Ring ring -- reality calling.

Here is a story Yelsew will like, it doesn't include scripture, but if you study real hard, you can see the basis from John 10...(if you want to).

A group of chickens and chicks are in the barnyard. A mother hen clucks throughout the afternoon and the the chicks disregard her noise. After a while a chicken-hawk is seen circling overhead, the chicken now gives an alarm call and the chicks flock to her.

Bro. Dallas

 

And when does a call become effectual? Any call is effectual when the one who is called responds as expected! NTHER CALL IS EFFECTUAL!


Frogman,
And the difference between a blinking yellow road sign and a blinking red road sign is this?

The Mother hen's clucking throughout the day is instruction to be chicks, and when danger manifests itself, the mother hen gathers her chicks to protect them. Basic farming 101!

 

If one wants to say every call is universal, then these same scriptures make no sense. Therefore, from Romans 8:30 alone one can see that there is an effectual call.

The above is all one needs to establish that there is an effectual call. But if one wants to establish from other scripture that there is a universal or general call, then obviously the effectual call must refer to someone else - a subset of those universally called, for example. </font>[/QUOTE]Npetreley, you should really study up on Calvinism if your going to spend so much time defending if. The doctrine of "irresisiable grace" is the same as the doctrine of "effectual call" in the Calvinistic system. Just like in any group, there are variations of the wording used to describe this view.

Most Calvinist that I'm familiar with believe that there is a universal calling of all men to faith. For example, Revelation 22:17 and many other passages indicate that the call of the gospel goes into all the world. Calvinist just add to that saying that sinful man is incapable of responding to that "general call" of the gospel, so their must be a second greater calling, the "effectual calling" which cannot be twarted by human will and is only applicable to the elect.

The entire Calvinistic system relies upon their teachings of "Total Depravity" or "Total Inability." Even Calvinist say that each of their points hang or fall together. They teach that man is unable to come to Christ or believe in Christ unless they are "effectually called." The problem with this view is that Calvinists have no real support for their teaching of Total Inability.

They use passages that speak of their sinfulness and the "defilement" or "depravity" of their hearts and they make up illustrations about how "dead" people can't do anything so as to prove their point. But none of these verses teach that man is unable to respond to the powerful presentation of the gospel.

Scripture never teaches that all men are incapable of responding to the gospel message! This is an assumption that Calvinists bring to the text.

With Respect.
Bill

 

Bill,

You don't actually say anything that regfutes npetreley's presentation so I won't touch on that.

I won't even deal with the way you condescndingly act as though npetreley were unaware that Effectual Call is the ame doctrine as Iresistable Grace, though that is unfortunate.

I will say though that the inabiluty of people is not an assumption but an explicit teaching of Scripture. We are in Adam, we are slaves to sin, we are hepless, we have reprobate minds, we have minds that cannot understand spiritual things, we have hearst ahat are wocked and decitful, and I could go on. These are all biblical teachings in biblical language.

Arminians are wrong either way. Either they exalt human anture, making them humanist, or they minimise sin, making them classically Pelagian.

You end up at the same place.

Firtunately for you, God elected you to salvation for no reason based in you. If it were forweknowledge of something in you, and foreknowing your bad theology, it is unlikely that he would have elected you (or me where I am off base for that matter).

 

Total Depravity:

http://freegrace.net/scriptures/total_depravity.htm

Bro. Bill, I am also a citizen of Ft. Worth. Which church do you attend, if you care to share.

 

I just completed a search of 13 versions of the bible, and could not find "effectual" in any of them. So if you are going to insist on using the term you cannot say that "effectual call" is biblical. Afterall, it is you and Frogman that insist there is no truth outside of scriptures. Since effectual is not found in the bible It cannot be truth.

 

There is no such thing in the Scriptures as a "general" call of the gospel anyway!!!

 

I guess the Trinity is a false teaching also.

 

Grasshopper,
With over 5000 years of recorded history relative to God and Godly things, is that all the evidence one can provide regarding Total Depravity. That's not even one scripture per century of time.

Wouldn't it make sense that if Man is totally depraved, that there would be significant evidence to support it?

If man were totally depraved, there would be no hospitals, no churches, no schools, no jails, etc. Yet every society on the face of the earth has love, mercy, grace, justice, and the other fruits of the spirit. Fruits of the spirit that cannot co-exist with Total Depravity.

 

Yelsew, yes the word "effectual" is used in scripture its the Greek word "energeian" or literally "operation" and it does connote an idea of being unchangable. The word "effectual" is used in the KJV but in other versions it is translated "working" or something to that effect.

It's also interesting that this word is used in reference to God's dealing with his apostles such as in Eph. 3:7 or Gal. 2:8, but is not used in connection with other believers.

With Respect,
Bill

 

Yelsew,

Why do you use these bogus arguments?

You know very well that Effectual Call is a theological term, which does not require that the term actually appear in Scripture. Like Trinity.

What makes a theology true or false is whether the idea that the theological term represents is found in scripture.

That would be why calvanism is true despite most of its theological terminology not being found in scripture is true, while arminianism is false despite the presence of one of its key terms (freewill) being in Scripture. The theological menaing of freewill that arminians put forward is absent from scripture.

Then there is your use of a straw man regarding Total Depravity. You have often been told that Total Depravity does not mean that man can do no good at all.

Then there is the fact that you misuse the fruit of the Spirit passage. To assert that anyone can have the fruit of the Spirit apart from teh indwelling of the Spirit is heresy, and the way you use the passage in light of its context is irresponsible in the extreme.

 

Npetreley,

Are you arguing that you don't believe there is a universal call now?

You told me that you supported the "general" univeral call of the gospel and the Holy Spirit. Has that changed since last week?

Bill

 

Here is a quote from a previous post:

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Enough said.

Bill

 

Not funny. Not really.

Disengenuous though. Definitely.