Featured Is this Prevenient Grace?

However, when the phrase “prevenient grace” is used in theological discussions, it is used in a specific way. In the context of the on-going Calvinism vs. Arminianism debate, prevenient grace is referred to in order to object to the Calvinist doctrine of irresistible grace.

Personally in my over 50 years in the church I have never heard of prevenient grace. Good reason too prevenient grace is referred to in order to object to the Calvinist doctrine of irresistible grace. That is probably the reason I never heard of it... Anything other than Irresistible Grace is none other than the devices of men... Yeah hath God said?... Brother Glen

 

According to the doctrine of total spiritual inability, the Fall resulted in all mankind being unable to seek God and trust in Christ. Two solutions have been concocted for this fiction. On one hand, God chose some individuals before creation to be saved, and uses Irresistible Grace to enable them to trust in Christ overcoming the effects of total spiritual inability. On the other hand, the concept of Prevenient Grace was concocted whereby all mankind is enabled to overcome total spiritual inability, thereby allowing the lost to seek God and trust in Christ by their own will, but in this concept they are not compelled to believe.

Both constructs are fiction.

 

Brother Van your conclusion is the both of these belief system I will call then that are fiction... If someone like yourself has come to that conclusion weighing all the evidence then what to you is the truth?... Brethren on here will make a statement of belief and back up why they have come to that conclusion by using scripture... So what is your answer and do you have one or are you just against both of these beliefs with no belief of your own... I sure brethren on here would like to know how you see it... Brother Glen

 

I read an article last night about John MacArthur espousing, I'll put it more mildly as, "a form of Prevenient Grace" to save argument on semantics BUT will say I'm not surprised at the back pedaling to supporting this "form" of grace in order to avoid obvious theological difficulties regarding the need to uphold biblical conditions of salvation.

http://evangelicalarminians.org/a-c...surprising-source-spoiler-its-john-macarthur/

 

Hi Brother Glen, I have laid out, using specific scripture why I believe "total spiritual inability" as the result of the Fall affects all people all the time is fiction. And I have backed up this view numerous times, and for you to suggest otherwise is without merit. But it is fine for you to ask why I believe "total spiritual inability" is mistaken doctrine.

First, the concept has no support in scripture. Advocates point to Romans 3:11 which they say means no one seeks after God "at any time." But the "at any time" is added. Another way to read the passage is no one seeks after God all the time. Thus we are all under sin. Or no one seeks after God when they are sinning, and so we are all under sin. The point being the doctrine is not found in scripture, it has been read into it, which is without merit.

If you look at other verses cited to support the mistaken doctrine, you will find the same thing, i.e. an added thought to create the support. For example, because of the Fall, everyone is conceived in iniquity, which means separated from God because God is holy. This separation is referred to as being dead in our sins (being separated because of being in a sinful state.) But being "dead" spiritually is never said in scripture to result in total spiritual inability, that definitional assertion is added by advocates of the doctrine.

Now lets turn to Matthew 13:1-23. If the Fall resulted in everyone being unable to seek God and trust in Christ, why did Jesus speak in parables? Because some could understand, but God's timing did not want that to happen at that time in Christ's ministry. Later, yes. You will find no answer for the need to speak in parables, and thus total spiritual inability is demonstrated unbiblical. But no one will admit it because in their minds, 400 years of great theologians could not be wrong.

Now lets turn to Romans 11 where God hardens the hearts of unbelieving Jews to facilitate the spread of the gospels to the Gentiles. Again, God would not need to harden hearts if the Fall had made them already unable to seek God and trust in Christ. Again, you will find no answer, but you will be unable to agree because "400 years of great theologians could not be wrong.

God bless,

Van

 

Thank you for your response... Do I agree no!... I will not debate the matter either... Since you have an opposing view to both points of doctrine just wanted your take on it... Now I know!... Brother Glen

 

Brother Glen, thank you for not posting up 400 years of mistaken views.

 

That was a little dig but my hide is stronger than that and I won't go there... Brother Glen

 

And again I thank you for not going there. Total Spiritual Inability has been demonstrated unbiblical time and time again, yet not one advocate has agreed. Oh I know, 400 years of great theologians could not be wrong.

 

Exactly. And when Calvinists say regeneration precedes salvation we're talking about logically preceding...not necessarily temporally preceding.

 

Van keeps talking about 400 years ago. Van,what happened in 1615 that has you hot under the collar?