The Value of Evangelism in Reformed Theology

[tdidymas]

So you are saying a person who is dead in sin, can never believe?




JLB

Not unless God brings them to spiritual life, as in Eph. 2:5. This shows that God is the source of life and righteousness. Yet men are intelligent enough to understand the words of the gospel. Although they may understand it mentally and logically, because they are spiritually dead, it is to them as foolishness, and they would never obey it (namely believe). It's the nature of sin, and what Paul conveys in Rom. 3:10-18 and elsewhere.
TD

 

[tdidymas]

The result of salvation is the combination of God‘s grace and our believing (obeying) what we hear; hearing is how we receive faith.

Obeying what we hear is how faith is activated, or made alive, and able to function to produce the intended divine result.


Since you have purified your souls in obeying the truth through the Spirit in sincere love of the brethren, love one another fervently with a pure heart, having been born again, not of corruptible seed but incorruptible, through the word of God which lives and abides forever, 1 Peter 1:22-23

• Since you have purified your souls in obeying the truth through the Spirit

It’s not those who, receive faith who are saved, but those who obey the word by which they receive faith.


Faith without the corresponding action of obedience is dead.





JLB

I do get that your idea follows synergism that the RCC teaches. However, I would like to point out a few things:
1. A spiritually dead person cannot hear the message (to believe) with spiritual ears ("he who has ears to hear...").
2. In order to obey the truth through the Spirit, one must already have the indwelling Spirit.
3. Those receiving the gift of faith from God (Eph. 2:8) are those who obey the gospel, because obedience is the natural and spiritual response to believing, that is, obedience is the proof that one believes.

So then, it requires understanding the true and biblical definition of what faith is. When you say that faith without the corresponding action of obedience is dead, you are getting that from James 2:24, and James was talking about a different kind of faith than what Paul was talking about in Rom. 5:1. When this is understood, because they are writing to a different audience with a different issue, it can be seen that the nature of biblical and saving faith results in obedience to the message heard. But "faith without works is dead" because the nature of that faith is natural only, and has no spiritual element to realize the wisdom of getting into God's will. Such wisdom only comes by the gift of God.
TD

 

[JLB]

I believe what the Bible says:
We all began in wickedness:
Eph. 2:1-3 "And you were dead in your trespasses and sins, in which you formerly walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, of the spirit that is now working in the sons of disobedience. Among them we too all formerly lived in the lusts of our flesh, indulging the desires of the flesh and of the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, even as the rest."

And then God graciously caused us to hear the gospel and obey it:
Eph. 2:4-6 "But God, being rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us, even when we were dead in our transgressions, made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved), and raised us up with Him, and seated us with Him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus."

It's all the work of God, just as Eph. 2:8 tells us it is:
"For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God."

If you are looking for a chronology, then Eph. 1:4 must be included:
"He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world..."

So the chronology is: God elected some to be in Christ before anyone existed, then the human race came into existence with a fallen nature, in which we all started out that way (and in which many continue), then God converts those elected before they existed through the gospel at various times, and those people believe and are saved. Then in the end at the 2nd advent, all the elect, both dead and living, through the resurrection and translation of the physical nature, will be gathered "from the four winds" to be with Christ forever.
TD

Do you believe the elect are saved, then they eventually believe?

 

[JLB]

Not unless God brings them to spiritual life, as in Eph. 2:5. This shows that God is the source of life and righteousness. Yet men are intelligent enough to understand the words of the gospel. Although they may understand it mentally and logically, because they are spiritually dead, it is to them as foolishness, and they would never obey it (namely believe). It's the nature of sin, and what Paul conveys in Rom. 3:10-18 and elsewhere.
TD

By spiritial life do you mean born again?

Are you saying we are born again first, then we believe?

 

[JLB]

. In order to obey the truth through the Spirit, one must already have the indwelling Spirit.

How does a spiritually dead person have the Spirit?

 

[tdidymas]

Do you believe the elect are saved, then they eventually believe?

No. I thought I explained that by way of scripture. I take it you wanted a chronology on it. Did you not understand my previous response?
TD

 

[tdidymas]

By spiritial life do you mean born again?

Are you saying we are born again first, then we believe?

Yes, because the exercise of saving faith requires Holy Spirit guidance. Rom. 8:14 "Those who are led by the Spirit of God are the sons of God." Faith in Christ is that leading of the Spirit (that is, the beginning of it), as also confirmed by 1 Jn. 5:1 "Everyone who believes has been born of God."
TD

 

[tdidymas]

How does a spiritually dead person have the Spirit?

The Spirit comes into a person to give spiritual life, then that person is no longer spiritually dead. Eph. 2:5 "Even while we were dead in our transgressions and sins, God raised us up to life and seated us in the heavenly places in Christ" - this is the activity of the Holy Spirit when He indwells the heart of the one being saved.
TD

 

[TibiasDad]

That's a far cry from the idea that God predestines everyone in general but no one in particular, or that He predestines everyone in a class but no one in particular.

God predestines no one to believe but everyone who believes to be christlike in character. That is Rom 8:28-30! Those who believe, and continue to grow in that belief, will be conformed to the image of his Son as God has predetermined it to necessarily be!

It is the same message in Ephesians 1:4For he chose us in him before the creation of the world to be holy and blameless in his sight. In love 5he predestined us for adoption to sonship through Jesus Christ, in accordance with his pleasure and will— 6to the praise of his glorious grace, which he has freely given us in the One he loves. 7In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, in accordance with the riches of God’s grace 8that he lavished on us. With all wisdom and understanding, 9he d made known to us the mystery of his will according to his good pleasure, which he purposed in Christ, 10to be put into effect when the times reach their fulfillment—to bring unity to all things in heaven and on earth under Christ.

Doug

 

[TibiasDad]

1 Jn. 5:1 "Everyone who believes that Jesus is the Christ has been born of God" (ESV). So if a person is believing in Christ, that person has already had spiritual birth. Notice it doesn't say "can become born of God" which would imply that believing comes first. It says "is" (most translations), which essentially means "has been." This statement implies that believing is the outward manifestation of being born again.

This is the tired old perfect tense argument that doesn't work! The perfect tense (has been born of God) doesn't place believing subsequent to being born again. In fact, in verse 10 of 1 John 5, we find the same construction only in the negative, "...Whoever does not believe God has made him out to be a liar..." 'Made him out to be a liar" is not the cause of "does not believe", but rather the other way around, for the last clause of verse 10, says, "because they have not believed the testimony God has given about his Son." Thus not believing is the cause of God being made a liar. 1John 5:1 merely shows a necessary relationship between belief and being born again. The grammar (a present tense verb preceding a perfect tense verb), cannot and does not express a cause and effect meaning in itself, that can come only, as in verse 10, from the addition of a clarifying and specifying thought.

John clearly places belief as the predecessor of being "given the right to become God's children" (John 1:12), so I cannot believe that he means the opposite in 1 John 5:1!


Doug

 

[OzSpen]

Why don't you stop with the useless opinions and try to exegete the scripture? This kind of response tells me you're mind is fixed, and you're not willing to discuss it further. Do I read you correctly?
TD

TD,

You don't read me correctly. I've come to my conclusions through exegesis of Scripture. I have a BA in NT Greek, have taught Greek (now retired), and have a PhD in NT.

I am more than willing to discuss but I refuse to accept a Reformed imposition on Scripture.

Oz

 

[jerry63935]

its reformed thinking,but,don't tell the arminists that .

wink,wink

no its neither its all Bible up to several years ago mainly whn i got saved. i had no idea what reformed or armeinst was.. to this day it dont amount to any things . as both are man made

 

[TibiasDad]

I am struggling with how you reconcile that God provides the causative force and yet, to quote myself, "a person's response to God's prevenient grace is something that God has chosen not to cause." Is it that God causes much of salvation and the person adds that last bit of causation by responding?

God's grace decides to not forsake man in his son and sends Christ to die, canceling the power of sin and death, and thus enabling man to hear when the Spirit speaks through the preaching of the gospel.

Man merely yields his will to God's in belief that God will do what he said he would do. God's still doing all the work, he has just asked for permission at one point to continue the work (though from our perspective it seems that he is just starting) that he has been doing.

I do not think that me giving way to God is a truly causal action any more than a drowning man taking hold of a buoy thrown to him means he saved himself. The headlines never read "Man saves self by accepting help from a passing boater!" It would be ludicrous to think that, and is just as much so when stated about salvation. God throws us the line of salvation and says, grab hold and I will pull you in. Grabbing hold doesn't pull me in, it only keeps me afloat and puts me at the whom of the will and strength of the one one the other end of the rope. Everything that is good and positive in this scenario is from God and he is the only reason I am not drowned.

In my mind, the watershed between Calvinism and Arminian thought is the irresistible grace aspect that says I cannot refuse to be saved. That is the point of, not just man's involvement, because even Calvinists say man is involved, but that man has an independent volitional ability to refuse. God gave us the choice of whom we will serve, either the god's of the world, or him. He extends the truth of the gospel and enables us to understand it sufficiently so as to accept God's graciousness or to disbelieve what he has said, either about who and what we are in relation to him, or that he is able to actually do what he said and promised to do.

God's prevenient grace is "irresistible" because it overcomes the sinfulness of man through the cross. It is only at the point of human action that freedom of choice comes to bear, and that is not to work, but to yield our will to his to let him, allow him to do what only he can do.


Doug

 

[Hospes]

God's grace decides to not forsake man in his son and sends Christ to die, canceling the power of sin and death, and thus enabling man to hear when the Spirit speaks through the preaching of the gospel.

Man merely yields his will to God's in belief that God will do what he said he would do. God's still doing all the work, he has just asked for permission at one point to continue the work (though from our perspective it seems that he is just starting) that he has been doing.

I do not think that me giving way to God is a truly causal action any more than a drowning man taking hold of a buoy thrown to him means he saved himself. The headlines never read "Man saves self by accepting help from a passing boater!" It would be ludicrous to think that, and is just as much so when stated about salvation. God throws us the line of salvation and says, grab hold and I will pull you in. Grabbing hold doesn't pull me in, it only keeps me afloat and puts me at the whom of the will and strength of the one one the other end of the rope. Everything that is good and positive in this scenario is from God and he is the only reason I am not drowned.

In my mind, the watershed between Calvinism and Arminian thought is the irresistible grace aspect that says I cannot refuse to be saved. That is the point of, not just man's involvement, because even Calvinists say man is involved, but that man has an independent volitional ability to refuse. God gave us the choice of whom we will serve, either the god's of the world, or him. He extends the truth of the gospel and enables us to understand it sufficiently so as to accept God's graciousness or to disbelieve what he has said, either about who and what we are in relation to him, or that he is able to actually do what he said and promised to do.

God's prevenient grace is "irresistible" because it overcomes the sinfulness of man through the cross. It is only at the point of human action that freedom of choice comes to bear, and that is not to work, but to yield our will to his to let him, allow him to do what only he can do.


Doug

But if the drowning man refuses to take hold of the buoey, the buoey, the rope, the Person throwing the rope cannot save anyone. Though grabbing the buoey does not save the drowning person, all is for nothing unless the buoey is grabbed. By a single instance of refusal, Almighty God is frustrated in His own stated purposes; He chooses to submit to a creature of His own making.

Does it not at all give you pause to believe that God bows and makes Himself impotent when confronted with a creature's willful rebellion?

 

[JLB]

But if the drowning man refuses to take hold of the buoey, the buoey, the rope, the Person throwing the rope cannot save anyone. Though grabbing the buoey does not save the drowning person, all is for nothing unless the buoey is grabbed. By a single instance of refusal, Almighty God is frustrated in His own stated purposes; He chooses to submit to a creature of His own making.

Does it not at all give you pause to believe that God bows and makes Himself impotent when confronted with a creature's willful rebellion?

God created man is Hs image and likeness.

That is what God wanted. Who are we to say to the potter, you must make me serve you as a robot? That would surely make God the servant of His own creation.


God wants us of own own ability to choose, to choose to love.
To choose to love Him and love each other.


Does He require that we love? Yes

Does He also inspire us to love? Yes

Does He empower us to love? Yes


Nevertheless, it is still our choice.


Whoever hates his brother is a murderer, and you know that no murderer has eternal life abiding in him. 1 John 3:15


Again we see the choice is to all; Whoever, anyone, everyone.



JLB

 

[Hospes]

Who are we to say to the potter, you must make me serve you as a robot?

Exibit 1 of the silly slaying of cartoonish understandings of Reformed theology. Talk of robots either shows that either you do not understand Reformed theology or you are deliberately misrepresenting it. I will assume the former.

Again we see the choice is to all; Whoever, anyone, everyone.

JLB, I agree with this statement, but you seem to think choice is unhinged from motive. All choices are determined by motive(s). The question needing answered is "From where does motive originate?" or "What causes motive?"

 

[tdidymas]

God predestines no one to believe but everyone who believes to be christlike in character. That is Rom 8:28-30! Those who believe, and continue to grow in that belief, will be conformed to the image of his Son as God has predetermined it to necessarily be!

It is the same message in Ephesians 1:4For he chose us in him before the creation of the world to be holy and blameless in his sight. In love 5he predestined us for adoption to sonship through Jesus Christ, in accordance with his pleasure and will— 6to the praise of his glorious grace, which he has freely given us in the One he loves. 7In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, in accordance with the riches of God’s grace 8that he lavished on us. With all wisdom and understanding, 9he d made known to us the mystery of his will according to his good pleasure, which he purposed in Christ, 10to be put into effect when the times reach their fulfillment—to bring unity to all things in heaven and on earth under Christ.

Doug

God predestined individuals, not merely an idea. "For adoption to sonship" - a son is an individual, not an idea. If God did not predestine certain individuals to believe, then He predestined no one at all, since belief is the proof that a person is predestined.

Furthermore, if God predestined everyone who believes to be Christlike, then He predestined all who believe to be in Christ. And if individuals were predestined to be Christlike, then they had to be predestined to believe. Faith is a prerequisite to being Christlike, so anyone predestined to be Christlike had to be predestined to believe.

Your response begs the question, is faith in a person generated by the work of God, or the work of man? (or both together in a synergistic relationship)?
TD

 

[tdidymas]

This is the tired old perfect tense argument that doesn't work! The perfect tense (has been born of God) doesn't place believing subsequent to being born again. In fact, in verse 10 of 1 John 5, we find the same construction only in the negative, "...Whoever does not believe God has made him out to be a liar..." 'Made him out to be a liar" is not the cause of "does not believe", but rather the other way around, for the last clause of verse 10, says, "because they have not believed the testimony God has given about his Son." Thus not believing is the cause of God being made a liar. 1John 5:1 merely shows a necessary relationship between belief and being born again. The grammar (a present tense verb preceding a perfect tense verb), cannot and does not express a cause and effect meaning in itself, that can come only, as in verse 10, from the addition of a clarifying and specifying thought.

John clearly places belief as the predecessor of being "given the right to become God's children" (John 1:12), so I cannot believe that he means the opposite in 1 John 5:1!


Doug

I see your argument, and it seems valid on the surface based on certain assumptions. However, John would be contradicting himself in these two verses if it is assumed that a person believes prior to becoming God's son based on Jn. 1:12, because 1 Jn. 5:1 says "everyone who believes" - everyone, not most. The fact of believing is proof of being born of God.

And furthermore, you forgot to include v. 13 in Jn. 1 "who were born... of God." In this case he also uses the past tense, which indicates that "becoming sons of God" is to already have been born of God. Since this statement is in the introduction of the book, the full aspects of being God's sons could be in view, which includes the resurrection stage. He also does this in 1 Jn 1 where he calls Christ "the eternal life." So then in this case "become sons of God" would include not only being born again (as a past event), but also becoming Christlike in character in this life, as well as being glorified in the resurrection.

The point is, "becoming sons of God" is not a spiritual event only, and cannot be assumed to be equivalent to being born again only, since he also defines the cause of being born again in v. 13. He is also identifying those who believe as "who were born... of God."

In addition to this, being given the right to become God's sons does not necessarily follow receiving Christ chronlogically, which I think is your assumption. But those receiving Christ are identified as those given the right to become God's sons, just as v. 13 also identifies them. So it's a statement of identification, not a statement of process. In this view, one could paraphrase thus: Those who receive Christ are the ones who God gave the power to become His sons, who are the same ones born of Him. IMO this paraphrase is the same sense of what John wrote in that context.
TD

 

[tdidymas]

TD,

You don't read me correctly. I've come to my conclusions through exegesis of Scripture. I have a BA in NT Greek, have taught Greek (now retired), and have a PhD in NT.

I am more than willing to discuss but I refuse to accept a Reformed imposition on Scripture.

Oz

Do you have any value to add to the conversation?
TD

 

[TibiasDad]

But if the drowning man refuses to take hold of the buoey, the buoey, the rope, the Person throwing the rope cannot save anyone. Though grabbing the buoey does not save the drowning person, all is for nothing unless the buoey is grabbed. By a single instance of refusal, Almighty God is frustrated in His own stated purposes; He chooses to submit to a creature of His own making.

Does it not at all give you pause to believe that God bows and makes Himself impotent when confronted with a creature's willful rebellion?

No, it doesn’t give me any more pause than would a parent that gives a teenager room to make their own decisions. I certainly didn’t do everything that my parents desired me to do, but that is part of the learning process.

What I wonder, is why do you think that God can’t make himself “impotent” to allow a creature to refuse him the opportunity to save? It doesn’t make God impotent at all if I refuse. (Remember, God is limiting himself; it is not us confining him!) God gave us his image and part of that image is self-determination, self-sovereignty of his on choices.

Doug