To Non Cals here:Does Man Need Prevenient Grace or Not To Accept Jesus ?

[Skandelon]

Skandelon, one of the 5 articles of the Arminian doctrine include this:

Do you disavow an article of doctrine that is from your own specificed theology?

While there are various explanations and views within the "Arminian/non-Calvinistic" camp (just as there are such in the "Calvinistic/Reformed" camps), I don't see anything stated here with which I disagree. Did something I say seem to disagree with this statement?

I do affirm God's common grace in permitting men to believe and follow, in that ALL GOOD things come from God. Even my ability to breathe my next breath is a result of his grace, after all. But, as stated in the article, this grace is common and resistible.

 

[JesusFan]

While there are various explanations and views within the "Arminian/non-Calvinistic" camp (just as there are such in the "Calvinistic/Reformed" camps), I don't see anything stated here with which I disagree. Did something I say seem to disagree with this statement?

I do affirm God's common grace in permitting men to believe and follow, in that ALL GOOD things come from God. Even my ability to breathe my next breath is a result of his grace, after all. But, as stated in the article, this grace is common and resistible.

So you DO affirm that God still has to do "something" along with preaching the Gospel to get anyone saved?

 

[Skandelon]

So you DO affirm that God still has to do "something" along with preaching the Gospel to get anyone saved?

First, you must understand that I affirm that God must grant us any ability that we have, including the ability to breathe. So, that would include our ability to believe truth.

Second, I believe the ability to believe clearly revealed truth is common to all, like breathing. IOW, I don't believe we have lost that ability through the fall. Adam believed God after he had fallen and even got some new clothes. His ability was increased in the sense that now he knew both good and evil. There is nothing which indicates man has lost his ability to hear/understand and believe a direct and clear message from God appealing for them to be reconciled. The reason Calvinists believe that is because they mistakenly take passages out of their historical context as proof texts, when in reality they are addressing Israel's judicially hardening by which God has temporarily blinded the nation from the clear truth so as to accomplish the Passover, just as he temporarily blinded Pharaoh so as to accomplish the first passover.

Third, the gospel IS a gracious work of the Holy Spirit. IT is powerful and effective because it is OF GOD, not OF MAN. God inspires, preserves, carries, and compels the preaching of his Gospel to every creature. Do you believe that "something" is enough, or not?

 

[Skandelon]

Bible also states clearly that God has permitted satan to 'blind" hearts and minds of those not getting saved , lest they should turn to Christ and get saved....

1. To what verse are you referring?

2. Why would satan need to blind people who were born blind due to the fall?

 

[JesusFan]

1. To what verse are you referring?

2. Why would satan need to blind people who were born blind due to the fall?

Double whammy for those not saved....

Blinded by being sinners, having sinful natures, while satan blinds those who do not come to the truth and get saved!

 

[Skandelon]

Should I take you to task over the word "many" for several pages of this thread as you've done to me in the past? :love2:

I didn't say many here on this board, I said "many" in general that I've read and I'd be glad to provide you some links to read to prove that assertion if necessary, unlike you who quote ONE poster (Winman) and even his quotes didn't say what you accused him of believing.

Can you clarify this? "They are careful not to in any way separate the power from the gospel by suggesting that God does some 'prior effectual' inward working which somehow makes the gospel effective for them only."

That needs elaboration, its a little murky.

They just don't in any way separate the gospel from the power of salvation because they don't want to undermine the passages which clearly place the power in the gospel itself, not in some additional prior working.

Also, in Galatians 1:15, Paul, set apart to preach, from the womb, which was God's purpose for His life.

That was one of his reasons for claiming authority over the other believers in Galatia as one with 'apostolic authority.' If you are using Paul as your example of how we are all selected, called and appointed, you may undermine that authority to sets him apart.

Many people look back on their salvation experience and prior and see God's workings in their lives. I personally believe this is what Paul partly sees and meant in Galatians 1:15.

I'm not denying that God's spirit works through other means, I'm only saying that I (and even some Calvinistic scholars) believe the power of the salvation is ONLY brought through the gospel.

 

[Van]

Thread summary

What is prevenient grace? It might be defined differently by Calvinists, Arminians, and non-Cal/Arms.

I use the term to refer to a supposed grace whereby God enables, but does not compel people to receive and understand the gospel. The idea being that a natural man, i.e man of flesh (in a fallen state) is not able to respond appropriately to the gospel. In my opinion it is false doctrine.

Now revealing grace must come before a person could trust in that revelation, but I believe scripture teaches fallen men are able to understand that revealing grace, the milk of the gospel.

As far as the Calvinist take, the prevenient grace is irresistible, that too is false doctrine.

I Corinthians 2:14-3:3 teaches men of flesh, i.e. not babes in Christ or spiritually mature Christians, can understand the milk of the gospel, but not other spiritual things discerned only with the aid of our indwelt Spirit.

And I believe Matthew 23:13 teaches men can be entering heaven, thus able to enter, yet be turned aside, thus the enabling is resistible.

In summary, my view of "prevenient grace" is the revealing grace of God which is necessary in order to have something in mind to trust in. But it does not supernaturally alter (enable) a man of flesh to respond, they are able to respond in their fallen state. Thus regeneration does not come before faith.

I do not think much, other than disparagement, has been offered since post #2.

Compare the following valid commentary from Skandelon, with the above!

First, you must understand that I affirm that God must grant us any ability that we have, including the ability to breathe. So, that would include our ability to believe truth.

Second, I believe the ability to believe clearly revealed truth is common to all, like breathing. IOW, I don't believe we have lost that ability through the fall. Adam believed God after he had fallen and even got some new clothes. His ability was increased in the sense that now he knew both good and evil. There is nothing which indicates man has lost his ability to hear/understand and believe a direct and clear message from God appealing for them to be reconciled. The reason Calvinists believe that is because they mistakenly take passages out of their historical context as proof texts, when in reality they are addressing Israel's judicially hardening by which God has temporarily blinded the nation from the clear truth so as to accomplish the Passover, just as he temporarily blinded Pharaoh so as to accomplish the first passover.

Third, the gospel IS a gracious work of the Holy Spirit. IT is powerful and effective because it is OF GOD, not OF MAN. God inspires, preserves, carries, and compels the preaching of his Gospel to every creature.

 

[Skandelon]

Double whammy for those not saved....

Blinded by being sinners, having sinful natures, while satan blinds those who do not come to the truth and get saved!

I'm sorry, but you failed to supply the verse to which you were referring, and you failed to tell us why Satan would need to blind those Calvinist claim are born that way?

Plus, don't other texts say God is the one doing the blinding of Israel? Or do you think God uses Satan to blind them?

 

[quantumfaith]

While there are various explanations and views within the "Arminian/non-Calvinistic" camp (just as there are such in the "Calvinistic/Reformed" camps), I don't see anything stated here with which I disagree. Did something I say seem to disagree with this statement?

I do affirm God's common grace in permitting men to believe and follow, in that ALL GOOD things come from God. Even my ability to breathe my next breath is a result of his grace, after all. But, as stated in the article, this grace is common and resistible.

As I have heard it said before here in BB land. BINGO

:thumbs::thumbs::thumbs:

 

[quantumfaith]

I do not think much, other than disparagement, has been offered since post #2.

Compare the following valid commentary from Skandelon, with the above!

First, you must understand that I affirm that God must grant us any ability that we have, including the ability to breathe. So, that would include our ability to believe truth.

Second, I believe the ability to believe clearly revealed truth is common to all, like breathing. IOW, I don't believe we have lost that ability through the fall. Adam believed God after he had fallen and even got some new clothes. His ability was increased in the sense that now he knew both good and evil. There is nothing which indicates man has lost his ability to hear/understand and believe a direct and clear message from God appealing for them to be reconciled. The reason Calvinists believe that is because they mistakenly take passages out of their historical context as proof texts, when in reality they are addressing Israel's judicially hardening by which God has temporarily blinded the nation from the clear truth so as to accomplish the Passover, just as he temporarily blinded Pharaoh so as to accomplish the first passover.

Third, the gospel IS a gracious work of the Holy Spirit. IT is powerful and effective because it is OF GOD, not OF MAN. God inspires, preserves, carries, and compels the preaching of his Gospel to every creature.

:applause::applause::applause:

 

[glfredrick]

While there are various explanations and views within the "Arminian/non-Calvinistic" camp (just as there are such in the "Calvinistic/Reformed" camps), I don't see anything stated here with which I disagree. Did something I say seem to disagree with this statement?

I do affirm God's common grace in permitting men to believe and follow, in that ALL GOOD things come from God. Even my ability to breathe my next breath is a result of his grace, after all. But, as stated in the article, this grace is common and resistible.

So, if you resist, do you stop breathing? Just wondering how that all works in the real world.

 

[quantumfaith]

Both cals/Arms would affirm than man , as result of the fall, needs to have God apply Grace , in order for any one to get saved right?

Basically disagree if it is general to ALL, or specifically applied towards some?

Both would disagree that the Gospel by itself can save anyone?

JF,

don't know about you, but I see the Gospel as a very simple and graphic illustration of God's ultimate expression of grace.

 

[Skandelon]

So, if you resist, do you stop breathing? Just wondering how that all works in the real world.

I guess so??? It's called "suicide."

The reason some perish is because they refused to love the truth and so be saved.

 

[preacher4truth]

I didn't say many here on this board, I said "many" in general that I've read and I'd be glad to provide you some links to read to prove that assertion if necessary, unlike you who quote ONE poster (Winman) and even his quotes didn't say what you accused him of believing.

They just don't in any way separate the gospel from the power of salvation because they don't want to undermine the passages which clearly place the power in the gospel itself, not in some additional prior working.

That was one of his reasons for claiming authority over the other believers in Galatia as one with 'apostolic authority.' If you are using Paul as your example of how we are all selected, called and appointed, you may undermine that authority to sets him apart.

I'm not denying that God's spirit works through other means, I'm only saying that I (and even some Calvinistic scholars) believe the power of the salvation is ONLY brought through the gospel.

Not talking authority and rank here friend. Talking called to salvation and purpose.

No, I'm not "undermining" Pauls authority whatsoever. He was called from the womb, and prior. His calling? To salvation and to an Apostle! Using him as an example doesn't do as you suggest. As a matter of fact his entire calling, and salvation are to be used as an example/pattern for all others after him according to 1 Timothy 1. Knowing the mind of Paul, and his humility, he wouldn't find this to be undermining him whatsoever.

We also are predeterminitively elected according to His purpose, as Paul states and argues in Romans, and set apart for salvation too; 1 Peter 1. We also are called to some task for Christ. We just don't happen to be apostles, as he was, but we are all called and saved in the same manner.

- Peace

 

[Skandelon]

We also are called to some task for Christ. We just don't happen to be apostles, as he was, but we are all called and saved in the same manner.

- Peace

So, on what basis does he claim apostolic authority? If he says, "Because God set me apart from birth." Those brethren who disagree with him in Galatia can say, "Us too." Then Paul can say, "God hand selected me and appointed me personally." They can reply, "Us too." What separates the inspired messenger from their audience?

To use another biblical example: Proof that God intervened through circumstances to effectually change Jonah's will to go preach in Nineveh, doesn't prove that God effectually and inwardly intervenes to cause some of his audience members to believe his message, does it?

 

[preacher4truth]

So, on what basis does he claim apostolic authority? If he says, "Because God set me apart from birth." Those brethren who disagree with him in Galatia can say, "Us too." Then Paul can say, "God hand selected me and appointed me personally." They can reply, "Us too." What separates the inspired messenger from their audience?

To use another biblical example: Proof that God intervened through circumstances to effectually change Jonah's will to go preach in Nineveh, doesn't prove that God effectually and inwardly intervenes to cause some of his audience members to believe his message, does it?

You can't say God set you apart from birth to what you are called to do and to salvation?

I can say it. I don't believe it makes Paul any less an apostle, nor does it do a thing to his authority as such.

Pauls calling is a pattern how Jesus calls all of us to salvation. Pauls office is different than ours. And I'm certain we don't believe there to be any more apostles. Paul looked back at how God predetermined to save him and call him, Gal. 1:15, and chose him in Christ by His purpose before ever having done good or bad, as applied via Romans 9:11.

Certainly God changed the hearts of the Ninevites to repent through the Word. It's the same thing He does today. The Word changes people, it intervenes, brings faith &c. but that's another topic.

- Peace

 

[Skandelon]

Pauls calling is a pattern how Jesus calls all of us to salvation.

I don't see scripture ever make that leap, but we may just need to agree to disagree. I still don't think proof that God has selected a particular person to be his inspired messenger is proof that God selects certain people in his audience to believe the message. I just believe we should take scripture for what it actually says without reading more into it.

Certainly God changed the hearts of the Ninevites to repent through the Word.

Are you sure about that? I guess God failed to change them the whole way then, huh?

 

[preacher4truth]

I don't see scripture ever make that leap, but we may just need to agree to disagree. I still don't think proof that God has selected a particular person to be his inspired messenger is proof that God selects certain people in his audience to believe the message. I just believe we should take scripture for what it actually says without reading more into it.

1 Timothy 1 isn't a leap, he plainly calls it a pattern. Also, Galatians 1:15 isn't only about being an inspired messenger, salvation itself is also implied and is what we call a given. Too many other passages point to being elect prior to birth, set apart for Gods purpose. It's called looking at the entire counsel of God, and then interpreting Scripture with guess what? That's right; Scripture!

Are you sure about that? I guess God failed to change them the whole way then, huh?

I am absolutely sure about that. Did they repent, or not? Yep, that's right, they repented for God's purposes. :wavey:

"I guess God failed to change them...?" Uh. No. God didn't fail in any way at all so I disagree with that altogether. He did with them all He purposed to do. No failure whatsoever. :type:

- Peace

 

[Skandelon]

1 Timothy 1 isn't a leap, he plainly calls it a pattern.

Can you show me where in this chapter it teaches that because God selects his divine messenger that he also selects those who will believe their message? Thanks

Also, Galatians 1:15 isn't only about being an inspired messenger, salvation itself is also implied and is what we call a given.

Its about Paul confronting other teachers who are corrupting Galatia with a "false gospel." He is attempting to show He is more authorative than those who are corrupting them. He does so by saying:

11 I want you to know, brothers, that the gospel I preached is not something that man made up. 12 I did not receive it from any man, nor was I taught it; rather, I received it by revelation from Jesus Christ. 13 For you have heard of my previous way of life in Judaism, how intensely I persecuted the church of God and tried to destroy it. 14 I was advancing in Judaism beyond many Jews of my own age and was extremely zealous for the traditions of my fathers. 15 But when God, who set me apart from birth and called me by his grace, was pleased 16 to reveal his Son in me so that I might preach him among the Gentiles, I did not consult any man, 17 nor did I go up to Jerusalem to see those who were apostles before I was, but I went immediately into Arabia and later returned to Damascus. 18 Then after three years, I went up to Jerusalem to get acquainted with Peter and stayed with him fifteen days. 19 I saw none of the other apostles--only James, the Lord's brother. 20 I assure you before God that what I am writing you is no lie. 21 Later I went to Syria and Cilicia. 22 I was personally unknown to the churches of Judea that are in Christ. 23 They only heard the report: "The man who formerly persecuted us is now preaching the faith he once tried to destroy." 24 And they praised God because of me.

Too many other passages point to being elect prior to birth, set apart for Gods purpose. It's called looking at the entire counsel of God, and then interpreting Scripture with guess what? That's right; Scripture!

I agree, which is why I'm still waiting for the text that says that God will select his inspired messengers in the same manner he selects their individual audience members to believe.

 

[preacher4truth]

Can you show me where in this chapter it teaches that because God selects his divine messenger that he also selects those who will believe their message? Thanks

That's a completely different subject and you know it.

Its about Paul confronting other teachers who are corrupting Galatia with a "false gospel." He is attempting to show He is more authorative than those who are corrupting them. He does so by saying:

No, not really.

I agree, which is why I'm still waiting for the text that says that God will select his inspired messengers in the same manner he selects their individual audience members to believe.

I never said that. Nice attempt though. An entirely differing topic. :applause:

I am absolutely sure about that. Did they repent, or not? Yep, that's right, they repented for God's purposes. :wavey:

"I guess God failed to change them...?" Uh. No. God didn't fail in any way at all so I disagree with that altogether. He did with them all He purposed to do. No failure whatsoever. :type:

- Peace

Yep. Show me where they didn't repent for His purpose. They did. God doesn't fail. You left this part blank.

- Peace