ECT Grace is unconditional but not universal

[Lon]

The denial of the fact that Christ died for all is an assault on the very essence of the Gospel. If substantiated then I am presented with a bizarre contradiction. Christ's lifting up is supposed to draw one and not, rather, repulse one.

It is rather an argument, between believers, over what the logical conclusion of our held theologies holds. Let me put it this way: The only 'repulsion' comes from one's own sense of right and wrong and fair-play. Realize, at least, that the Calvinist has no such construct and believes nearly as you do that God is just, loving, merciful. Realize too that John 3:16, for instance, isn't against Calvinism. No Calvinist shucks verses for any reason, or if they do, I'm not that Calvinist (nor are most of us I don't believe). In fact, I believe God is concerned over the lost and isn't willing that any one should perish. He'd never tell us to love our enemies and do good to them otherwise. I hope you realize that places me in your camp as far as concern and love for unbelievers.

Quick analogy (mine aren't as good as the Lord Jesus', mine break down so just for a moments consideration):
In chains, they are either all broken and there is a general denial by unbelievers that they can get up and follow or a preference for slavery...
Or, they are broken instantly upon one's following Him.

Question: Does it matter if they are broken already, or broken upon coming to Him? I'd say, not really, though worth a discussion (as here in thread).

One camp says that the chains are broken only for those who are called and enabled (monergism).

Another camp believes that all chains are broken, all one has to do is get up (synergism).

Question: In either of these two scenarios: "All who call on The Name of the Lord will be saved." Does either camp actually do anything about what is happening? Imho, it does not, but especially as a monergist. "Salvation belongs to the Lord." Every individual must meet God on His terms, individually. Even a mass coming forward at a Billy Graham crusade, each one had to come individually.
We are heralds and preachers but God is sovereign. There is no way any one of us can keep another from hearing of God's grace and stones will do the work if we will not. To me, that levels the playing field in such a way that a thread like this is a bit academic rather than earth-shattering.

Do we agree:
1) God loves the word - John 3:16 Romans 5:8
2) We are all sinners, apart from God - Romans 3:23; 6:23
3) Christ died to save sinners - 1 Timothy 1:5 Romans 5:8
4) We need to call on the Lord to be saved - Romans 8:9,10; 10:13
?

 

[Sonnet]

It is rather an argument, between believers, over what the logical conclusion of our held theologies holds. Let me put it this way: The only 'repulsion' comes from one's own sense of right and wrong and fair-play. Realize, at least, that the Calvinist has no such construct and believes nearly as you do that God is just, loving, merciful. Realize too that John 3:16, for instance, isn't against Calvinism. No Calvinist shucks verses for any reason, or if they do, I'm not that Calvinist (nor are most of us I don't believe). In fact, I believe God is concerned over the lost and isn't willing that any one should perish. He'd never tell us to love our enemies and do good to them otherwise. I hope you realize that places me in your camp as far as concern and love for unbelievers.

As an unbeliever I may assure you that is important to me too.

You are a very mild Calvinist but Dort puts it ruthlessly with an absolute focus on man's depravity - which is how Calvinists attempt to resolve their doctrinal anomalies.

Quick analogy (mine aren't as good as the Lord Jesus', mine break down so just for a moments consideration):
In chains, they are either all broken and there is a general denial by unbelievers that they can get up and follow or a preference for slavery...
Or, they are broken instantly upon one's following Him.

Question: Does it matter if they are broken already, or broken upon coming to Him? I'd say, not really, though worth a discussion (as here in thread).

? Not following this.

One camp says that the chains are broken only for those who are called and enabled (monergism).

Another camp believes that all chains are broken, all one has to do is get up (synergism).

Acts 7:51 might explain what occurs.

Question: In either of these two scenarios: "All who call on The Name of the Lord will be saved." Does either camp actually do anything about what is happening? Imho, it does not, but especially as a monergist. "Salvation belongs to the Lord." Every individual must meet God on His terms, individually. Even a mass coming forward at a Billy Graham crusade, each one had to come individually.
We are heralds and preachers but God is sovereign. There is no way any one of us can keep another from hearing of God's grace and stones will do the work if we will not. To me, that levels the playing field in such a way that a thread like this is a bit academic rather than earth-shattering.

Stones?

Do we agree:
1) God loves the word - John 3:16 Romans 5:8
2) We are all sinners, apart from God - Romans 3:23; 6:23
3) We need to call on the Lord to be saved - Romans 8:9,10; 10:13
?

Yes yes yes.

Your theology teaches that some horrible sinners (and they are indeed) are excluded by God from any recourse to salvation. And for other horrible sinners the outcome is different.

 

[Lon]

As an unbeliever I may assure you that is important to me too.

Why are you, yet? What is the hold-out?

Stones?

Luke 19:40

Yes yes yes.

Your theology teaches that some horrible sinners (and they are indeed) are excluded by God from any recourse to salvation. And for other horrible sinners the outcome is different.

Not when the answer to you is: "today,'if' you hear His voice, do not harden your heart." Hebrews 3:7,8;15

 

[Sonnet]

Why are you, yet? What is the hold-out?

I don't know.

Luke 19:40



Not when the answer to you is: "today,'if' you hear His voice, do not harden your heart." Hebrews 3:7,8;15

This still holds:
Your theology teaches that some horrible sinners (and they are indeed) are excluded by God from any recourse to salvation. And for other horrible sinners the outcome is different.

 

[1Mind1Spirit]

Synergism is not pelagianism.

I dont take shortcuts with isms, I've been conversing with you for several days now.

Taking much time with YOU, when I ask you certain questions that make you have to think past your pre conceived notions you shuck outta dodge.

This is just another dodge.

Bottom line is Jesus said God gives us to him.

37 All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out.


We know we are given to Jesus when we believe Jesus is the son of God.

After that has nothing to do with Monergism or Synergism or Pelagianism,Jesus quickens whomsoever he will.

Luke 10:22
All things are delivered to me of my Father: and no man knoweth who the Son is, but the Father; and who the Father is, but the Son, and he to whom the Son will reveal him.

 

[Lon]

I don't know.

I've been and will continue in prayer for you.

This still holds:
Your theology teaches that some horrible sinners (and they are indeed) are excluded by God from any recourse to salvation. And for other horrible sinners the outcome is different.

I don't believe it does: There were two thieves on the cross. One called on grace, the other did not.

Realize too, in the end, I think Calvinism is correct BUT it is a systematic theology, a way of men to understand scripture. It does not, in fact, invade the truths of scripture. In a nutshell, Calvinism stands upon scripture and not the other way around: Scripture does not stand on Calvinism. Now a good many will say that they are one and the same, including Spurgeon, the Prince of Preachers, but realize that your first priority is to scriptures and the truth found in them. I have ever been fine living among Arminians and others. I have no real problem with you disagreeing with my Calvinist doctrines simply because I'm most concerned with you just grasping scripture truths as you are able. If by 'unbeliever' you mean 'nonCalvinist' then you aren't an unbeliever. "In Christ" is in Christ. We can all argue how we got there but "All who call on the Name of the Lord will be saved, so call and argue with me about how you got there all you like atf. Imho, it doesn't keep you or me from salvation and I'm just as concerned for the lost as you are (maybe, or I 'think' anyway).

Call on Him! -Lon

 

[Sonnet]

I dont take shortcuts with isms, I've been conversing with you for several days now.

Taking much time with YOU, when I ask you certain questions that make you have to think past your pre conceived notions you shuck outta dodge.

This is just another dodge.

No dodge but fact.

Bottom line is Jesus said God gives us to him.

37 All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out.

Ok.

We know we are given to Jesus when we believe Jesus is the son of God.

After that has nothing to do with Monergism or Synergism or Pelagianism,Jesus quickens whomsoever he will.

Luke 10:22
All things are delivered to me of my Father: and no man knoweth who the Son is, but the Father; and who the Father is, but the Son, and he to whom the Son will reveal him.

As I said before, Judas saw and heard - he had knowledge of the secrets of the kingdom of God. Jesus explicitly excluded him from those described thus: Isaiah 6:9-10.

 

[Sonnet]

I've been and will continue in prayer for you.


I don't believe it does: There were two thieves on the cross. One called on grace, the other did not.

Realize too, in the end, I think Calvinism is correct BUT it is a systematic theology, a way of men to understand scripture. It does not, in fact, invade the truths of scripture. In a nutshell, Calvinism stands upon scripture and not the other way around: Scripture does not stand on Calvinism. Now a good many will say that they are one and the same, including Spurgeon, the Prince of Preachers, but realize that your first priority is to scriptures and the truth found in them. I have ever been fine living among Arminians and others. I have no real problem with you disagreeing with my Calvinist doctrines simply because I'm most concerned with you just grasping scripture truths as you are able. If by 'unbeliever' you mean 'nonCalvinist' then you aren't an unbeliever. "In Christ" is in Christ. We can all argue how we got there but "All who call on the Name of the Lord will be saved, so call and argue with me about how you got there all you like atf. Imho, it doesn't keep you or me from salvation and I'm just as concerned for the lost as you are (maybe, or I 'think' anyway).

Call on Him! -Lon

Appreciated.

Dort:
Article 6: God’s Eternal Decree
The fact that some receive from God the gift of faith within time, and that others do not, stems from his eternal decree. For “all his works are known to God from eternity” (Acts 15:18; Eph. 1:11). In accordance with this decree God graciously softens the hearts, however hard, of the elect and inclines them to believe, but by a just judgement God leaves in their wickedness and hardness of heart those who have not been chosen. And in this especially is disclosed to us God’s act—unfathomable, and as merciful as it is just—of distinguishing between people equally lost. This is the well-known decree of election and reprobation revealed in God’s Word. The wicked, impure, and unstable distort this decree to their own ruin, but it provides holy and godly souls with comfort beyond words.

 

[Lon]

Appreciated.

Dort:

Spoiler

Article 6: God’s Eternal Decree
The fact that some receive from God the gift of faith within time, and that others do not, stems from his eternal decree. For “all his works are known to God from eternity” (Acts 15:18; Eph. 1:11). In accordance with this decree God graciously softens the hearts, however hard, of the elect and inclines them to believe, but by a just judgement God leaves in their wickedness and hardness of heart those who have not been chosen. And in this especially is disclosed to us God’s act—unfathomable, and as merciful as it is just—of distinguishing between people equally lost. This is the well-known decree of election and reprobation revealed in God’s Word. The wicked, impure, and unstable distort this decree to their own ruin, but it provides holy and godly souls with comfort beyond words.

Again, in a nutshell, realize your argument with Dort is not an argument with scriptures themselves.
While a few of us summarize scriptures "Dort-ly," it doesn't necessitate that we've done so without error. We 'think' that it is without error but we hold it up for scrutiny, thus your beef with Calvinism need not be your beef with Christianity. The number of Calvinists is growing, but the vast majority of believers are not Calvinists by exponential numbers. I'd have you on my side of the fence, arguing with me these truths. To me, that's the more important consideration. Get on board the salvation boat or train, and argue with me on deck, where we are held in Him. In Him -Lon

 

[Sonnet]

Again, in a nutshell, realize your argument with Dort is not an argument with scriptures themselves. Why a good many of us summarize scriptures "Dort-ly," it doesn't not necessitate that we've done so without error. We 'think' that it is without error but we hold it up for scrutiny, thus your beef with Calvinism need not be your beef with Christianity. The number of Calvinists is growing, but the vast majority of believers are not Calvinists by exponential numbers. I'd have you on my side of the fence, arguing with me these truths. To me, that's the more important consideration. Get on board the salvation boat or train, and argue with me on deck, where we are held in Him. In Him -Lon

Since Dort is the very foundation of TULIP then perhaps you are more than just a moderate Calvinist, but a nascent synergist.

 

[Lon]

Since Dort is the very foundation of TULIP then perhaps you are more than just a moderate Calvinist, but a nascent synergist.

Reverse that: A nascent monergist (I've been a Calvinist about 3 years and the learning curve is a bit broad)

 

[intojoy]

Doesn't deal with what I wrote.



I'm just doing what your doing - posting on a thread where I am permitted to do so.

For whom did Christ die?

For everyone. But the cross was not the only saving instrumentality.




Sent from my iPhone using TOL

 

[Sonnet]

Reverse that: A nascent monergist (I've been a Calvinist about 3 years and the learning curve is a bit broad)

Then perhaps you should accept the possibility that God may have passed on me.


...the good news.

 

[Sonnet]

That's the good news...but here's the bad news...

 

[Lon]

Then perhaps you should accept the possibility that God may have passed on me.

Why? He's more tenacious than even I, so I'm trying to be like Him. Love is like that, no?
Grace gives further opportunity: I cannot see a sunset without grace, my wife's kiss, without His grace, my children walking in grace, without His grace. I suspect that is true of every soul: Grace calls out to us. Again, Christ's blood is either applied universally or it is not BUT I don't think the world without grace so this conversation, again, is academic. God causes the rain to fall on the just and the unjust: All men have had so much grace that this one issue, to me, isn't the 'one' issue. It is an important discussion, but the more important one again is why any man would not love grace :idunno: It seems brilliantly bizarre to me. It truly does. I found grace irresistible. The question has to be "why haven't you found and run to Him?"

...the good news.

The good news is grace. It has struck me as INCREDIBLY gracious that God gave Pharaoh 10 opportunities to make the right decision. Jesus Christ is alternatively the chief Cornerstone or the Stone of Stumbling for all men. As Cornerstone, His blood avails. As Stone of Stumbling, His blood does not avail. In your and their eyes, it is what you do with grace: Spurn/scorn it, or run to it. The point? Perspective. There is no doubt Pharaoh chose his own reaction. There is no doubt that God used his actions as stumbling. We cannot come to grace, ever, and leave unchanged. Think of it this way: you are setting yourself to either fall willingly into grace or are steeling yourself from it, right? None of us see grace, mercy, and love without walking away somehow significantly changed. I think what you are wrestling with is whether it is love, mercy, and grace, but have you already decided what you will do once you figure that part out? That it a question better decided before you figure out the other imho. -Lon

 

[Sonnet]

Why? He's more tenacious than even I, so I'm trying to be like Him. Love is like that, no?
Grace gives further opportunity: I cannot see a sunset without grace, my wife's kiss, without His grace, my children walking in grace, without His grace. I suspect that is true of every soul: Grace calls out to us. Again, Christ's blood is either applied universally or it is not BUT I don't think the world without grace so this conversation, again, is academic. God causes the rain to fall on the just and the unjust: All men have had so much grace that this one issue, to me, isn't the 'one' issue. It is an important discussion, but the more important one again is why any man would not love grace :idunno: It seems brilliantly bizarre to me. It truly does. I found grace irresistible. The question has to be "why haven't you found and run to Him?"

The good news is grace. It has struck me as INCREDIBLY gracious that God gave Pharaoh 10 opportunities to make the right decision. Jesus Christ is alternatively the chief Cornerstone or the Stone of Stumbling for all men. As Cornerstone, His blood avails. As Stone of Stumbling, His blood does not avail. In your and their eyes, it is what you do with grace: Spurn/scorn it, or run to it. The point? Perspective. There is no doubt Pharaoh chose his own reaction. There is no doubt that God used his actions as stumbling. We cannot come to grace, ever, and leave unchanged. Think of it this way: you are setting yourself to either fall willingly into grace or are steeling yourself from it, right? None of us see grace, mercy, and love without walking away somehow significantly changed. I think what you are wrestling with is whether it is love, mercy, and grace, but have you already decided what you will do once you figure that part out? That it a question better decided before you figure out the other imho. -Lon

Your summary is at odds with consistent Calvinism where EVERYONE makes the wrong decision until regeneration. You are slipping into synergism.

 

[Lon]

Your summary is at odds with consistent Calvinism where EVERYONE makes the wrong decision until regeneration. You are slipping into synergism.

No, simply saying for you, from a synergistic pov, you can see that my belief isn't a hang-up to you. The point is that grace does extend to you. Don't allow the Calvinist/Arminian debate to obfuscate what you specifically need. The Lord Jesus Christ is either your chief Cornerstone or your Stone of Stumbling. As far as it depends on you, you are either hardened or softened, build or stumble. Do you have a choice? That's really for you to figure out. I can't give you that answer. I do know you are one or the other. I pray you are the kind of person grace softens and would that all were such. Not my call. It is yours in the sense that you have to go one way or the other. A no is a no. A yes is a yes. You are responsible for that.

 

[Cross Reference]

Bereft of any scriptures that explicitly support LA you are forced to wrest the doctrine from scriptures that say no such thing.

Acts 20:28
Keep watch over yourselves and all the flock of which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers. Be shepherds of the church of God, which he bought with his own blood.

Nothing here about anyone not being bought by His blood.

Matthew 26:28
This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.

What does 'many' mean here:

For just as through the disobedience of the one man the many were made sinners, so also through the obedience of the one man the many will be made righteous.

?

That 'many' Jesus spoke of - did it include Judas:

Luke 22:21-22

?



And you have ZERO scriptures that explicitly support LA.

1 John 2:2, John 1:29, 1 Tim 2:4-6, 1 Tim 4:10, John 3:14-16, Hebrews 2:9, Titus 2:11.




So Paul the disingenuous then? Romans 10:1ff.



How about admitting that Jesus is speaking to the Pharisees in a PARABLE and tells them that they are bad shepherds. He contrast their bad shepherding (they just threw out the now healed blind man from the synagogue) with what he does.

No one is excluded from joining the flock - v.9.



The parable demonstrates the Pharisee's bad shepherding and Jesus' good shepherding. The sacrifice in v.11 underlines this good shepherding. It says nothing about any supposed LA doctrine. You are twisting the meaning.



Actually, Paul and the apostles preached 1 Cor 15:3-8.

v.11
Whether, then, it is I or they, this is what we preach, and this is what you believed.

Couple of things:

Jesus' death and resurrection; His atonement provided man with an advocate with God, something mankind never had before Jesus hung on that cross. The below passage sums up the requirements for what God is after from "redeemed personel" who WANT His salvation:

"My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous:
And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world. And hereby we do know that we know him, if we keep his commandments. He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him. But whoso keepeth his word, in him verily is the love of God perfected: hereby know we that we are in him. He that saith he abideth in him ought himself also so to walk, even as he walked." 1 John 2:1-6 (KJV)


2. Depraved does not mean reprobation. Total depravity is something God turns one over to by decree. "He, that being often reproved hardeneth his neck, shall suddenly be destroyed, and that without remedy".Proverbs 29:1 (KJV); Romans 1:28 (KJV)

 

[Cross Reference]

Quote Originally Posted by PneumaPsucheSoma

This is an attempt by PPS at getting scripture to say what it doesn't:

What is the source of alleged Synergism?

Is it from man apart from God who created him?

Or is it from the original Monergistic creation, to which (and beyond) we are resurrected?

What is it within man that is uncreated by God for Synergism?

1. "What is the source of alleged Synergism?"

Answer: God.

2. "Is it from man apart from God who created him?"

Answer: Yes but, not intended to be outside God's will and purposes.

3. "Or is it from the original Monergistic creation, to which (and beyond) we are resurrected?"

Answer: That sentence is designed to be so screwed up that it defies an answer of any kind.

 

[Cross Reference]

Yeah, you just want to obfuscate and demand answers to fallacious questions.

There's no need for me to continuously respond when it's quite easy to cut to the chase. You just want to engage in endless ping ponging, and you're not even linguistically qualified to address the inspired text (nor illumined by a renewed mind).

What is it within man that is uncreated for alleged Synergism (that was not within the original Monergistic creation by God)?

One question, and that which comes from it.

What is it within man that can accomplish Syngeristic cooperation with God that God didn't create?

What is this uncreated capability for Synergism that man has apart from his Creator?

What is this ability for Synergism?

You assume synergism is uncreated, Why? Spell it out without your usual "obfuscations" set in your usual phony Greek interpretations etched in the stones of your kidneys..