Sotierological Unity?

Makes no difference. It's salvation.

 

I am glad you said "seems to be", because no Calvinist I know would equate regeneration or the new birth with election. And nobody who is a baptist, whether Calvinistic or not, would agree that the elect are indwelt by the Holy Spirit upon infant baptism or at conception. Talking of conception, your conception of calvinism seems to be a mistaken one, at least on this point.

 

Sorry Skypair, I am not trying to be awkward, but I don't really understand your question. Are you asking how the Holy Spirit brings people under the sound of the gospel? Perhaps (if you have the time to do so) you could explain what you meant. Sorry to be such a nuisance.

 

Sky, your posts just get more and more bizzare. Comparing the indwelling of the Holy Spirit to demon possesion in reverse?????

I didn't even know about the Holy Spirit when I was saved. I had to learn about Him through God's word. Does that mean I was possesed against my will?

Your post is beyond ridiculous.:BangHead:

 

Thanks, Skypair. I think I understand what you mean now. I don't think many (if any) Calvinists believe that they were "forcibly drawn", at least not in the sense of being dragged, kicking and screaming, to the Saviour. Rather, we believe that our hearts, including our wills, are changed by God. Rather than "re-invent the wheel", here is how The Baptist Confession of Faith of 1689, reritten in modern English, puts it, in its chapter on Effectual Calling:

1 AT a time appointed by and acceptable to God, those whom God has predestinated to life are effectually called by His Word and Spirit out of the state of death in which they are by nature, to grace and salvation by Jesus Christ. Their minds are given spiritual enlightenment and, as those who are being saved, they begin to understand the things of God. God takes away their heart of stone and gives them a heart of flesh. He renews their will, and by His almighty power He sets them to seek and follow that which is good, at the same time effectually drawing them to Jesus Christ. And to all these changes they come most freely, for they are made willing by divine grace.
Deut. 30:6; Ps. 110:3; Song 1:4; Ezek. 36:26,27; Acts 26:18; Rom. 8:30; 11:7; Eph. 1:10,11,17,19; 2:1-6; 2 Thess. 2: 13,14.

2 God's effectual call is the outcome of His free and special grace alone. Until a man is given life, and renewed by the Holy Spirit, he is dead in sins and trespasses, so is entirely passive in this work of salvation, a work that does not proceed from anything good foreseen in him, nor from any power or agency resident in him. The power that enables him to answer God's call and to embrace the grace offered and conveyed in it, is no less than that which effected the resurrection of Christ from the dead.
John 5:25; 1 Cor. 2:14; Eph. 1:19,20; 2:5,8; 2 Tim. 1:9.


​

So there doesn't seem to be too much similarity with demon possession. Certainly, when I was saved, I didn't feel that I was beeing forced to do something against my will. My experience was that described in a verse of Charles Wesley's great hymn, "And can it be?":

Long my imprisoned sprit lay,
Fast bound in sin and nature's night;
Thine eye diffused a quickening ray;
I woke, the dungeon flamed with light;
My chains fell off, my heart was free,
I rose, went forth, and followed thee.
My chains fell off, my heart was free,
I rose, went forth, and followed thee.


​

Wesley was not a calvinist, yet he seems to have realised (judging by those words) that it was necessary for God to act before he was free to follow Christ.

I hope that is helpful.

 

The word is as strong as "drag" but that's not the same thing as "drag kicking and screaming".

 

I don't disagree with draw=drag, but draw is not the same as "drag kicking and screaming" (by which I meant "drag against the dragged person's will).

Yes. Maybe you're not the Calvinist I am after. :laugh:

I do see being saved as instantaneous. I cannot find any biblical warrant for believing that there could be a "partial Christian" - the nearest I could think of was Agrippa saying to Paul, "You almost persuade me to become a Christian." (Acts 26.28), but the bible foes not tell us that Agrippa did later become a Christian.

However, sanctification, becoming more and more in actual practice as God would have us be, is indeed a gradual process. (I am ashamed to say that it is all too gradual in my case!)

Praise His wonderful Name!

 

I am sure I sent a reply to this, but it has not appeared, so I will try again:


I cannot answer for npetrely, of course, but for myself, I did not 'insist it is "drag" and not "draw"'. I was simply replying to your earlier statement:

I have had many say that "draw" means "drag." But I won't lay that to your blame.

​

I replied:

I don't disagree with draw=drag

​

and added the "condition" that "draw" is not the same as "drag kicking and screaming." I certainly didn't intend that to be insistent, and I apologise if it came over that way.

 

For one thing, it's the same word used in another verse that means "drag into court". When you sue someone, you don't woo them into court with pretty flowers and candy. You drag them there. In this case, it may be against the person's will, but the will of the person being dragged is not described by the word "drag/draw". That's why it's not necessarily "drag kicking and screaming". It's just "drag".