Wrong Take On Romans 12:3c

Andy-

Does every man have the ability to choose Christ, or not?

The unsaved man does have the ability to choose not to sin, "but we are all as an unclean thing, and all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags". "For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all." The unsaved man has a choice, but, he does not always make the right choice.

I resisted the word of God and the drawing of the Holy Spirit several times before I finally surrendered. That means I made a choice. I agree that He chose me before I chose Him, but, you can't deny that I chose Him.

Romans 10:9 That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.

The "if" in that verse sounds like election is conditional.

 

No, but you said I could choose Christ, that all men could choose Christ.
I am not trying to be mean I just do not understand why you won't say: "you can't choose to be saved unless God picks you to change your heart". That is what you believe or at least that is what I get from it.

 

Does everyone have the ability to choose Christ? Sure. But is anyone willing to choose Christ? No, unless God regenerates him. By the way, Calvinists differ on phrasing this issue. Some C's probably disagree with the way I've phrased it - they would say that man is unable (but only because he is unwilling).

So in your second paragraph, I can agree with "the unsaved man does have the ability to not sin." But then I would add, that the unsaved man is not willing to not sin, and therefore, he sins, because he wills/chooses to sin.

Just as we all know that there is no man who has ever lived that was willing to not sin, so also do we know that there is no man who has ever lived that was willing to accept Christ, save for the regenerating work of the Holy Spirit. And that is why God had to save us, because none of us were willing on our own. So he chooses us, and then we choose him.

 

Yes.

He never makes the right choice because his inclination is against God.

I would not deny that you chose Him.

It is conditional. It is conditional on whether or not you confess, etc.

It is academic that man CAN choose Christ of his own free will. Without being regenerated, he is not inclined to do so, but he is ABLE to do so. I hate to keep going back to the food example, but I think it does express the concept. At an earlier age, my kids were ABLE to choose to eat vegetables they didn't like, but they would never make that choice because they were not inclined to do so. In this human example, the only way to get them to eat their vegetables was to force them. If I were God, I could have renewed their minds (regenerated them) such that they'd be inclined to CHOOSE to eat their vegetables. The difference I'd make would be in their inclination, not their ability.

The problem with man is that he is unable to change his own inclination, so from an academic perspective, man is UNABLE to choose Christ of his own free will. But the distinction is only academic. God is not prohibiting anyone from choosing Christ. They are able, but unwilling.

 

O.k., so you admit that is impossible for you to not sin. Then why does He command us to not sin? Doesn't He know that it is impossible to not sin? That's not fair! That is the same objection I hear from non-C's regarding man's unwillingness to choose Christ. No one is perfect, because no one is willing to be perfect (we agree on this). And no one chooses Christ, because no one is willing to choose Christ, unless Christ chooses him first.

Again, in all this, I'm just showing that it is a misreprensentation to say that C's believe that people have no choice in their salvation. Yes, they do. Everyone chooses hell, unless God saves them.

 

Thanks, Nicholas. It looks like we are on the same page regarding this.

 

Andy and Nicholas,

You can rest now. :sleeping_2: I finally understand what you are saying. Sorry it took so much work on your part. It is a tough thing to comprehend, but, I agree with you. You win.

What do I agree with?

1) Man, left to himself, will not cease from sin, though he is able, he is not willing.
2) Man, left to himself, will not choose Christ, though he is able, he is not willing.

I have always agreed to these statements.

 

Its the same reason why a lion will not eat hay. The lion has the power to eat hay, but a hunger lion will lay in hay and die. The hay could keep him alive. Yet the lion will not eat hay, for hay is not in his nature to eat. A lion eats meat.

The same is true with man. Mans sin nature removes the choice of God. Its not mans nature to choose God, for he seees no need of God. Or...he thinks he can come later on in his own way. Now is the day of salvation. If Man does cry out to God...he would be saved. Whosoever will may come. Yet..no one comes. This is what is mean when one says..."mans will is bound by sin."

 

Thanks to Blammo and Andy. It's nice (and fairly rare) that we can have a civilized discussion on a topic like this, and even better that it ended up with an understanding!


​

 

You asked me if it were possible for a man to be perfect. (in this life) and I said No. He concluded all under sin that He might have mercy on all. Now, we can cease to do evil and learn to do good. Even though we are sinners we still can see the light for He said to the church "ye are the light of the world". There is also a Spirit in man, the inspiration of God almighty that giveth him understanding. Also, The Grace of God which bringeth SALVATION hath appeared unto ALL men, etc.
Now because a man is concluded under sin does not mean he cannot choose to get out from under sin by the help of the Lord. So He can either choose to continue in evil or sin or he can choose to follow the Lord and be saved. God created man with the ability to choose good or choose evil. After you have committed one sin there is nothing you can do to erase that sin except "believe" in the Lord, repent and be baptized. "ye must be born again".

A man can cease to sin but has all his old sins against him and still needs a saviour, therefore "he is not perfect".

Man is not a lion laying in a pile of hay. We are talking about Salvation here and Salvation is of the Lord and there is no other food as the prodical son found out except the "bread of Life".

You still say a man can choose Christ but he won't because his heart is sinful. That still is double talk. That is like saying a Rock will not choose Christ because the Rock is dead. Man is not a Rock but a complex human being created by a Sovereign God that in His Sovereignity, He created man where he could choose good or evil and that is why God could say "what so ever a man soweth, so shall he reap".

He did not say "whatsoever I sow for man, so shall he reap.

Andy; said:
Does everyone have the ability to choose Christ? Sure. But is anyone willing to choose Christ? No, unless God regenerates him.

What you just said is "that a man can choose Christ" and then you continue to say "he cannot choose Christ unless God regenerates him", that is saying it both ways, "he can but he can't".

 

Bob, the point is that God is not prohibiting people from coming to Christ. The misrepresentation of the Calvinist view is that God is somehow prohibiting people who want to be saved. That's simply not the case.

 

He prohibits them, none the less.

 

If you say so, Webdog.

 

I don't...calvinists do.

 

Calvinists say nothing of the sort. God prohibiting men from salvation would be like erecting a barrier to prevent people from going where they wouldn't want to go anyway. It makes no sense.

 

This is what He would do if He failed to "regenerate" someone to accept His Gift.

 

Andy; I know that what you are saying here is that a unregenrate man does not want to be saved, is that right?
Then does the unregenerate man have a choice?
Does the regenrate man have a choice?

Does man ever have a choice at all according to the Calvinist belief?

 

That isn't prohibiting. Prohibiting presumes that someone wants something but God is preventing them from having what they want.

Prohibit is an active word. To fail to regenerate someone is not the same thing as actively preventing someone from being regenerated.

Main Entry: pro·hib·it
Pronunciation: prO-'hi-b&t, pr&-
Function: transitive verb
Etymology: Middle English, from Latin prohibitus, past participle of prohibEre to keep off, from pro- forward + habEre to hold -- more at [SIZE=-1]PRO-[/SIZE], [SIZE=-1]GIVE[/SIZE]
1 : to forbid by authority : [SIZE=-1]ENJOIN[/SIZE]
2 a : to prevent from doing something b : [SIZE=-1]PRECLUDE[/SIZE]
synonym see [SIZE=-1]FORBID[/SIZE]

 

Prohibition does not only have the meaning of preventing someone that wants something. You see trespassing prohibited signs. It means only that trespassing is prohibited, whether you want to or not...everyone...not only those that would want to trespass.

 

If there was no possibility that anyone would go there, you wouldn't need to post a sign.

I'm not going to quibble with you on this anymore. You're simply wrong. Calvinism does not claim that God prevents people from coming to Him, since that implies that they would want to come to Him if God hadn't actively prevented them. Quite the contrary, God has guaranteed that anyone who wants to come to Jesus can (not only can, but will), and in no case will he be turned away.