Why did Thomas demand to see in order to believe?

Oh, I would most certainly like to debate this topic if you would do likewise [snip - please nothing personal in this thread, PM me if you want to talk about personal matters. Thank you.]

 

So, we're in agreement that you're not going to throw these things in here, and bring up the past? No?

 

I really don't follow your question very well. First, who says it is not possible for someone to choose to believe or not believe in Christ? Second, the entire world is already in the "not believe in Christ" camp unless they choose to believe.

I know of none in Reformed Theology who says it is "impossible for someone to choose to believe or not believe in Christ?" That would mean that everyone is lost and no one can be saved (or that no one is lost and everyone is saved if it is impossible for someone to choose to not believe in Christ...double negative:godisgood.

Now, I do believe it is not possible for someone to choose to believe in Christ unless God first works in them. I believe you have stated that very thing on several occasions.

So, let's look at Thomas. Thomas refused to believe that Jesus was resurrected until he saw Him alive. After he saw Him, he proclaimed Jesus to be his Lord and God. What does that prove? It proves...

1. Thomas rejected Jesus until Jesus directly revealed Himself to Thomas.
2. After Jesus revealed Himself to Thomas, Thomas was saved and worshipped Him as God.

What's your point?

peace to youraying:

 

Please provide proof that some say it is not possible for someone to choose to believe or not in Christ. I think this is a misnomer, so provide solid exacting poof this has been stated this way.

You then rush to a text to prove this alleged belief that somewhere "some" have said what you've claimed. I believe your statements to be phantom statements. Why no proof, why just allegations with no documentation to back it up?

Again, please provide proof beyond reasonable doubt where anyone has stated this emphatically.

The entire premise of your OP is based upon alleged statements. Thus your conclusions of Thomas in the end don't prove a thing, and are not worthy to be addressed until your premise is proven with facts about what you accuse others as having said. Otherwise we are contending with hypothesis on your part, which would be nearly impossible to disprove without some real proof anyone has ever said what you claim they have said.

- Peace

 

Every Calvinist would agree that people choose not to believe. All the non elect choose to not believe. Calvinists do not teach that God forced people to not believe. They choose to not believe because they don't want Christ.

The question with Calvinist is not why some choose to reject Christ but why anyone chooses to come to Christ.

 

I thought the Calvinist declare that God sovereignly determined who would be the elect or not, and predestined them to believe or not? God is in complete control of choice/creaturely volition or He is not sovereign and all that jive…?

Easy, for love of the truth.

 

Which is exactly what I hold to. But it is not irresistable

 

The natural status for man is rejection. God chooses to save.

 

only the elect love the truth..the others are described here...
John 3:19
And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.
John 3:18-20

 

Yes or no, Iconoclast.

Edit...And jbh28.

 

Calvinists say that man cannot believe unless he is regenerated, there is no evidence of that here, is there? If so, show where the scriptures say that. Jesus himself said Thomas believed BECAUSE he had SEEN, something very ordinary and natural. Show where Jesus said a supernatural inward working in Thomas was performed.

Jesus presented outward evidence to Thomas he had risen. Thomas, in his God-given faculties to process evidence and reason upon it made a conscious choice to believe.

 

OK, scripture doesn't explicitly say that here. Must scripture explicitly say, every time there is an account of someone coming to salvation by faith, that "regeneration" or a supernatural inward working has occurred for such doctrine to be true?

OK. I've never said people do not engage their God-given faculties when coming to faith.

peace to youraying:

 

Thank YOU for such an agreeable way of disagreeing. Blessings.

 

Well, you're admitting confusion so I empathize with your last statement above. I think that often times there is variance on your part concerning subjects and meanings, versus what persons actually are conveying.

Looks to me that you're misconstruing Aarons intent with your OP? I'm certain what Aaron means is that the ability to believe comes from God, that is, saving faith, a gift from God, in other words not something man is capable of doing on his own since it is the gift from God. So in that sense I would say that Aaron and I would agree, and "nail on head" would be appropriate.

Does that make sense? I can't then say that what you've provided is "proof," simply a misunderstanding on your part, hence your misconception.

Yes. perhaps you and Aaron should hash this out as it sounds like a personal misunderstanding.

***as a side note, I see the subject of irresistible grace is coming into play here, and will seek understanding on this subject as to what it means, whether I believe the Calvinist perception and teaching of this, &c. I will begin a thread about this and see what happens.

- Peace

 

It isn't just Thomas. When the women returned from the empty tomb, their words seemed to the apostles as idle tales, and they believed them not.

Again, it doesn't say Thomas wouldn't believe in Christ. He wouldn't believe their report. Either way, faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things unseen. Whatever is of sight is not faith. Seeing the risen Christ no more generates faith than reading Moses and the Prophets, and according to Christ if one will not hear Moses and Prophets, neither will they believe if one returns from the dead to tell them these things.