I think it is both funny and sad that anyone could complain that Calvinists overplay God's sovereignty. It's as if they think "Those Calvinists make God too powerful;they need to understand the sovereignty of man!"
-
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!
T - Total Depravity
- Thread starter Skandelon
- Start date
- Status
I agree. I wouldn't condemn anyone as "overplaying" Gods sovereignty. But there are some who can understand no biblical doctrine apart from their understanding of Divine Sovereignty (this is the lens through which they "must" look). These types tend to view salvation as centered on sovereignty where Scripture centers it on Christ....and you are right - it is sad.
Last edited by a moderator:
Skandelon
<b>Moderator</b>
I wouldn't say you overplay God's sovereignty as much as I would say you misapply it. AW Tozer said it much better than I could:
"God Sovereignly decreed that man should be free to exercise moral choice, and man from the beginning has fulfilled that decree by making his choice between good and evil. When he chooses to do evil, he does not thereby countervail the sovereign will of God but fulfills it, inasmuch as the eternal decree decided not which choice the man should make but that he should be free to make it. If in His absolute freedom God has willed to give man limited freedom, who is there to stay His hand or say, 'What doest thou?' Man’s will is free because God is sovereign. A God less than sovereign could not bestow moral freedom upon His creatures. He would be afraid to do so." - A.W. Tozer, The Knowledge of the Holy: The Attributes of God
I like A.W. Tozer. I have bought many of his books. They are very valuable and needed. However, he was not an expositor of the Scriptures in contrast with another A.W. -- A.W. Pink.
Tozer liked to play it down the middle as much as possible --but he ede3d up on the Arminian side of the playing field.
It's humorous that some on the non-Calvinist side -- Arminian/semi-Pelagian folks like to say that God endowed people with magical free-will. (Even many secular movies play up that angle.) But then these professing Christians maintain that the Lord certainly doesn't give or grant faith to whom He chooses. What a wresting of the Scripture! They like the idea of people having this precious free-will capacity and deny God-endowed gifts of faith and repentance. Where is grace in the non-Cal perspective?
Tozer liked to play it down the middle as much as possible --but he ede3d up on the Arminian side of the playing field.
It's humorous that some on the non-Calvinist side -- Arminian/semi-Pelagian folks like to say that God endowed people with magical free-will. (Even many secular movies play up that angle.) But then these professing Christians maintain that the Lord certainly doesn't give or grant faith to whom He chooses. What a wresting of the Scripture! They like the idea of people having this precious free-will capacity and deny God-endowed gifts of faith and repentance. Where is grace in the non-Cal perspective?
salzer mtn
Well-Known Member
John 6:44 No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him. Notice the scripture did not say man may not come to me. May not would mean he does not have permission to come, can not mean's man has not the ability to come. Verse 45, It is written in the Prophets, and they shall all be taught of God. The all does not mean every single individual in the world will be taught of God , because we know some men never hear the gospel. So the all would be those that God has called out in time that were elected in eternity past. Every man therefore that hath heard and hath learned of the Father cometh unto me. Again, the every man is the elected called out ones that hear, and learn and they do come to the Father.
Last edited by a moderator:
Skandelon
<b>Moderator</b>
But why couldn't they come??? Multiple choice:
A. Because God decreed for all mankind to be born unable to respond to His very OWN appeals for reconciliation due to the sin of Adam.
or
B. For this reason they [Israel] could not believe, because, as Isaiah says elsewhere: "He has blinded their eyes and deadened their hearts, so they can neither see with their eyes, nor understand with their hearts, nor turn--and I would heal them." -Jesus (Jn 12:39)
"" 'Go to this people [Israel] and say, "You will be ever hearing but never understanding; you will be ever seeing but never perceiving." For this people's heart has become calloused; they hardly hear with their ears, and they have closed their eyes. Otherwise they might see with their eyes, hear with their ears, understand with their hearts and turn, and I would heal them.' "Therefore I want you to know that God's salvation has been sent to the Gentiles, and they will listen!" -Paul (Acts 28)
or
B. For this reason they [Israel] could not believe, because, as Isaiah says elsewhere: "He has blinded their eyes and deadened their hearts, so they can neither see with their eyes, nor understand with their hearts, nor turn--and I would heal them." -Jesus (Jn 12:39)
"" 'Go to this people [Israel] and say, "You will be ever hearing but never understanding; you will be ever seeing but never perceiving." For this people's heart has become calloused; they hardly hear with their ears, and they have closed their eyes. Otherwise they might see with their eyes, hear with their ears, understand with their hearts and turn, and I would heal them.' "Therefore I want you to know that God's salvation has been sent to the Gentiles, and they will listen!" -Paul (Acts 28)
A or B?
Skandelon
<b>Moderator</b>
Surprising you would come to that conclusion given than Pink happens to agree with your perspective while Tozer does not. :smilewinkgrin:
But why not address the content of his quote? You disagree? Why? What is wrong with that view of sovereignty?
Never heard it said like that...but maybe the word 'responsibility' would sit better with you? One who is 'able to respond' is 'responsible.' One who is unable to respond it not responsible. (response-able)
Was the Father's reception of his prodigal son based upon the son's decision to return home, or upon his own gracious choice? Did the son deserve to be accepted on the basis that he came home? Did the son earn what he received because he returned? Do we earn forgiveness by requesting it, or is it the choice of the forgiver to forgive alone?
I feel as if I need to ask these questions because you seem to be under the delusion that our 'free' decision to humble ourselves and ask for forgiveness somehow merits God's grace, which is just absurd.
Does scripture say:
"Humble yourself and you will be exalted."
or
"God will humble you so as to exalt you, if your one of the lucky ones."
I think what's humerous are those on the determinist side who call free will 'magical' out of one side of their mouth...while claiming men freely sin and reject God out of the other. Talk about a wrest of Scripture and logic!
salzer mtn
Well-Known Member
I believe man cannot is because man chose to disobey God and sin in the garden and therefore he fell into both spiritual death which effected ever part of his make up and natural death. Number B, Israel rejected Christ, Christ rejected them and blinded their eyes and harden their heart. This was God's choice to do this, there are many today that do no more than Israel yet God chooses to have mercy on them. Will I rise up and tell God this is not fair ? No because God has a right to do with his creation as He will's.
Is the above what Rippon refers to as 'magical free will'?
I see what you mean. I do define total depravity a depraved condition that extends to all aspects of man’s nature so that there is nothing that man can do to merit saving favor with God. But too often I think it is taken to mean that depraved people can’t perform actions that are good in either man’s or God’s sight or they do not possess a conscience which judges between and evil (which I think is taking the doctrine too far).
I agree with Calvin’s definition: “All men are conceived in sin, and born the children of wrath, indisposed to all saving good, propense to evil, dead in sin, and the slaves of sin.”
I agree with the Arminian definition: “That man has not saving grace of himself, nor of the energy of his free will, inasmuch as he, in the state of apostasy and sin, can of and by himself neither think, will, nor do any thing that is truly good (such as saving Faith eminently is).”
Except that man's inability is explained clearly by Paul in Romans 10;
Rom 10:14 How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher?
Paul asks here "how shall they believe?". Now, this is DIRECTLY addressing the subject of the ABILITY to BELIEVE.
Does Paul ask how shall they believe unless they be supernaturally regenerated? NO, he does not say one word to that effect here, or anywhere else in all of scripture, he simply implies that man must HEAR of Jesus to believe on him. Then he asks how shall a man HEAR? Again, does he imply man must be regenerated before he will be willing to listen to the word of God? No, he simply implies a preacher must be sent.
Now, compare Romans 10:14 to John 6:45 and you will see the same thing;
Jhn 6:44 No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day.
45 It is written in the prophets, And they shall be all taught of God. Every man therefore that hath heard, and hath learned of the Father, cometh unto me.
Calvinists love to pull Jhn 6:44 out of context to attempt to prove Total Inability, completely ignoring the very next verse that explains how men are drawn, and how they come to Jesus. Every man that has been taught, every man that has heard and learned from the Father comes to Jesus.
But God does not hear for us, and God does not learn for us. We must listen to God's word and take heed to it. This will enable us to believe.
Man's inability is not an inability to believe, we believe thousands of things. Man's inability is ignorance, no man naturally knows of the true God and Jesus Christ. That is why preachers must go forth and teach people the gospel, this is what enables men to believe on Jesus.
Mat 28:19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:
20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen.
No man can believe on Jesus unless he has heard of him, this is our inability.
Last edited by a moderator:
There are some here that would agree with you. Personally, taking the verse to deal with the nature of man would take the verse out of context (Paul transitioning from the contract between the righteousness of the Law and the Righteousness of faith into the opportunity to believe) – but Paul does present the importance of the cognitive message.
Paul asserted (in the previous verses) that one must call on the Lord to be saved. He then begins to outline the steps that fulfill calling on the Lord. Of course, Paul does continue by stating that Israel has certainly heard the gospel – He has stretched out his hands all day long to a disobedient and recalcitrant people (hearing the gospel apparently was not their inability).
So yes, of course teaching the gospel is important. While this has absolutely nothing to do with man being unable to believe on their own merit, I agree that we need to preach.
I think that the passages you need to combat are those Calvinists, Arminians, and others who believe in depravity. They include: Gen 6:5; Jer 17;9; Rom 3:10-18; Matt. 7:17-18; John 15:4-5; 1 Cor. 12:3; Matt. 13:14; John 1:11; John 8:43; Matt. 7:18;; John 6:44, etc. Those who believe in depravity do not deny the importance of preaching.
Men can choose to listen or not. That is not inability, it is choice.
The only inability implied is that men cannot believe on him of whom they have not heard. Now here is the perfect place to mention any moral inability, but Paul does not say one word to that effect here, or anywhere in scripture.
Gen 6:5 And GOD saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.
This verse simply states a fact, that men were wicked and their thoughts were continually wicked. It does not say one word about inability to repent. Noah was an exception to this wickedness, the scriptures say he was perfect in his generations and walked with God. This refutes inability.
Jer 17:9 The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?
This is a general statement and does not prove man is unable to repent from his wickedness. In fact, we see an example of this just 5 verses later.
Jer 17:14 Heal me, O LORD, and I shall be healed; save me, and I shall be saved: for thou art my praise.
So, within the same context we see men can repent and desire to be both healed and saved.
Romans 3 does not prove inability;
Rom 3:10 As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one:
11 There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God.
12 They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one.
If I were to say, "None of my neighbors ever goes to church, no, not one" would you understand that to mean they were unable to go to church? NO, nobody would assume that, but that is exactly what folks do with Romans 3. It is simply stating facts about men, that they do not seek God, that they do not do good. It does not say one word about inability, people have been CONDITIONED by doctrine to read that into this scripture.
Mat 7:17-18 is easily refuted by Mat 12:33;
Mat 12:33 Either make the tree good, and his fruit good; or else make the tree corrupt, and his fruit corrupt: for the tree is known by his fruit.
This verse shows men have both option and ability, they can make themselves good, or they can make themselves corrupt.
I could continue and go through every verse you have presented and show you they do not prove inability. The problem is that folks pull selected verses out of context to prove a doctrine, and ignore many other scriptures that refute it. This is a POOR way to study scripture.
See, we are very much alike here. We both believe the other has poor study habits.
Well, prove inability to me. Let me see scripture that supports this.
John 15:4-5?
Jhn 15:4 Abide in me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, except it abide in the vine; no more can ye, except ye abide in me.
5 I am the vine, ye are the branches: He that abideth in me, and I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit: for without me ye can do nothing.
OK, we cannot bear good fruit of ourselves. This does not prove we are unable to abide in Jesus as he commanded we do.
That would be like saying you cannot fly unless you get on an airplane. But are you able to get on an airplane? YES.
1 Cor 12:3 Wherefore I give you to understand, that no man speaking by the Spirit of God calleth Jesus accursed: and that no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost.
Again, is man able to listen to God's word and learn that Jesus is Lord? YES. Man would never know this of himself, no man is born with this knowledge, he needs the revelation of God through the preaching of the scriptures to know this. Jesus said his words were "spirit" and they were "life". So when you hear the word of God, you are listening to the Spirit of God.
Mat 13:14 And in them is fulfilled the prophecy of Esaias, which saith, By hearing ye shall hear, and shall not understand; and seeing ye shall see, and shall not perceive:
This is a different subject altogether here, this is Jesus speaking in parables for the intention that the hearers would not understand. It actually argues against inability, for if these men were not able to understand Jesus's teachings, why did he need to speak in parables? This refutes inability.
Jhn 1:11 is easily refuted by the very next verse that says men did receive Jesus.
Jhn 8:43 Why do ye not understand my speech? even because ye cannot hear my word.
OK, this is the BEST verse in all the scriptures to prove inability. But it is speaking to very specific men, it is not speaking of all men. But even these men had the option and ability to believe.
Jhn 8:24 I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins.
These are the same men Jesus spoke to in verse 43. Note that he says "IF" ye believe not. "If" denotes option and ability. Jesus is not saying they are unable to believe.
I already answered Mat 7:18, men can either make themselves good, or else make themselves corrupt (Mat 12:33)
Jhn 6:44 has been addressed as well, it is explained by verse 45 that shows men are drawn when they hear the word of God, when they learn and are taught of the Father. Those that listen and learn will surely come to Jesus, those that do not listen will not come to Jesus.
Now show me scripture that actually proves inability.
John 15:4-5?
Jhn 15:4 Abide in me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, except it abide in the vine; no more can ye, except ye abide in me.
5 I am the vine, ye are the branches: He that abideth in me, and I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit: for without me ye can do nothing.
OK, we cannot bear good fruit of ourselves. This does not prove we are unable to abide in Jesus as he commanded we do.
That would be like saying you cannot fly unless you get on an airplane. But are you able to get on an airplane? YES.
1 Cor 12:3 Wherefore I give you to understand, that no man speaking by the Spirit of God calleth Jesus accursed: and that no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost.
Again, is man able to listen to God's word and learn that Jesus is Lord? YES. Man would never know this of himself, no man is born with this knowledge, he needs the revelation of God through the preaching of the scriptures to know this. Jesus said his words were "spirit" and they were "life". So when you hear the word of God, you are listening to the Spirit of God.
Mat 13:14 And in them is fulfilled the prophecy of Esaias, which saith, By hearing ye shall hear, and shall not understand; and seeing ye shall see, and shall not perceive:
This is a different subject altogether here, this is Jesus speaking in parables for the intention that the hearers would not understand. It actually argues against inability, for if these men were not able to understand Jesus's teachings, why did he need to speak in parables? This refutes inability.
Jhn 1:11 is easily refuted by the very next verse that says men did receive Jesus.
Jhn 8:43 Why do ye not understand my speech? even because ye cannot hear my word.
OK, this is the BEST verse in all the scriptures to prove inability. But it is speaking to very specific men, it is not speaking of all men. But even these men had the option and ability to believe.
Jhn 8:24 I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins.
These are the same men Jesus spoke to in verse 43. Note that he says "IF" ye believe not. "If" denotes option and ability. Jesus is not saying they are unable to believe.
I already answered Mat 7:18, men can either make themselves good, or else make themselves corrupt (Mat 12:33)
Jhn 6:44 has been addressed as well, it is explained by verse 45 that shows men are drawn when they hear the word of God, when they learn and are taught of the Father. Those that listen and learn will surely come to Jesus, those that do not listen will not come to Jesus.
Now show me scripture that actually proves inability.
Last edited by a moderator:
No, I wanted to see what YOU believe proves total inability. What scripture (if indeed it is scripture) convinces you of inability?
Skandelon
<b>Moderator</b>
How is Israel's being temporarily blinded from the truth while the Gentiles are being given that truth an outworking of God's decree to make all mankind born totally blind to all truth?
- Status