certain people were named in Romans 9.The Lord wasn't speaking of people en masse.Jacob and Esau were pinpointed.

Sure they were they just weren't chosen for Salvation in the passage you claim they were. This choosing was for a different purpose.

If verses 22 and 23 were not dealing with eternal destinies and salvation I don't know how much the Scripture has to be for you to yield to it.

I don't base my theology on a few verses taken out of context because if you read on you find the vessels of wrath are endured by God because they become vessels of mercy.
You claim that the elect are God's but you fail to see that there are thos who are saved anyway.
Rom 9:23 And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory,
Rom 9:24 Even us, whom he hath called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles?
Rom 9:25 As he saith also in Osee, I will call them my people, which were not my people; and her beloved, which was not beloved.
If these were not His people then they weren't chosen from before the foundation of the world or, they would have been.

You call me dishonest when all along it is you who is being dishonest.

It is your Hearing and understanding that is stopped up by the dark cloud of hyperCalvinism. The reason I could never believe in Calvinism is that I never take the word of men as truth until I have compared it with scripture. When I do that with calvinism it comes up false every single time.
MB

 

[Thinkingstuff]

No, mans participation in the events you listed doesn't limit Gods control.

Why should it be different in Salvation?
So that no man can boast, Because human works in salvation is unbiblical, Because that would assume human
ability "pre-conversion" ect. ect.

I would also ask how would God use a sinner, (dead spiritually) to cooperate with Him to salvation?
He is the the Potter we are the clay, what does clay do?

If He chose us before time began explain how we participated.

Maybe it would help me understand if I could figure out how people explain that God and His grace PLUS man and our participation get us TO conversion, without works.

Please note, I am not saying we don't participate, I am saying our participation is a RESULT of our conversion, NOT one of the causes of it.

I then have two more questions for you.

Do you equate salvation with Justification or do you view salvation as a totality of the the christian experience? I'm leaning toward the latter which would mean that I have no part in justification but do have part in the rest of my salvation. Ie work out your salvation with fear and tremebeling.

If salvation is narrowed to just justification wouldn't that make many bible verses inadiquate?

 

[Reformer]

I then have two more questions for you.

Do you equate salvation with Justification or do you view salvation as a totality of the the christian experience? I'm leaning toward the latter which would mean that I have no part in justification but do have part in the rest of my salvation. Ie work out your salvation with fear and tremebeling.

If salvation is narrowed to just justification wouldn't that make many bible verses inadiquate?

I have been saved---Justification-- A one time event
I am being saved--Sanctification--An ongoing process until death
I will be saved--Glorification-- A future event

If you don't mind could you go back and look at my previous questions and comment on them?

 

[Rippon]

Nothing you presented refuted anything but about what you claim to be true. None even hinted at your claims. Just scriptures that you've obviously been taught that they support your claim by someone who is biblically illiterate.

I have gone to the Scriptures and they certainly support the doctrines of grace.You deny the doctrines of grace.At least you are very clear bout that which you deny.

Not one of these support particular election. Election is real I don't deny that but I do deny it being particular

Then you deny biblical election.

Your the only one in this conversation who opposes what God's word says by adding your own words too it.

What words have I supposedly added?

What is dishonest is to add to scripture

Agreed.Stop it.

if you read on you find the vessels of wrath are endured by God because they become vessels of mercy.

You keep on bringing up that nonsensical claim.Romans 9 does not bear that out.

You claim that the elect are God's but you fail to see that there are thos who are saved anyway.

Only the elect are saved -- no one else.Only those whose names appear in the Lamb's Book of Life -- written before the world began.

It is your Hearing and understanding that is stopped up by the dark cloud of hyperCalvinism. The reason I could never believe in Calvinism is that I never take the word of men as truth until I have compared it with scripture.

Spoken like a tue Semi-Pelagian.BTW,you have no idea what Calvinism is --Just like Ben.And you haven't a clue what hyper-Calvinism is.You need to read more.Read the Word of God in context.Read Church History.Read more so that you will not type foolish things.

When I do that with calvinism it comes up false every single time.
MB

Too bad.When you ask the Lord for guidance He may grant you to see that which is very evident to Calvinists as lovers of the Word of God.

 

[Thinkingstuff]

Reformer, to answer your questions from your previous post I will start by saying that if there is a perseived difference it seems to me that it lies in semantics. When you say salvation it seems I have to take in context what you mean. Here is my example:

have been saved---Justification-- A one time event
I am being saved--Sanctification--An ongoing process until death
I will be saved--Glorification-- A future event

Each item listed is a specific of Salvation or one aspect or detail. I would say all three are salvation. So when God in eternity (I view as outside time space so in the past, present and future but many others would say before the world and indeed its true as far as it goes) chose me to be saved. Indeed he did so with out my participation. But that is not salvation it is what some would call election, which is just a part of salvation. One aspect. That aspect as indeed the totality of how I understand it is based on grace (or undeserved favor). When God laid down his life for me He did so without my specific participation. However, if you ever heard the statement "if you were the only one on earth God would lay down his life for you" it automatically assumes that you would have to crusify him, since there is no one else. In that senario did you participate? (that was just a side bar). However, I did not participate in condeming or crusifing the Lord yet he allowed the Pharasees to condemn him and the Romans to crusify him. So the Roman who said "surely, this is the son of God" (if he was ever saved) may have been a free agent used as an instument to bring about an act leading towards our justification. Justification is also salvation (I had no part) but alone it is not salvation it is another aspect. But provided for by grace. Now here is the aspect that seems to be the hing for many. Faith. I believe. How is this possible? Well, I did not give it to myself. God prompeted me and worked with me my entire life and brought me to the point of decision (God or other). He gave me the faith to believe (without my participation). God offered and the only reasonable responce to faith is acceptance (almost like I did nothing which is true but it isn't in the sence that I chose. I think there is a mystery here. A cooperation with God which is part of my salvation) or another aspect of Salvation. I think that to say I was justified and I believed actually limits salvation to one point in time (another side bar). Or only relates one aspect of salvation and unintentionally it is presumptive. I (emphasis on I) believe. It almost sounds like "I am the master of my own destiny". I chose; which hinges salvation entirely on me and my ability to choose. I disagree. I would say I couldn't help but to choose. And the only reason I could do so to begin with is because of grace. (which is outside of me). But this is not salvation entire either just another aspect. What are we saved unto? Well, the biblical answer is works. (what you call sanctification which is a good term). So I do participate in that which could never have occured with out all the other things I mention. And then even in that I could not do the good works apart from the grace that allows me to do them. But does that diminish my particpation. No. Does my participation limit Gods soveriegnty? No. So rightly, I am honored by God (crowns?) for my particpation. Yet, I am right to lay them down at God's feet for he allowed me to participate. We are Joint heirs in his kingdom which by necessity means the kingdoms deeds as well. This is also grace. But this again is just another aspect of salvation (a reward of it for salvation entire is a gift and to be wished for even in suffering as we can see with the apostles). Then there is eternal life. That is also salvation. So, the fact I'm justified allows for the reward of eternal life like the theif on the cross (no works involved on his part). Yet as I have attempted to explain they are aspects and I would say the theif lost (or could not participate) the other reward of deeds and self sacrifice as the apostles seem to understand as such. So salvation entire is all that I've mentioned yet each aspect is also salvation. It's a laymans attempt to explain something that mystified people better than I for centuries, indeed, millenia. Not that I understand it perfectly. I don't and I'm at a disadvantage with you since I do not have your educational background. But that is how I understand it.

So it is true to say as you did with regards to the quote in this post but I would say salvation is bigger than just that. Actually I am considering the details of Justification which is quite the task as well.

So your question here:

Maybe it would help me understand if I could figure out how people explain that God and His grace PLUS man and our participation get us TO conversion, without works.

Is based on a wrong premise. Getting to conversion is done by God. or better stated God gives you faith. Justification is also done by God. But the results of these things are also salvation. So faith without works is dead. So salvation without works is an intrinsic imposibility. Just like you are justified but don't recieve eternal life? That also is an intrinsic imposibility. Salvation without either of these is pointless. Salvation is the purpose of scripture and so I say the entire christian experience is salvation. To limit it to one or two aspects makes us god rather than the almighty. Salvation entirely considered is completed by Grace.