So has anyone noticed anything here? All the many words of the Calvinist combined do not prove regeneration precedes faith. The problem they have is that there is not one passage of scripture that says this is so.
Scriptures are cited as proof such as Romans 3:11; '"there is none who seeks after God" and when it is pointed out that seeks is a present participle in the Greek and says nothing about an individual act of seeking but rather an on-going practice there is no answer. This fact the Calvinist ignores: can't let facts get in the way of their doctrine!
The Calvinist should consider that in God's providence He has arranged His creation, including every man, with one purpose: in order to facilitate their seeking Him:
Acts 17:26-27
26. And He has made from one blood every nation of men to dwell on all the face of the earth, and has determined their preappointed times and the boundaries of their dwellings, 27. so that they should seek the Lord, in the hope that they might grope for Him and find Him, though He is not far from each one of us;
And this speech Paul addressed to the men of Athens! This same Paul who is quoted so eagerly in Romans 3:11! Oh I know; Paul only meant that God set the world up that some might seek Him - that is, after He regenerated them. Which brings up the question: why was it necessary for God to set up the world "so that they should seek the Lord" according to your Calvinist doctrine?
Proof Regeneration Precedes Faith
Homer,
Yes, I imagine most people are observing what you observe about this thread, namely, that the Calvinists have certainly failed to meet the burden of proof introduced in your first post.
There have been no surprises here. The same non-exegetical assertions seem to make up the entire case of the Calvinist. Few attempts have been made by them to exegete any of the passages that have been raised to challenge them.
It seems to me that, apart from any conclusions drawn from the data, the following observations must be acknowledged by all:
1. The Bible nowhere actually speaks of regeneration preceding faith or repentance in conversion.
2. The assumption is continually asserted by the Calvinists (without exegetical support) that the metaphor "dead", in Ephesians 2, carries the specific meaning of "unable to believe, repent, or make any decision in the direction of pursuing salvation." Why we should accept this strange definition has never been demonstrated--nor, to my recollection, has a Calvinist even attempted to show why this should be the meaning of Paul's metaphor. It is simply a necessary postulate of the Calvinistic system, which for some, apparently, is a self-validating system.
3. Calvinists here have played their usual cards, citing passages that talk about the wicked men of Noah's, Isaiah's, Jeremiah's and Jesus' day, and extrapolating them to include every human who has ever lived. This may be a reasonable proceedure, but no Calvinist has attempted to show that there is a reason behind doing so.
4. When given examples of persons in scripture who were apparently not regenerated, but who did good things that God appreciated, the Calvinists have in every case eisegeted (imported into) the text so as to make unsubstantiated claims that these people must have been regenerated. Why? Because Calvinism, the self-validating system, requires this. Why does Calvinism (though not scripture) require this? See point number 2.
5. I only saw one Calvinist admit that he had made a mistake, when shown from scripture that he had misused a text (kudos, Jugulum!). The rest simply ignore the fact that they have been refuted, and resort to the mantra (point #2).
6. Many scriptures have been presented by non-Calvinists that distinctly say that the gift of salvation (or the Holy Spirit, or eternal life--all references to regeneration) comes to a man as a result of his asking, seeking, believing, calling, etc. Calvinists have not, in this open-minded observer's judgment, attempted to give an exegesis of those passages that would make them conform to their doctrine. Nor have they presented any verse of scripture (agenda-driven assertions do not carry the same weight as do texts of scripture) that suggests that regeneration is a condition for faith, rather than vice versa.
Yes, I imagine most people are observing what you observe about this thread, namely, that the Calvinists have certainly failed to meet the burden of proof introduced in your first post.
There have been no surprises here. The same non-exegetical assertions seem to make up the entire case of the Calvinist. Few attempts have been made by them to exegete any of the passages that have been raised to challenge them.
It seems to me that, apart from any conclusions drawn from the data, the following observations must be acknowledged by all:
1. The Bible nowhere actually speaks of regeneration preceding faith or repentance in conversion.
2. The assumption is continually asserted by the Calvinists (without exegetical support) that the metaphor "dead", in Ephesians 2, carries the specific meaning of "unable to believe, repent, or make any decision in the direction of pursuing salvation." Why we should accept this strange definition has never been demonstrated--nor, to my recollection, has a Calvinist even attempted to show why this should be the meaning of Paul's metaphor. It is simply a necessary postulate of the Calvinistic system, which for some, apparently, is a self-validating system.
3. Calvinists here have played their usual cards, citing passages that talk about the wicked men of Noah's, Isaiah's, Jeremiah's and Jesus' day, and extrapolating them to include every human who has ever lived. This may be a reasonable proceedure, but no Calvinist has attempted to show that there is a reason behind doing so.
4. When given examples of persons in scripture who were apparently not regenerated, but who did good things that God appreciated, the Calvinists have in every case eisegeted (imported into) the text so as to make unsubstantiated claims that these people must have been regenerated. Why? Because Calvinism, the self-validating system, requires this. Why does Calvinism (though not scripture) require this? See point number 2.
5. I only saw one Calvinist admit that he had made a mistake, when shown from scripture that he had misused a text (kudos, Jugulum!). The rest simply ignore the fact that they have been refuted, and resort to the mantra (point #2).
6. Many scriptures have been presented by non-Calvinists that distinctly say that the gift of salvation (or the Holy Spirit, or eternal life--all references to regeneration) comes to a man as a result of his asking, seeking, believing, calling, etc. Calvinists have not, in this open-minded observer's judgment, attempted to give an exegesis of those passages that would make them conform to their doctrine. Nor have they presented any verse of scripture (agenda-driven assertions do not carry the same weight as do texts of scripture) that suggests that regeneration is a condition for faith, rather than vice versa.
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
Reason:
In Jesus,
Steve
Steve
Homer,
I am neither a "calvanist" nor "Arminian" as I have said before. That does not mean however that I don't find with-in their respective teaching,
reasonable biblical understanding of the various texts being discussed.
you wrote: "Scriptures are cited as proof such as Romans 3:11; '"there is none who seeks after God" and when it is pointed out that seeks is a present participle in the Greek and says nothing about an individual act of seeking but rather an on-going practice there is no answer. This fact the Calvinist ignores: can't let facts get in the way of their doctrine"!
Are you saying in essence that men do seek after God through their own natural ability? I understand "none who seeks God" as NONE! That's all inclusive, whether in the present tense or past. If an individual act of one seeking God by your definition is a proof text toward your position, then I will have to ask you who in reality does the "seeking"? You or God? How do you answer the statement: "I was found by those who didn't seek me?"Rom 10:20 See also Acts 15:14-18. with emphasis on the "REMNANT OF MEN WHO MAY SEEK THE LORD".
PEACE in HIM,
Bob
I am neither a "calvanist" nor "Arminian" as I have said before. That does not mean however that I don't find with-in their respective teaching,
reasonable biblical understanding of the various texts being discussed.
you wrote: "Scriptures are cited as proof such as Romans 3:11; '"there is none who seeks after God" and when it is pointed out that seeks is a present participle in the Greek and says nothing about an individual act of seeking but rather an on-going practice there is no answer. This fact the Calvinist ignores: can't let facts get in the way of their doctrine"!
Are you saying in essence that men do seek after God through their own natural ability? I understand "none who seeks God" as NONE! That's all inclusive, whether in the present tense or past. If an individual act of one seeking God by your definition is a proof text toward your position, then I will have to ask you who in reality does the "seeking"? You or God? How do you answer the statement: "I was found by those who didn't seek me?"Rom 10:20 See also Acts 15:14-18. with emphasis on the "REMNANT OF MEN WHO MAY SEEK THE LORD".
PEACE in HIM,
Bob
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
Reason:
Steve
Your comment to Homer: "1. The Bible nowhere actually speaks of regeneration preceding faith or repentance in conversion".
If that is the case, how do we account for Apostle Paul's conversion on the Damascus road? Did he come to repentance before or after his encounter with the Lord? Did Paul choose the Lord or was he chosen by the Lord? Was his conversion the result of his seeking or was he sought out by the Lord? Did he come to faith before his regeneration or after?
In Jesus,
Bob
Your comment to Homer: "1. The Bible nowhere actually speaks of regeneration preceding faith or repentance in conversion".
If that is the case, how do we account for Apostle Paul's conversion on the Damascus road? Did he come to repentance before or after his encounter with the Lord? Did Paul choose the Lord or was he chosen by the Lord? Was his conversion the result of his seeking or was he sought out by the Lord? Did he come to faith before his regeneration or after?
In Jesus,
Bob
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
Reason:
Steve,
Your comment:
2." The assumption is continually asserted by the Calvinists (without exegetical support) that the metaphor "dead", in Ephesians 2, carries the specific meaning of "unable to believe, repent, or make any decision in the direction of pursuing salvation."
First, I am not defending Calvinism or any other "ism". But, I think a fair question to ask is how you understand the term "dead". By saying it to be a mere metaphor and not a real description of man's state and disposition before our God, empties the word of its force and meaning as used in a normal understanding of the word in Scripture, IMO. What is the metaphor "dead" therefore describing?
In Jesus,
Bob
Your comment:
2." The assumption is continually asserted by the Calvinists (without exegetical support) that the metaphor "dead", in Ephesians 2, carries the specific meaning of "unable to believe, repent, or make any decision in the direction of pursuing salvation."
First, I am not defending Calvinism or any other "ism". But, I think a fair question to ask is how you understand the term "dead". By saying it to be a mere metaphor and not a real description of man's state and disposition before our God, empties the word of its force and meaning as used in a normal understanding of the word in Scripture, IMO. What is the metaphor "dead" therefore describing?
In Jesus,
Bob
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
Reason:
-
_SoaringEagle
- Posts: 285
- Joined: Sat Nov 19, 2005 10:40 pm
- Location: Louisville, KY
First, I am not defending Calvinism or any other "ism". But, I think a fair question to ask is how you understand the term "dead". By saying it to be a mere metaphor and not a real description of man's state and disposition before our God, empties the word of its force and meaning as used in a normal understanding of the word in Scripture, IMO. What is the metaphor "dead" therefore describing?
Hi,
Not to answer for Steve, but what do you think Paul means when he employs the metaphor "dead" in the following verse?
Rom 6:2 God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein?
Do you think that Paul means that the Christian is totally unable to sin since he is "dead" to sin?
God bless,
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
Reason:
Derek
Some trust in chariots, and some in horses: but we will remember the name of the LORD our God.
Psalm 20:7
Some trust in chariots, and some in horses: but we will remember the name of the LORD our God.
Psalm 20:7
-
_SoaringEagle
- Posts: 285
- Joined: Sat Nov 19, 2005 10:40 pm
- Location: Louisville, KY
In closing, Robert Shank had this to say about this subject in his book Elect in the Son:
My Spirit shall not always strive with man" declared God in the days of Noah (Gen 6:3). If the men of Noah's generation were foreordained to damnation, as Calvinism teaches, in what sense did the Spirit strive with them, since they were fulfilling their foreordained role in refusing the testimony of Noah?
Yet again, command does not imply human ability. The Holy Spirit striving does not imply human ability either.
The Ten Commandments, likewise, speak of what we ought to do but they do not imply that we have the moral ability to obey them. (Rom 3:20, 5:20, Gal 3:19,24), nor can we be perfect as is our Heavenly Father is, yet we are commanded to be as He is. Command does not imply human ability.
(Ecc 8:4) Where the word of a king is, there is power;
(Ps 119:11) Your word I have hidden in my heart, That I might not sin against You!
(John 18:37) Pilate therefore said to Him, "Are You a king then?" Jesus answered, "You say rightly that I am a king.
Notice that Jesus is a King, and where His word is, there is power. In the book of Psalms, we read that David hid His word in his heart, that he might not sin against God. So from this line of thinking, God's Word gave David the ability to resist the power of sin. So if God's word gave David who was a believer the ability to not sin, then it can also give an unbeliever the power to choose to exercise faith in Christ from the heart.
(1 Pet 1:23) ...having been born again, not of corruptible seed but incorruptible, through the word of God which lives and abides forever.
(Rom. 1:16); "For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ, for it is the power of God to salvation for everyone who believes, for the Jew first and also for the Greek"
We read Paul saying that there is one who plants (the Word of God which is likened unto seed), one who waters, and it is God who gives the increase. (1 Cor. 3:6-7) So it is certain that these two things, the implantation of the Word of God and the watering happen before a person is born again. These things here enables one to respond to the gospel.
Faith is so much a personal choice that it is said to belong to the individual by whom it is exercised:
"But Jesus turned him about; and when he saw her, he said, Daughter, he of good comfort; thy faith hath made thee whole" (Matt. 9:22). "And Jesus said unto him, Go thy way; thy faith hath made thee whole. And immediately he received his sight, and followed Jesus in the way" (Mark 10:52). To the woman who was a sinner, and yet who "loved much," the Master said, "Thy faith hath saved thee; go in peace" (Luke 10:50). Of the ten lepers who were healed, only one returned to the Saviour to give thanks, to whom he said, "Arise, go thy way; thy faith hath made thee whole" (17:19 ). "For what saith the Scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness" (Rom. 6:3). What was counted unto Abraham for righteousness? Faith. Whose faith? His own.
Agreed. God shows mercy to some. The question at hand is who decides who will recieve mercy? God alone? Man alone? God + Man? The bible tells us that God + Man decides.Besides, all that is said here is that God shall not always strive with man, as He has done with His Prophets etc, but will one day no longer show mercy and longsuffering with those in the flesh. Therefore, even this passage supports the teaching that God indeed, shows mercy to some, but one day, enough will be enough, just like in the days of Noah, but believers, just like Noah, will be spared in the end through His long suffering of all the elect in time. For God is longsuffering towards His elect, not wishing that any of them shall perish, but that all given to the Son by the Father from eternity, shall be saved. God will show mercy to whomever he will show mercy, and who He wills to harden, He will harden, all to the glorious grace of God.
Pro 28:13 - He who covers his sins will not prosper, But whoever confesses and forsakes them will have mercy.
Repentant Faith in God obtains Mercy!
Luke 1:46 And Mary said: "My soul glorifies the Lord 47 and my spirit rejoices in God my Savior, 48 for he has been mindful of the humble state of his servant. From now on all generations will call me blessed, 49 for the Mighty One has done great things for me-- holy is his name. 50 His mercy extends to those who fear him, from generation to generation.
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
Reason:
SE
Steve's explanation of "dead" from Eph 2 is only one description of death. I do not disagree with him on every point. However, it seems both sides of the isle tend push the envelope too far on the subject. Either one side makes too much of man's inability to respond to the Gospel, or the other makes too much of man's free will and ability to choose. I do not necessarily subscribe to the notion that man cannot make good choices. But since God alone knows the heart of man, He alone knows our motives.
Whether or not "unregenerated" people can or cannot make "good" moral choices is not the issue. They do indeed. But for any "good" deed to pass
God's standard of goodness, it must flow from a heart that loves God perfectly and loves our neighbor perfectly. Are you dead yet?
In Him,
Bob
Steve's explanation of "dead" from Eph 2 is only one description of death. I do not disagree with him on every point. However, it seems both sides of the isle tend push the envelope too far on the subject. Either one side makes too much of man's inability to respond to the Gospel, or the other makes too much of man's free will and ability to choose. I do not necessarily subscribe to the notion that man cannot make good choices. But since God alone knows the heart of man, He alone knows our motives.
Whether or not "unregenerated" people can or cannot make "good" moral choices is not the issue. They do indeed. But for any "good" deed to pass
God's standard of goodness, it must flow from a heart that loves God perfectly and loves our neighbor perfectly. Are you dead yet?
In Him,
Bob
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
Reason:
Derek,
You wrote "
Hi,
Not to answer for Steve, but what do you think Paul means when he employs the metaphor "dead" in the following verse?
Rom 6:2 God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein?
Do you think that Paul means that the Christian is totally unable to sin since he is "dead" to sin?
God bless,
_________________
Derek
My answer is no, of course not. As I stated from an earlier post, "dead"
does not always mean we have no capacity for good or evil. Obviously its
meaning is determined by its context. "We died to sin" means IMO, as a
ruling principle, the old man, old way of life etc, is what we are called to die too.
Peace,
Bbo
You wrote "
Hi,
Not to answer for Steve, but what do you think Paul means when he employs the metaphor "dead" in the following verse?
Rom 6:2 God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein?
Do you think that Paul means that the Christian is totally unable to sin since he is "dead" to sin?
God bless,
_________________
Derek
My answer is no, of course not. As I stated from an earlier post, "dead"
does not always mean we have no capacity for good or evil. Obviously its
meaning is determined by its context. "We died to sin" means IMO, as a
ruling principle, the old man, old way of life etc, is what we are called to die too.
Peace,
Bbo
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
Reason: