Oh man, was that good. I wonder why the other side of this debate didn't respond to it? Thanks for posting that video Sister.
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Receiving a gift is not also part of the giving
- Thread starter Revmitchell
- Start date
- Status
Oh man, was that good. I wonder why the other side of this debate didn't respond to it? Thanks for posting that video Sister.
In Christian theology, synergism is the position of those who hold that salvation involves some form of cooperation between divine grace and human free will.
Monergism is the position in Christian theology that God, through the Holy Spirit, works to bring about the salvation of an individual through regeneration, not requiring the persons's cooperation.
So, how does the term "synergism" not describe your theory of "innate faith?"
Mitchell refuses to be defined by labels. He and I have had this discussion before. Avoiding labels is convenient because it excuses him from error. Oh, and I have tried removing the label, replacing it with the substance of what he believes. He rejects that too. It is sort of like Jello theology. He refuses to be pinned down. He wants an escape hatch of sorts whenever he thinks he needs it. Of course, his theology is synergistic, whether he accepts that or not. He can deny it all he wants, but facts are stubborn things.
What facts? Your labels are not facts. They are only important to folks like yourself. I don't want to be held responsible for things I do not believe. Do you? Your labels fail to correctly represent most folks. Just because you call it synergistic does not make if fact. That is a characterization based on your presupposition. Your doctrine is in error so that makes your labels based on it in error.
Yes, Revmitchell is right. We shouldn't use labels. Like Christian. Or Baptist. Or Believer. Or Pastor. No labels. That will fix the problem.
It's like going to the grocery store. All those cans on the shelves and every can with a label. They should take all those labels off those cans.
Oh, wait. If there is no label on the can how do you know what is in it?
It's like going to the grocery store. All those cans on the shelves and every can with a label. They should take all those labels off those cans.
Oh, wait. If there is no label on the can how do you know what is in it?
Yes of course it is exactly the same thing. Anyways it is not all labels it is Calvinist labels based on their flawed theology. They misrepresent us every time.
Anyways it is not all labels it is Calvinist labels based on their flawed theology. They misrepresent us every time.
Really?Yes of course it is exactly the same thing.
I am not misslabeled by Van touting in a post that I view salvation as being of works?
Certainly, all is ONLY a Calvinist plot of right wing bikers who formulate all conspiracy.
Last edited:
You are right, labels are not facts. The facts are the beliefs that the labels represent. You do not believe a sinner is dead in their trespasses and sins. If a sinner is not dead in sin, common sense dictates there is something inside the sinner that can still give assent to God. Ergo, God does not first illumine and regenerate the sinner prior to the sinner believing. Theologians on both sides of the aisle agree that is the Synergist position. In the Synergist system, the fulcrum of salvation does not rest on God, it rests on man. Man must exercise his free will to believe. God leads the sinner to water but does not make him drink. The decision to drink is left to the sinner. That is Synergism = two parties cooperating in bringing about the desired result.
Now, you will say that is not your position and I am misrepresenting it. The fact is you will offer the same retort about anything I say. You are never going to allow yourself to be pinned down. That makes it difficult to have a constructive theological discussion because one party refuses to take responsibility for what they believe.
Again misrepresenting my views. This is complete false. What makes it difficult to have a constructive conversation is the failure to answer the the question in the op because you don't want yo be pinned down and the out right lie made in your post.
Then what are your views? Do you believe the lost sinner is dead in trespass and sin? Do you believe the lost sinner is not only unable to believe, he doesn't want to? Do you believe the lost sinner is the enemy of God? Do you believe that nothing a saved person has is his on his own or do all good things come from God?
You keep saying we misrepresent your views but you refuse to state what those views are.
Answer the question in the op
I dealt with your OP in posts #20 and #24. I said you asked a nonsensible question. I stand behind that. You do not like my answer. Big surprise, right? Cleverly worded questions do absolutely nothing to advance a discussion. All they do is reveal your inability to articulate a theological argument. For a man who is in the ministry that is a sad commentary.
So you have no views so it is impossible for anyone to misstate them?
No, it doesn't.
Sure. Jesus said we need to make every effort to enter into the Kingdom.
Sure it can. I exert effort all the time without earning anything from anyone. You are being illogical in your zeal to protect your theology from the words of Jesus.
The comparison fails because you falsely assert that "wages" and "effort" are the same thing. You are making all kinds of logical errors.
And now the attack.
So all I have learned from your post is that if I post the words of Jesus that undermine your theology and also provide a helpful clarification from a noted Christian leader, you are compelled to illogically assertions and attacks.
Not impressive.
Katarina Von Bora
Active Member
Great post. Salvation is completely of God and He doesn't need our help. Grace, faith and repentance are all gifts.
God Bless
It is one thing to say salvation is completely of God and He does not need our help, which is true, and to say our faith that God credits of righteousness was supernaturally instilled before salvation (or after salvation if you agree with Agedman.)
1) We are saved through faith, thus our faith precedes our salvation, our faith provides access to the grace in which we stand, Romans 5:2.
2) Next we are chosen for salvation through faith (2 Thess. 2:13). So our election was conditional on the basis of faith in Christ.
3) Paul teaches (Romans 4:2-5) that salvation on the basis of faith is not a works based salvation.
So who ever said God needs our help?
Did you not read with comprehension the quote of Van?
- Status