Monergists & Synergists: Divide or Unify?

[Thousand Hills]

Let me begin this thread by asking some questions. OK

1. Is it appropriate for Christians to divide over this issue? YES
2. Does the debate effect one's view of the Gospel and salvation? YES
3. If so, is that a minor or major issue? MAJOR
4. If someone belongs to a church that holds to a different view, should that person advocate for their view and cause dissension in the church? NO, THEY SHOULD SUBMIT TO AUTHORITY GOD HAS PLACED THEM UNDER AND REST IN HIS PROVIDENCE
5. If the issue does come up in real life, should we be charitable in our behavior even if we disagree? YES

My answers above......

I am thankful to be in an SBC church where the leadership is calvinistic, preaching is expository, and every ministry of the church is intentional. Its not a family reunion and its not a social club. My wife and I have been in 3 churches over the past 10 years and I have never seen her grow and mature in her understanding of scripture like she has at this one.

 

[Squire Robertsson]

As I see it, while not a synergist, I view the various actions taken by God at salvation, (in no particular order) redemption, adoption, sanctification, regeneration, propitiation, repentance, ect. as happening so fast from the human POV as to seem instantaneous. IOW, as a human perceives the occasion, there is no time lag between regeneration and repentance. To God, it's a series circuit. To man, it's a parallel circuit.

 

[steaver]

steaver

.

Some might not have liked how I worded my responses.They might not say it in the same way....but they were not outside the camp ,even when you tried to twist the quotes a bit....



Like here Steaver....You stated that "perhaps" the Spirit was failing to teach the sheep.....you were given jn 10:26-27...that you do not get it is not my fault.....by the way...goats do not believe in tulip, no they do not believe in most any truth, that is why they ARE GOATS.

You keep trying to twist what I asked. As often as you try, I can keep posting the original quote which my question clearly states "perhaps" the Spirit is failing to teach the sheep TULIP. At which you replied No and gave John 10 as support - No TULIP = No sheep.

Keep trying though! Everytime it just exposes your bearing a false witness. You want me to post the original quote again?? I doubt it.

 

[Reformed]

As I see it, while not a synergist, I view the various actions taken by God at salvation, (in no particular order) redemption, adoption, sanctification, regeneration, propitiation, repentance, ect. as happening so fast from the human POV as to seem instantaneous. IOW, as a human perceives the occasion, there is no time lag between regeneration and repentance. To God, it's a series circuit. To man, it's a parallel circuit.

Squire, you are describing the order of salvation (ordo salutis). I agree, that for all practical purposes, the order of these component parts are nearly instantaneous, except for propitiation. I believe Christ satisfied the requirement of the law (death) at the cross.

 

[Reformed]

My answers above......

I am thankful to be in an SBC church where the leadership is calvinistic, preaching is expository, and every ministry of the church is intentional. Its not a family reunion and its not a social club. My wife and I have been in 3 churches over the past 10 years and I have never seen her grow and mature in her understanding of scripture like she has at this one.

Amen, amen, and amen!

 

[Iconoclast]

You keep trying to twist what I asked. As often as you try, I can keep posting the original quote which my question clearly states "perhaps" the Spirit is failing to teach the sheep TULIP. At which you replied No and gave John 10 as support - No TULIP = No sheep.

Keep trying though! Everytime it just exposes your bearing a false witness. You want me to post the original quote again?? I doubt it.

answer the quotes about divine enablement listed for you...quit stalling...

You can post whatever you want...when you twist it I will show it.

 

[Iconoclast]

4. If someone belongs to a church that holds to a different view, should that person advocate for their view and cause dissension in the church?

The person should be able to voice a scriptural point of view, not necessarily to cause division , but sometimes the people have never been allowed to hear other views.
If opening up certain verses causes new thoughts in that church then that is good growth.

 

[Squire Robertsson]

No, I'm not describing the order of salvation. I tried to be clear that I was not putting the list "in any particular order."

Squire, you are describing the order of salvation (ordo salutis). I agree, that for all practical purposes, the order of these component parts are nearly instantaneous, except for propitiation. I believe Christ satisfied the requirement of the law (death) at the cross.

 

[Reformed]

1 Jn 4:19 We love because He first loved us.

Would it be inaccurate to say that our ability to love was divinely enabled?

 

[Reformed]

No, I'm not describing the order of salvation. I tried to be clear that I was not putting the list "in any particular order."

I stand corrected. Many of things you listed are part of the ordo salutis.

 

[steaver]

That is true, and I started a thread on this very topic which you hid from like an ostritch. 160 posts and not one by you:thumbsup:

many quotes from historic teachers all affirming exactly what I said and not a peep from you....interesting

here is another chance steaver...in case you missed it;

from various commentaries;

I PRAY THAT THE EYES OF YOUR HEART MAY BE ENLIGHTENED: pephotismenous (RPPMPA) tous ophthalmous tes kardias [humon] : (1Peter 5:8; Psalms 119:18; Isaiah 6:10; 29:10,18; 32:3; 42:7; Matthew 13:15; Luke 24:45; Acts 16:14; 26:18; 2Corinthians 4:4,6; Hebrews 10:32)

SPIRITUAL EYES

MacDonald - We have seen that the source of spiritual illumination is God; the channel is the Holy Spirit; and the supreme subject is the full knowledge of God. Now we come to the organs of enlightenment: the eyes of your hearts (NKJV margin ) being enlightened. (Believer's Bible Commentary)

Those for whom Paul is praying were once "spiritually blind" walking around in "spiritual darkness" as he reminded them of later writing that "you were formerly darkness, but now you are light in the Lord; walk as children of light (Eph 5:8-note)

Wiersbe - In the prison prayers of Paul (Eph. 1:15–23; 3:14–21; Phil. 1:9–11; Col. 1:9–12), we discover the blessings he wanted his converts to enjoy. In none of these prayers does Paul request material things. His emphasis is on spiritual perception and real Christian character. He does not ask God to give them what they do not have, but rather prays that God will reveal to them what they already have.
Lawrence Richards has a pithy comment stating that "One way to build our own prayer lives, and to direct our intercession for others, is to model our prayers on those found in Scripture. Here we see a prayer Paul offered with the intention of strengthening Christ’s church. What did Paul ask? That we might know God better (Ep 1:17). That we might look beyond appearances, to see the church as God does—a people transformed to display His glory, unspeakably precious to Him (Ep 1:18). That we might sense and experience the working of “His incomparably great power for us who believe” (Ep 1:19a). I suppose it’s all right to pray for that addition to a new Sunday School wing. Or the funds to go on the radio. But if we want our church to truly be the church, the things Paul prayed for here are vastly more important. (Richards, L. The 365 Day Devotional Commentary. Wheaton, Ill.: Victor Books)

Eyes (3788) (ophthalmos) is literally the organ of vision but in Paul's use is obviously figurative. It is a beautiful picture, the heart being regarded as having eyes looking out toward God and all of the spiritual blessings that have their source and supply in God's Beloved Son. Proper understanding of spiritual truth is not dependent on having a keen intellect but rather a tender heart! Is your heart tender to the Word of God? Do you hunger and thirst for God as a deer does for the water brooks?

Paul is praying for a deeper spiritual understanding, that "Ah Ha" reaction we have when we begin to really understand something and exclaim "I see it! I finally see what you’re telling me, Lord!" That's what Paul is praying for here. Why? Why would he be praying for this "Ah Ha" enlightenment? Remember that the first three chapters are doctrine but the last three begin with how we are to walk. Paul knows that as a man thinks in his heart, his spiritual interior, will determine how he walks. And so he prays that these saints might be able to grasp the breadth and length and height and depth of the great truths in this chapter, so that they might be enabled by the indwelling Spirit and the riches of God's grace to order their steps in a manner which is pleasing to the Lord.

The psalmist understood that the supernatural Word of God was unlike any writing of man and thus pleaded with God to...

Open (Hebrew galah = Piel stem always denotes "to uncover" something which otherwise is normally concealed. LXX translates with apokalupto from apó = from + kalúpto = cover, conceal which means literally to uncover and so to remove the veil or covering exposing to open view what was before hidden.

The Greek tense is aorist imperative which speaks in context of a request in the form of a command and speaks of urgency and need) my eyes, that I may behold (careful, sustained, and favorable contemplation - LXX translates with katanoeo from kata = down + noeo is literally to the the mind down on and speaks of giving very careful consideration to some matter, think about very carefully, consider closely. observe fully, consider attentively denotes action of mind apprehending certain facts about a thing) wonderful (amazing, astounding, marvelous, extraordinary or even difficult - things beyond human capability) things from Thy law. (Psalm 119:18) (Comment: When you open your Bible, ask the Author to open your heart)

Heart (2588) (kardia [word study]) is not the literal organ that circulates ancients considered the heart the center of knowledge, understanding, thinking, wisdom. The heart the seat of the mind and will, and it could be taught what the brain could never know. The "heart" in Scripture speaks of the very center and core of one's life, the seat of thought and moral judgment.
The heart is the seat of emotions in some cultures, but in the Greek culture it was not. In the Greek culture the seat of emotions would be the intestines. The heart was the seat of understanding.

This deep, interior enlightenment is undoubtedly the result of the work of the Holy Spirit Who leads the believer to know (eido) intuitively all that God has made available to him in Christ, and in essence to come to understand what it means to be "in Christ" or "in Him". They knew to a degree what the concept of being "in Christ" meant but not in a deep intuitive way. That is what Paul desires for them and for all believers.

Paul prayed that believers would know the three things mentioned not in their head but in their hearts, the very essence of their being. When we know them in the head and not the heart, we are simply "smarter sinners" but when we know them in our heart, we will become more like our Savior.

Note that the KJV translated from the Greek Textus Receptus (the is from the Nestle-Aland Greek) does not have "heart" (kardia) but has the word "understanding" which is the noun dianoia an old word for the faculty of understanding. It speaks of a clarity of mind or understanding by which one is able to see things intelligibly and clearly and proceed accordingly. Virtually all the authorities agree that "heart" is the correct translation.
__________________

You seem to not be comprehending. When you originally made the comment that one can only believe in Calvinism by Divine Enablement, and gave Matt 13 as support, which is a passage distinguishing between the lost and the saved, therefore another declaration that unless one believes in Calvinism they are not saved, I thought you were outside the camp of Calvinist. However, after questioning the board of Calvinist, it became apparent that they all believed just as you declared concerning Calvinism in association with the lost and the saved.

Now, as far as the Holy Spirit illuminating Jesus' sheep to God's Word, absolutely, no non-Cal would disagree. What we disagree with is Calvinist claims to the Holy Spirit teaching TULIP to His sheep. TULIP is nothing more than a manmade composition trying to explain God's Word. The only thing the Holy Spirit illuminates is God's Word, not TULIP commentary.

 

[steaver]

1 Jn 4:19 We love because He first loved us.

Would it be inaccurate to say that our ability to love was divinely enabled?

Does enabled equate to caused?

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Hardy har har.... this redneck don't even like corn liquor.

Barley and rye I'm thinking!

 

[convicted1]

Barley and rye I'm thinking!

At his age? Alka Seltzer and H2O....

 

[Squire Robertsson]

I understand that. But, I'm not going to try and definitively measure what I don't have the instruments to definitively measure. Others are welcome to try. But, don't be surprised when someone else comes up with a different measurement. We are dealing with the unmeasurable miraculous. We can come close but not much beyond the decimal point.

I stand corrected. Many of things you listed are part of the ordo salutis.

 

[thatbrian]

Does enabled equate to caused?

In this instance, yes: Be-cause, or by-cause

The cause of our love is that He first loved us.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

OK. Well, this is a bit of a rabbit trail, but I will chase the ole feller to his hole.

There are certain doctrines that you can live with and certain doctrines you cannot. For instance - let us say providence puts me in an area where there are no Mongergist churches. None. Zip. Zoo. Zilch. In that case I would find a church that preaches Christ. In my iexperience most conservative Synergist churches never even mention free will when presenting the Gospel. The preacher may be a Synergist (whether he calls himself that or not), but he may deliver a solid, biblical message. If I had no other choice, I would find the best church I could and attend there. I may not be able to join for conscience sake. The former church I was a member of had, in its doctrinal statement, a requirement that members must agree with it. At the time I joined I was a dispensationalist, so I had no problem with their pro-dispensational stand. But as time went on, and my views changed I had to deal with that issue. I resolved it by joining a new church plant in the area. Had there been no other solid church in the area, I would have gone to the pastor and deacons and asked if an exception could be made because of conscience. If they declined then I would have resigned my membership but still attended.

I do not know the doctrinal issues that have caused you to draw a line in the sand. I think we should draw those lines on the fundamental doctrines of the faith. Anything else we should be able to live with, even if we vehemently disagree. If not then we will have a nation of Christians meeting in their own homes each Lord's Day and a fractured body of Christ.

Newsflash....ya got that now. Also in the streets, the pubs, the coffee shops etc. They are reconstituting in places you don't ever venture into....bringing the Word out to where the people are and yes going back to the warmth of homes for coffee and theological discussion. So Gods Word is growing, perhaps not the way you'd like it but the spirit cant be contained....it reaches out to the disinfranchised as well as the born agains.:thumbs::jesus:

 

[Reformed]

Does enabled equate to caused?

Yes. Let me explain why.

As you know, Monergists believe in irresistible grace. Forget that it is part of TULIP. Do not let TULIP become a stumbling stone. Monergists believe that irresistible grace is a biblical doctrine. The "I" in TULIP simply describes it. The reason we believe in irresistible grace has to do with the nature of God's calling of His elect. Once the Holy Spirit has illumined the cold, dark heart of a sinner, that heart desires nothing more than God. In fact there is nothing, or nobody, else that can fill the heart's yearning need other than God.

Jesus said, "My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me" (John 10:27).

Earlier in that chapter, about the sheep, Jesus said, "A stranger they simply will not follow, but will flee from him, because they do not know the voice of strangers" (John 10:5).

If you know anything about sheep, they are followers. They will follow their shepherd's voice each and every time. An individual sheep will not say, "Forget the shepherd. I am doing my own thing." No. All the sheep will follow. Sheep find comfort in the shepherd's voice. The sheep of God's flock find comfort in the Good Shepherd's voice. They will not follow another, only the voice of the Good Shepherd (Christ).

 

[Iconoclast]

Steaver

In post 51 progress has taken place. You agree that it is The teaching ministry of the Spirit of God the enables Christians to believe Divine truth. This is an important development.

In awhile I will answer in full and as we now seemingly are in agreement that Divine enablement is essential to come to truth......I will now be able to address your concerns and provide needed clarification.

The nature of our dispute then is not if The Spirit teaches truth......but what is the content of what we call TRUTH.

If you thought you did not agree with me before....stay tuned for my next post......

 

[webdog]

There is no such thing as a monergist, IMO. Just confused synergists

Fact: faith is required of man to be saved. Regardless of where he gets this faith, it is till a requirement.