The stumbling blocks of reformed doctrines

[Chopper]

Are you asking what the point is of having defined "free will" from a Reformed perspective?

God bless,
William

Yes. The elect does not have free will. They are saved by the will of God at some point in their live. Reformed theology does not include the Salvation of those who are not chosen by God before the foundations of the earth or world....My theology takes in John 3:16 that includes a free will choice of all who are not the called elect. It is the "General Call of the Gospel" to the world.

 

[Chopper]

not so sure as i either understand what your saying or B. agree So i ask for a explanation so as i fully understand { I find the theory of some Calvinists who believe that people are regenerated BEFORE they believe, to be utterly stupid and false. I believe that all those of Whom God elects to be saved, must at one time in their lives, surrender to the call of the Holy Spirit to repent of their sins, believe on Jesus Christ by faith, be baptized, and live holy and acceptable to our Master Owner, Jesus, the Christ of God.} i can agree with this personally the regeneration theory before salvation .is compared to the price is right game show. you wait to se if you will be saved? { to persevere until the end} i agree with .

Actually, the Elect don't have to wait, they will be saved! There is no conscious thought of Salvation until the Holy Spirit comes on them and they believe because it is irresistible.

 

[Chopper]

praise the LORD " I had to stop writing my sermon and turn to the inspiration of the Holy Spirit and curb the awful thing called pride" its only way i know how to preach . i make few note with thoughts beyond that i have yet to eer write a message and i like them old country preachers... they have wisdom

Oh praise the Lord my preacher Brother. I wish I could inform you of the many many times I had to stop writing my notes for a message because I was thinking, "that will bring some amen's." I have always had to fight pride. It's a terrible enemy of the Holy Spirit.

 

[childeye]

Given that we choose to sin on account of our sinful flesh(Rom 7:17), I've always had this question whenever I was taught that sin entered the world because Adam chose wrong - What sin dwelt in his flesh before this that made him choose to do wrong in the first place, for he was not deceived and he chose of his own accord?

No sin is necessary to choose wrong. Ignorance and gullibility are all that is required. Satan was the most cunning of God's creatures. Adam and Eve probably didn't even know what a lie was.

I hold that Adam's corruptible flesh(1Cor 15:42) was overcome(2Pet 2:19) and brought into bondage(Rom 8:21) by the nature of rebellion ie Sin - and this Sin manifested itself against the commandment(Rom 7:8) in Adam's act of disobedience.

To foster rebellion one must establish distrust in the Creator. That is what Satan did by introducing a false image of god through subterfuge.

 

[childeye]

The_Epsicle , has stated it more clearly than I could have. Taking what he said.....I was taught that if I broke one law, did anything that God says is sin, then to God it was the same thing as if I had murdered someone per (James 2:10). The example was, if I were to so much as think an evil thought against someone, I had better ask forgiveness immediately or there was this unforgiven sin sitting on I account. It was possible to loose my salvation, one never knows. So if I were to not ask forgiveness and I was killed by car, etc. I could go to hell.
I know I am not the only person who has understood it this same way. I have heard it from people who now understand that this is old covenant thinking and others who still believe this way. There is such bondage in this thinking. My view of God was not what it should have been. I knew God loved me but not so much when I sinned, and maybe He would even hate me. What if I wasn't sufficiently sorry for what I did? What I was doing was putting the new wine of the new covenant into the old wineskin of the old covenant. (Matt. 9:17) It is rather like some of the believing Jews, who said to the believing gentiles, that they must be circumcised and eat only clean foods, etc. per the law. They were mixing law and grace.
I really wonder if it is that much different than the way you felt and understood.

Thanks for your post Deborah 13. I agree that our experiences are somewhat alike in that there is/was a mindset that I believe is a works vs. faith type of transition happening. We start out works oriented with keeping the law as our focus, but gradually come to know that persevering in Love is what it's all about.

 

[ezra]

Actually, the Elect don't have to wait, they will be saved! There is no conscious thought of Salvation until the Holy Spirit comes on them and they believe because it is irresistible.

could you elaborate more on the elect .i do debate in a Calvinist forum. it does get rather intense .i listen to Vernon McGee and he is calvinist.. ya sure can,t tell it ... also enjoy listening to MacArthur some areas i agree with him some i dont

 

[childeye]

Oooohhhh boooyyyy!!!!!!!

The Lutheran is going to have fun with this one!... tomorrow....

I'll add some more scripture but for now I'll deal with basic definitions, the Bible can be split up into two groups which are:

Law: Makes demands that we cannot fulfill. And damns all those who do not conform to it's impossible(but righteous) demands.(Romans 3:10 ESV, Isaiah 64:6 ESV, Romans 6:23 ESV

The scripture that probably supports the idea of the Law(and it's distinction from the Gospel) the best is this one:

"So I find it to be a law that when I want to do right, evil lies close at hand. For I delight in the law of God, in my inner being, but I see in my members another law waging war against the law of my mind and making me captive to the law of sin that dwells in my members. Wretched man that I am! Who will deliver me from this body of death? Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord! So then, I myself serve the law of God with my mind, but with my flesh I serve the law of sin." - Romans 7:21-25 ESV

Gospel: Makes no demands and even offers the Faith required to believe it, the Gospel is the forgiveness of Sins through the belief in Jesus.(John 3:16 ESV, Ephesians 2:8 ESV, John 5:24 ESV)

For proper understanding of the Bible you must make a proper distinction between the Law and the Gospel, this is a central belief in Lutheran theology and is a part of sola scriptura. The Law and it's demands are found in both the Old and New Testament, as well as the Gospel and it's life saving Grace is found in both the Old and New Testament. I'll add more scripture as needed but this ought to be enough to get started.

After reading your Oooohhhh boooyyyy!!!!!!!... I had to smile. Your post is thorough and gets to the heart of the matter. So as to keep the subject going, why do you suppose God does this, causes all to be comdemned so as to forgive all? I'm just curious as to how a Lutheran answers this. I write on an atheist forum and they are always saying Christianity invents a problem which then it solves.

 

[childeye]

Yes. The elect does not have free will. They are saved by the will of God at some point in their live. Reformed theology does not include the Salvation of those who are not chosen by God before the foundations of the earth or world....My theology takes in John 3:16 that includes a free will choice of all who are not the called elect. It is the "General Call of the Gospel" to the world.

Are you saying the elect are ambassadors for Christ? Just so you know, I view the term freewill as an equivocation. As in I am free in my will to do this because I could have done that.

 

[Deborah13]

Yes. The elect does not have free will. They are saved by the will of God at some point in their live. Reformed theology does not include the Salvation of those who are not chosen by God before the foundations of the earth or world....My theology takes in John 3:16 that includes a free will choice of all who are not the called elect. It is the "General Call of the Gospel" to the world.

Act 7:51 Ye stiffnecked and uncircumcised in heart and ears, ye do always resist the Holy Ghost: as your fathers did, so do ye.
This scripture says to me that God did call them by the Holy Spirit and God did allowed them to resist the Holy Spirit.

Can you give me a scripture were God called someone by the Holy Spirit and did not allow them to resist?

 

[ezra]

to many misunderstand the term free will .it does not mean one can pick chose time place to be saved. the spirit has to draw . it simply means God does not force him self .Calvinist use the term irresistible Grace one thing for sure when God knocks on the door of your heart. its best to let him in. his knock is loud he has still small voice. for years i rejected him until that day i made the choice to help another person grow marijuana on federal land.. i got a federal indictment against me. i was lost as a goose you see God was in that getting my attention. 2 years later a 500.00 fine a year of drug counsel per federal court guidelines. not likening the evangelist that was preaching . the very last night of my probation. i surrendered . i took the walk by blind faith not having a clue what to do or say...when i say free will No body forced me i heard a voice say now or never . he drew me in with the power of the Holy Spirit. thats how i describe free will

 

[Deborah13]

.when i say free will No body forced me i heard a voice say now or never . he drew me in with the power of the Holy Spirit. thats how i describe free will

That's a great testimony of God working in a man's life. Glad you paid attention.

 

[ivdavid]

This scripture says to me that God did call them by the Holy Spirit and God did allowed them to resist the Holy Spirit.

Yes, God did call to all flesh and all flesh resisted him without exception. Which is why we require an irresistible grace that would regenerate man in the flesh, to be born in the spirit with a new heart, after which he is able to discern the things of the Spirit(1Cor 2:14) and obey God.

Can you give me a scripture were God called someone by the Holy Spirit and did not allow them to resist?

Every single instance of a person being regenerated, really. Of course, you'd say it was that person not resisting and I'd say that's irresistible grace right there - we wouldn't make progress along this line. For instance, Can you give me a scripture where God is pleased with someone for obeying in the flesh?

Anyway, most commonly used prooftexts are Acts 13:48, Acts 16:14, 1John 5:1 - but we'll be dabbling in greek grammar to discuss how it could mean something other than what is immediately apparent - so while I'm stating these to show that the irresistible grace camp do see confirmation in Scripture, I do acknowledge it need not be conclusive enough for one of an alternate view.

I personally felt John 6:64-65 showed a stronger correlation - some did not believe since it was not given to them by the Father. Why was it given to the others then? I haven't yet come across convincing alternate interpretations of this.

2Cor 4:4 speaks of the blinding of the minds of the unbelievers, that prevents them from seeing the light of the Gospel - but the believers have God shining that light in their hearts (2Cor 4:6).

Eze 37:1-10 shows a work done by God alone, in giving new life to the very dry bones - it's difficult for me to imagine the dry bones being asked to choose if they wanted to resist/accept this supernatural work of God. This then leads on to Eze 37:14 which echoes the new covenant stated in Eze 36:24-27.

Apart from all these, there still is the matter of the WHY - why must there be irresistible grace.
1. God created man a Living Soul*, and called it good = (LS)
2. The fall resulted in man with a Sinful Flesh* = (LS - SF)
3. God provides sufficient Knowledge* of His redemptive plans through Christ = (LS - SF) + K
4. Man, still cannot will to obey the Gospel*, of his own accord, due to sinful flesh = (LS - SF) + K =X=> G
5. Man requires on God's Grace* to overcome sinful flesh to obey the Gospel in the spirit = (LS + Gr) + K ===> G

Now, if as you state, this Grace in Point 5 can be resisted - then man's state has not changed one bit from Point 4, and so what effective work has such Grace accomplished? For to say that man, of his own accord, has resisted God's Grace - would be the same as Point 4 which says he has not the will to obey, of his own accord. What changed then? Rather, for man's state to change from Point 4, there must be an effective irresistible change worked in him, that overcomes the sinful flesh.

 

[OzSpen]

"Possible" in what sense?
Are you asking if God has indeed extended an opportunity to all reprobate sinners, without exception, to believe and be saved - then, the answer is a resounding Yes. John 3:16.
Or are you asking if the reprobate sinner in the flesh can make use of this above opportunity extended by God - the answer is a big No. Sin in the flesh does not permit him to. Rom 8:7. Which is why one has to be regenerated in the spirit to overcome the rebellious flesh - which work we've received by God's mercy.


Why interchange Regeneration with Salvation - the two are distinct concepts in my mind. A is not before B because B is before C ?


What is meant by "same time" here? Is it that you are measuring the physical time difference between 2 distinct events here - or are you saying that they're not 2 distinct events but one and the same, with one describing the other? If the latter, I disagree based on what I've written in my previous post.
If I say -
1) I cooked lunch, by steaming the vegetables.
2) I cooked lunch, by reading an online recipe.

If you hold on to position 1, then yes, since steaming describes/refers to a process of cooking - one must say that they both happen at the same time. But if you happen to hold on to position 2, then they are distinct events which may happen simultaneously or perhaps the reading preceded the cooking by quite some time. It's just inconclusive - insufficient data in itself.

Again, referring to my earlier post on this, justification must necessarily precede salvation - and hence, that by which you are justified should necessarily precede justification itself - which leads us to concluding faith must precede salvation. Yes, but in our physical time, all of this happens in an instant, such that you are given assurance of salvation the moment you believe.

I find you are being pedantic when such is not needed. I was asking straight forward questions.

 

[ezra]

That's a great testimony of God working in a man's life. Glad you paid attention.

with the threat of federal prison and big fine plus not seeing your family --he was speaking in a rather loud way..

 

[ezra]

Which is why we require an irresistible grace

no doubt his Grace should be irresistible . but we can reject it i did for years but the phrase irresistible grace is not in the Bible

 

[Deborah13]

Act 7:51 Ye stiffnecked and uncircumcised in heart and ears, ye do always resist the Holy Ghost: as your fathers did, so do ye.
This scripture says to me that God did call them by the Holy Spirit and God did allowed them to resist the Holy Spirit.

Yes, God did call to all flesh and all flesh resisted him without exception.

Where is your scripture that says all men (not all flesh) were called and all men resisted? When are you talking about that God called all men and all men resisted?

I personally felt John 6:64-65 showed a stronger correlation - some did not believe since it was not given to them by the Father. Why was it given to the others then? I haven't yet come across convincing alternate interpretations of this.

Joh 6:45 ... every one therefore who heard from the Father, and learned from the Father, cometh to me;
One must not just hear, one must also learn. I see that one and hear and still resist the learning....
Act 7:51 Ye stiffnecked.... ye do always resist the Holy Ghost: as your fathers did, so do ye.
So you are saying the Jesus is rebuking them for something they cannot do anything about?
I tell my child to go clean his room, he falls and breaks his leg, and I rebuke him for not cleaning his room.

2Cor 4:4 speaks of the blinding of the minds of the unbelievers, that prevents them from seeing the light of the Gospel - but the believers have God shining that light in their hearts (2Cor 4:6).

Are you suggesting that satan has the power to blind men (supernaturally) and that blinding is more powerful than God's light?

5. Man requires on God's Grace* to overcome sinful flesh to obey the Gospel in the spirit = (LS + Gr) + K ===> G

Agreed

Now, if as you state, this Grace in Point 5 can be resisted - then man's state has not changed one bit from Point 4, and so what effective work has such Grace accomplished? For to say that man, of his own accord, has resisted God's Grace - would be the same as Point 4 which says he has not the will to obey, of his own accord. What changed then? Rather, for man's state to change from Point 4, there must be an effective irresistible change worked in him, that overcomes the sinful flesh.

An irresistible grace, does not have to occur. He just has to be able to hear and then listen to what God is telling him in his spirit. He must not resist what the Holy Spirit is speaking to him. But you believe man cannot hear that voice, unless God saves him before he even hears the voice because he is sinful in his flesh.
Go back to the garden as your example of God speaking to sinful flesh. Adam and Eve, were just as sinful in the flesh, and just as spiritually dead as each of us, and yet they could hear the voice of God speaking to them.
Then inspect the conversation that goes on between, sinful in the flesh Cain and God. He heard God, try to get him to respond to Him, but Cain refused, and continued on in his sinfulness. God didn't keep Cain from listening and satan isn't even mentioned. Cain chose to operate in his sinful flesh rather than respond to God's loving request. "Cain, why has your countenance fallen?"
Why would you think that man now is somehow different than Adam, Eve, and Cain? We are just like them. So God must have a way to speak to men, even when they are in sinful flesh without regenerating (saving) them first and allow man to resist.
Or don't you believe the Genesis account of what happened in the garden and the account of what happened between God and Cain? To me, that would be the purest of examples of God and man because there isn't any side story going on and because God says we are just like Adam. So shouldn't we look at what Adam did, what God did, and what Adam experienced with God?

 

[childeye]

to many misunderstand the term free will .it does not mean one can pick chose time place to be saved. the spirit has to draw . it simply means God does not force him self .Calvinist use the term irresistible Grace one thing for sure when God knocks on the door of your heart. its best to let him in. his knock is loud he has still small voice. for years i rejected him until that day i made the choice to help another person grow marijuana on federal land.. i got a federal indictment against me. i was lost as a goose you see God was in that getting my attention. 2 years later a 500.00 fine a year of drug counsel per federal court guidelines. not likening the evangelist that was preaching . the very last night of my probation. i surrendered . i took the walk by blind faith not having a clue what to do or say...when i say free will No body forced me i heard a voice say now or never . he drew me in with the power of the Holy Spirit. thats how i describe free will

Great testimony Ezra. Your definition of freewill is typical, but as usual ends in a contradiction. With all respect, you only describe one power when contemplating the moral paradigm. I would point this out by posing the question, what was God drawing you away from? Or again, what power were you serving when God called you to turn around and serve Him? And again, who was your god before God? And again, What truth were you believing to be true before you believed in the real Truth?

I understand why you say God does not force anyone. Because it creates a mindset of 'having to' do something unwillingly, rather than 'getting to' do something willingly. But these are all sentiments that change according to what we believe to be true at the time. What was 'have to' before becomes 'get to' when one's understanding of reality changes. Hence freewill is an equivocation working in the mind and lost in semantics.

I think the perfect analogy is the prodigal son. Luke 15:11-32. Here we can see a son who is unwilling to serve His Father, but rather willing to leave the Father's house. He is driven by a belief that there is something better out there for himself than the Father has to offer. This is no different than the disinformation that is behind the temptation to sin. However the son soon learns that the temptations are imaginary false hopes, and that the real Truth is that things were actually pretty good at his Fathers house. So he returns contrite and willing and grateful to be a lowly servant, when before as a son he had taken all of that for granted. That is what vanity is, taking for granted those things that God gives. It is not the product of a freewill but a circumstance inherent in the creation. Romans 8:20.

Hence freewill is an illusion working in the mind unless defined as a will set free by the Truth. For the Father gave the son his inheritance and let him go and did not force him to stay. Even because to do so would only enforce a spirit of rebellion, which first began with distrust in the Fathers intentions or abilities to do what is best for the son, which is why the son is willing to leave in the first place. Consequently, the son is "forced" by the Truth to come to his senses when he is starving and remembering how good it was under his Fathers loving care. Notice that the Truth forces the son to return while lies tempted the son with freedom when he left. People are prone to believe in freewill because they don't like being forced to serve God, which is a sentiment that can only exist in a mind that finds something wrong with God.

 

[ezra]

Hence freewill is an illusion working in the mind unless defined as a will set free by the Truth

lol your gonna have get more ammo than that if freewill is an illusion working in the mind . then your defecation of irresistible grace is a deception. i been down this road so many times i can walk it blindfolded . the prodigal son had to hit rock bottom before he came to his senses and the choice to go back home. he made the choice to leave of his own free will and returned under his own free will. the Bible says you shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free. not force { People are prone to believe in freewill because they don't like being forced to serve God, which is a sentiment that can only exist in a mind that finds something wrong with God.} can show a scripture to back up your theory of force? the Philipian jailer asked paul and Silas good sirs what must i do to be saved. he was seconds away from killing him self . { I understand why you say God does not force anyone. } sorry but you don,t understand .... i have debated this in a reformed forum and the names of heretic false religion etc come out. . you fail to understand the concept of free will

 

[ivdavid]

But you believe man cannot hear that voice, unless God saves him before he even hears the voice because he is sinful in his flesh.

Okay, we need to call a timeout and just try and understand exactly what it is the other person believes in, before discussing the truth of each belief.

Firstly, what does "hear God's voice" refer to, according to you? Is it metaphorical for God's regenerative work, is it hearing physical sound waves of words through your ears, is it hearing coherent audible words inside your head much like how you talk to yourself or how your conscience warns you, is it thoughts passing through your mind concerning God and His Gospel, is it a combination of these?

Secondly, I usually don't correlate any beliefs of mine to this particular phrase of "hearing God's voice". How have you arrived at the declaration that "I do not believe man cannot hear God's voice" - is it something I've written somewhere - could you point that out so I could understand what it was I meant there and how you've perceived it?

To clarify my position on this topic - I'd say "I believe man cannot obey God's voice, unless God regenerates him, because he is in sinful flesh." Note, I would use "obey" instead of "hear", and "regenerates" instead of "saves" to be absolutely precise.

Go back to the garden as your example of God speaking to sinful flesh.

What is the point here? That the flesh can hear audible words from God? Why would I even object to that - we have red-lettered John 6:65 and lots more heard by unregenerate people in the flesh. We have Deut 4:12 heard by the stiffnecked people. From where I stand now, I'm simply confused as to how I'm seen arguing against all this, when in fact I'm trying to argue along a completely different line.

Cain chose to operate in his sinful flesh...

As opposed to operating in...what? Do you believe that the unregenerate can operate in their spirit before this spirit is born anew of the Holy Spirit? I'm not making any point here - simply want to know how your beliefs connect.

An irresistible grace, does not have to occur. He just has to be able to hear and then listen to what God is telling him in his spirit.

I hold as true, your above 2nd statement - and I've emphasized the part where I believe it negates your 1st statement.
It is indeed enough for man to listen to truth in his spirit, - but he is in the flesh(Rom 7:14), yet to be born in the spirit(John 3:6). You too agree he is spiritually dead - must not this natural man then be made spiritual before he can listen to and discern the things of the Holy Spirit(1Cor 2:14)? And he is in the spirit and no longer in the flesh, when the Holy Spirit indwells him (Rom 8:9).
This is why I see it necessary for regeneration(flesh->spirit) to happen first so that "man can listen to God in his spirit".

This is intended to be a clarification post - I'll discuss the John and 2Cor verses once we've cleared up these confusions.

 

[OzSpen]

.... I hold as true, your above 2nd statement - and I've emphasized the part where I believe it negates your 1st statement.
It is indeed enough for man to listen to truth in his spirit, - but he is in the flesh(Rom 7:14), yet to be born in the spirit(John 3:6). You too agree he is spiritually dead - must not this natural man then be made spiritual before he can listen to and discern the things of the Holy Spirit(1Cor 2:14)? And he is in the spirit and no longer in the flesh, when the Holy Spirit indwells him (Rom 8:9).
This is why I see it necessary for regeneration(flesh->spirit) to happen first so that "man can listen to God in his spirit".

Norman Geisler, who calls himself a moderate Calvinist (Geisler 1999:129), stated that 'Contrary to the claims of extreme Calvinists, there are no verses properly understood that teach regeneration is prior to faith. Instead, it is the uniform pattern of Scripture to place faith logically prior to salvation as a condition for receiving it' (Geisler 1999:228).

To support his position, Geisler examined Romans 5:1; Luke 13:3; 2 Peter 3:9; John 3:16; Acts 16:31; Romans 3:24-25; John 3:6-7; and Titus 3:5-7 (1999:228-230), to demonstrate that faith is prior to regeneration.

Works consulted
Geisler, N 1999. Chosen but free. Minneapolis, Minnesota: Bethany House Publishers.