Monergism vs. Synergism

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Calvinists like to take passages which teach that we can't seek God (i.e. Rom 3:10-11) to prove that we can't respond to a God actively seek to save us. It is unfounded.

Why would Samuel Rutherford (a Presbyterian) say that the reprobate has exactly the same warrant to believe in Christ as do the elect?

 

[Skandelon]

Why would Samuel Rutherford (a Presbyterian) say that the reprobate has exactly the same warrant to believe in Christ as do the elect?

You'll have to talk to Sam about that, but I suspect, if I know the semantics that Calvinists play, that he means that the reprobate have the same 'command' or 'call' to believe as the elect. Both of them are given a 'warrant' to repent and believe, but that ignores the fact that only one is granted the ability to willingly accept that warrant.

 

[12strings]

...Dabuccy (spelling)...

Spelling indeed!!! Good old Claude is probably turning over in his grave as we speak!

 

[OldRegular]

Where the subsequent parables of the lost sheep and lost coin likewise not really about 'the lost' but just the backslidden?

Parables are parables!

If so, why then did the father say, "He was once dead but now is alive?"

This illustrates the concept of RECONCILIATION.

I believe Scripture states that at times the Children of God grieve the Holy Spirit. Is not reconciliation desirable at that time.

Mankind as a whole is being reconciled back to relationship with their creator (Father).

I hope that we are not to interpret that literally!

More specifically, the prodigal represents the Gentiles living in rebellion and the older brother represents Israel living in religion, but both missing out on the relationship that only comes through grace.

I have thought, and sometimes still do, that this is the more appropriate teaching of the parable. Others disagree. However, that interpretation raises the same question you raise above:

Where the subsequent parables of the lost sheep and lost coin likewise not really about 'the lost' but just the backslidden?

 

[Skandelon]

Parables are parables!

Obviously.... and you failed to answer the question I asked why?

I believe Scripture states that at times the Children of God grieve the Holy Spirit. Is not reconciliation desirable at that time.

Sure they do, so you believe the lost coin, the lost sheep and the lost son (of which the father said was dead but is now alive again) are representative of saved people who have grieved the spirit? So when you grieve the spirit do you die and need to return to God to be made alive again? Please expound.

I have thought, and sometimes still do, that this is the more appropriate teaching of the parable. Others disagree. However, that interpretation raises the same question you raise above:

How so? The lost coin and lost sheep, likewise could be speaking more generally of God's desire to bring in the Gentiles. This doesn't affect my prior application, but it does deny your speculation that this is really about backslidden believers who have grieved the Holy Spirit.

 

[OldRegular]

"This is the work of God, that you believe on him who he has sent." - Jn.6:29

"Being confident of this, that he who began a good work in you will perform it until the day of Jesus Christ." - Phil.1:6

"And the very God of peace will sanctify you wholly,...,faithful is he who calls you, and he will bring it to pass. - I Thess.5:23,24

Blessings...

Amen! Great passages!

Yes they are but then all of Scripture is Great!

Consider John 6:29
No one who believes the Doctrines of Grace, is a Calvinist, or a Monergist would deny faith is an essential part of Salvation.

Consider Philippians 1:6

God the Father before the foundation of the world foreknew and chose a people to be His own[Ephesians 1:4].

God the Son agrees to humble Himself, take upon Himself the form of man, and die on the cross to pay the penalty for the sins of those whom the Father has chosen to salvation so that none are lost [John 17; Philippians 2:6-10].

God the Holy Spirit agrees to apply the work of the Son to those chosen by God the Father by the regeneration and effectual calling of those whom God the Father has chosen unto salvation [John 6: 37, 44; Ephesians 2:1-10].

And then 1 Thessalonians 5:23, 24
2 Peter 3:9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Spelling indeed!!! Good old Claude is probably turning over in his grave as we speak!

That tells you the hight of respect I have for the French....thankfully he composed beautiful music.

With that said....I take my family to "First Night" performances & when a symphony was playing Pachelbels relaxing masterpiece "Canon in D" my wife asked me who the composer was & I replied Pachelbel. So my son thinks I said Taco Bell (Wise Guy).

Could be worse...could be a cello player having to play the movement.....here is a rant on that subject matter.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JdxkVQy7QLM

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

You'll have to talk to Sam about that, but I suspect, if I know the semantics that Calvinists play, that he means that the reprobate have the same 'command' or 'call' to believe as the elect. Both of them are given a 'warrant' to repent and believe, but that ignores the fact that only one is granted the ability to willingly accept that warrant.

So what?!?

 

[Skandelon]

So what?!?

indeed... :wavey:

 

[Herald]

X2. Who are the whosoever though?

Now when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad and glorified the word of the Lord. And as many as had been appointed to eternal life believed.

The "whosoever" is connected to "the world" earlier in the verse. God so loved both Jews and Gentile - all people groups. They are the whosoevers. This will start a whole new discussion, so I really don't want to get into a exegetical discussion of John 3:16, although a separate thread on the topic is fine.

 

[Skandelon]

The "whosoever" is connected to "the world" earlier in the verse. God so loved both Jews and Gentile - all people groups. They are the whosoevers. This will start a whole new discussion, so I really don't want to get into a exegetical discussion of John 3:16, although a separate thread on the topic is fine.

I don't blame you for not wanting to 'get into' it, as even John Calvin himself affirmed God's love for every person. Some "out-calvin" John Calvin around here.

 

[Herald]

Sorry to have to be the one to tell you that the inconsistency is yours. We deny WORKS in salvation because we understand the difference in meritorious works by which one earns or deserves his salvation by his deeds, and imputed righteousness by Grace through faith.

You far from understand the difference between meritorious works and imputed righteousness. You are the type of Synergist who holds to the happy inconsistency I wrote about. On the one hand the Synergist claims that God will not violate his free will in salvation. On the other hand he claims salvation is all of grace, and not works. You're confused or willfully ignorant.

Tell me, did the Prodigal Son earn or merit the response he got from his Father because he returned home to beg for forgiveness and a servant job? Of course not. He deserved to be slapped and sent packing, but BECAUSE OF A GRACIOUS FATHER ALONE, he was fully restored as a Son and Heir. He didn't earn that or merit that or WORK for that...so to presume that his humiliating and shameful return is equal to 'works salvation' is unfounded biblically.

You don't understand the parable of the Prodigal. It has nothing to do with the discussion at hand.

I hope this helps you understand the error of your inconsistency about our views.

It helps me understand the error of your inconsistency about your views.

 

[Herald]

No one on this board, Monergists or Synergist alike, is accepting of a merit based salvation. Thanks for sharing you insight Skan.

That's why I am thankful for the happy inconsistency that most Synergists hold to. If they really had to face the doctrinal position they claim to believe then they would see the works based righteousness that Synergism is built upon. Man cooperating with God in salvation is a works based system, more properly described as Semi-Pelagianism.

 

[Herald]

I don't blame you for not wanting to 'get into' it, as even John Calvin himself affirmed God's love for every person. Some "out-calvin" John Calvin around here.

I'm happy to discuss it, just not in this thread. Rabbit trails abound in threads like this. John 3:16 can be a thread all to itself.

 

[Skandelon]

That's why I am thankful for the happy inconsistency that most Synergists hold to. If they really had to face the doctrinal position they claim to believe then they would see the works based righteousness that Synergism is built upon. Man cooperating with God in salvation is a works based system, more properly described as Semi-Pelagianism.

Did you read my post? It doesn't appear as if you did.

Also, can you define 'works' for us so that we know that you are able to draw the distinction that I clearly laid out in my post? Thanks

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

indeed... :wavey:

Ahhhh, you feel it isnt fair......:tear:

 

[Yeshua1]

A self-admitted Synergist would not say that "salvation is 100% of the Lord." If you are working along side God to accomplish your salvation then some of the credit for your salvation rests with you. Either that or you do not understand what synergism is.

Those holding to "salvation 100% of the Lord' would say that we are born into original Sin, are spiritually dead, saved by the Sovereign Will of God by Election unto Eternal life, that even faith he gives us...

 

[OldRegular]

Obviously.... and you failed to answer the question I asked why?

Sure I did. You just don't like the answer!

Sure they do, so you believe the lost coin, the lost sheep and the lost son (of which the father said was dead but is now alive again) are representative of saved people who have grieved the spirit? So when you grieve the spirit do you die and need to return to God to be made alive again? Please expound.

Did I say any thing at all about the lost coin and the lost sheep? You are getting like Winman, telling me what I believe!

How so? The lost coin and lost sheep, likewise could be speaking more generally of God's desire to bring in the Gentiles.

Yes they could!

This doesn't affect my prior application, but it does deny your speculation that this is really about backslidden believers who have grieved the Holy Spirit.

Only in your mind Skandelon. You are assuming a parallelism that is unwarranted. As I said parables are parables. Now consider your initial post to which I responded:

Sorry to have to be the one to tell you that the inconsistency is yours. We deny WORKS in salvation because we understand the difference in meritorious works by which one earns or deserves his salvation by his deeds, and imputed righteousness by Grace through faith.

Tell me, did the Prodigal Son earn or merit the response he got from his Father because he returned home to beg for forgiveness and a servant job? Of course not. He deserved to be slapped and sent packing, but BECAUSE OF A GRACIOUS FATHER ALONE, he was fully restored as a Son and Heir. He didn't earn that or merit that or WORK for that...so to presume that his humiliating and shameful return is equal to 'works salvation' is unfounded biblically.

I hope this helps you understand the error of your inconsistency about our views.

You yourself say:

He deserved to be slapped and sent packing, but BECAUSE OF A GRACIOUS FATHER ALONE, he was fully restored as a Son and Heir.

So the prodigal was a son when he left and a son when he came back according to your statement above! You cannot be restored to something you never were, can you?

 

[Winman]

Where the subsequent parables of the lost sheep and lost coin likewise not really about 'the lost' but just the backslidden?

Yes, Jesus said the prodigal son was dead and lost, words never said of believers. All of the stories in Luke 15 are about lost sinners, not backsliders.

If so, why then did the father say, "He was once dead but now is alive?"

Come on Skan, you know I can't let you get away with this, Jesus said the prodigal son was alive AGAIN.

KJB- For this my son was dead, and is alive again; he was lost, and is found. And they began to be merry.

Even the Modern Versions all say the young man had "returned" to life, or was "alive again"

NIV- For this son of mine was dead and is alive again; he was lost and is found.' So they began to celebrate.

ESV- For this my son was dead, and is alive again; he was lost, and is found.' And they began to celebrate.

NASB- for this son of mine was dead and has come to life again; he was lost and has been found.' And they began to celebrate.

If men are born dead in sin as many falsely teach, then it would be impossible for Jesus to say the prodigal was alive AGAIN, but that is exactly what Jesus said, in fact he said it TWICE.

This illustrates the concept of RECONCILIATION. Mankind as a whole is being reconciled back to relationship with their creator (Father). More specifically, the prodigal represents the Gentiles living in rebellion and the older brother represents Israel living in religion, but both missing out on the relationship that only comes through grace.

Yes, and to be reconciled means to reestablish a relationship. You cannot reconcile with someone you never knew and never had a relationship with.

Folks just don't get it, the scriptures do not support Original Sin.

 

[Skandelon]

Yes, Jesus said the prodigal son was dead and lost, words never said of believers. All of the stories in Luke 15 are about lost sinners, not backsliders.



Come on Skan, you know I can't let you get away with this, Jesus said the prodigal son was alive AGAIN.

KJB- For this my son was dead, and is alive again; he was lost, and is found. And they began to be merry.

Even the Modern Versions all say the young man had "returned" to life, or was "alive again"

NIV- For this son of mine was dead and is alive again; he was lost and is found.' So they began to celebrate.

ESV- For this my son was dead, and is alive again; he was lost, and is found.' And they began to celebrate.

NASB- for this son of mine was dead and has come to life again; he was lost and has been found.' And they began to celebrate.

If men are born dead in sin as many falsely teach, then it would be impossible for Jesus to say the prodigal was alive AGAIN, but that is exactly what Jesus said, in fact he said it TWICE.




Yes, and to be reconciled means to reestablish a relationship. You cannot reconcile with someone you never knew and never had a relationship with.

Folks just don't get it, the scriptures do not support Original Sin.

Depends on your definition of Original Sin and your use of the analogy regarding 'death.' I'm fine with the 'again' application above for the same reasons you are, but I can still affirm Original Sin in that we are all born in need of a savior.

Even Adam was made with a need for Christ...the law simply revealed that truth.