Lazarus

Your deductive reasoning is flawed. Like I stated prior, many calvinists do not believe in the regeneration (being reborn) prior to faith in Christ. It is NOT pelagianism. You may want to get a better grip on the phrases you throw around.

Please show where I have ever stated we can come to Christ on our own? I don't see God's convicting grace and drawing as passing from death to life...in order to receive life. The whole regeneration prior to faith view is ridiculous, and lacks any kind of common sense and reasoning, not to mention Scripture.

 

1. Here's Pelagianism: "It is the belief that original sin did not taint human nature (which, being created from God, was divine), and that mortal will is still capable of choosing good or evil without Divine aid."

2. Webdog says: "A person doesn't have to be made alive to come to Christ."

3. Now, we have several things going on here:

a. either the person didn't spiritual die and needs no help to come to Christ because the Fall didn't affect him in any way.

b. Or, the person was only wounded by the fall and can still own his own come to Christ.

4. Both positions deny that a person is truly dead in sins (Eph 2:1-4) and must be made alive in Christ for salvation.

5. The language of the NT to describe the sinner is dead in sins, blinded by Satan, and hardened because of sin---each of these presupposes divine initiative for the unsaved to become saved---and according to Scripture it must be monergistic.

 

TCG, I've already explained myself, it's not pelagainism. Your flaw is what spiritual death means. Any reasoning stemming from that is obviously going to be flawed, also. If you took it as the original authors intended, you would understand and accept the similie (death = separation..."dead to sin").

You still have issues with your calvinist brethern who believe regeneration happens along with, or immediately after faith in Christ.

 

1. Now, you must modify your original statement not to sound Pelagian.

2. Calvinists who say regeneration happens along with or immediately after faith in Christ like Dr. Milliard Erickson, Christian Theoloy, of Baylor University, put the same concept in the effectual call.

3. Calvinists like that call the same monergistic process the effectual call, which still doesn't support your view; while calvinists like myself call that same process regeneration.

 

I don't have to do anything. I didn't sound pelagian in the least.

Impossible. You cannot have regeneration prior disguised in the term effectual call...and then regeneration after. If that's what they hold to, they are more confused than the calvinists that place regeneration prior to faith in Christ.

 

1. Maybe I should have said semi-pelagian.

2. Maybe you need to get out a few theologies and read exactly what these Calvinists believe.

3. You said they believe one thing; now you're not even sure what they believe--make up your mind!

 

I prefer non calvinist, thank you.

I've heard the arguments. Been there, done that.

Do you know what sarcasm means?

 

He has to made alive to be saved -- he doesn't have to be alive the choose salvation. Paul is making a gospel presentation here, TC. The first clue is that he neglects to mention Christ's death and resurrection. When we hear these, then WE have to choose -- repent or reject.

There you go making ASS-U-MEptions again! You "presuppose" these to be true because you won't accept any other explanation than what you have been brainwashed with.

skypair

 

1. Paul never neglected to mention anything--you are the one who is neglecting the obvious.

2. How can a man dead in sins move to salvation without that Spirit wrought regeneration to behold the wonderful things of the gospel of Christ, anchored in Jesus death and resurrection.

3. You have been hanging around too many preachers--preachers' talk; that's all.