Monergism and Synergism

Only for those who make up their own game :thumbs:

 

Christ needed my "concurrence" before He would JUSTIFY my soul ETERNALLY before His Father -- that is, save me. ("If you confess me before men, I will confess you before the Father." --- Rom 10:9-10, etal.)

In my daily walk of SANCTIFICATION -- aka: spiritual growth -- I am indeed, God's/Christ's "helper" a) in being saved from evil and b) in accomplishing His will in this world.

The question to you isn't so much whether you are a "synergist." It's at what point do you become a "synergist" in Christ's kingdom. I doubt seriously that you can ever say you are a Christian with a "free will" but yet never work synergistically with Christ to usher in "...Thy kingdom come, They will be done on earth...."

skypair

 

And so it is with a lot of terms given us by Calvinism.

From what I gather, "common grace" is the gospel of grace that cannot be heard by those who are "predestined to condemnation" even though it is the same gospel that the "elect" hear unto "effectual grace."

It is "pure mysticism" that anyone can separate out the one from the other in the presentation of the same message!

skypair

 

Correction, you didn't make any observation at all. You catagorically set forth to put someone down. I hold strictly to the word of God and I test everything against it. I have never made any statement or allusions that truth is what I choose it to be.
You presume that because I don't agree with your 'opinions' that I have to think or be of the mind that all truth is subjective but that what 'you believe' is the real truth. Wrong - that is arrogance and pride.
But.. to try to degrade another believer based upon your 'opinions' regarding a certain perspective to that of someone worldly (and thus ungodly) that believe struth is what you make it (subjective) - is taking it to far.

Here is fact #1 - The definitions are not something the non-Cal determined nor anyone else for that matter as a proper view of their position.

Here is fact #2 - That definition was set forth by Calvinists to show a distinction between the two views as they percieved them.

Here is fact #3 - They based their definition upon what 'they' understood a particular view held to. (the deifination fits that of the Pelagain and Semi-Pelagain view - Arminianism according to their understanding fell in the catagory of Semi-Pel - the truth is, it did not).

Here is fact #4 - Their defintions are not the standard except to and for their own view thus making their truth in this are subjective at best. However it was not in accordance with what others truly hold to and believe. Thus their definition are poor at best.

Here is fact #5 - Non-Cals do not fall into either Catagory because both are improperly defined. But most specifically they do not fall into the Synergistic catagory because the defintion of synergism excludes us.


If monergism simply meant God alone saves, and God alone regenerate. Then Non-Cals and Arminians would be Monergists. However even their own defintion cause them to fall short of the monergism label.

You didn't hurt my feeling in the least. What you said was baseless and purposeful to put another down. So yes, you were straightforward and wrong at the same time.

I know many Calvinists that are very prideful and arrogent and Calvinism will not stop that and I know those you would place into the camp of synergism who are the most humble and kind believers you can imagine. You have a very distorted view and to high an opinion of Calvism. I know another on this board who would state that Calvinists don't lie but anyone else might (refering to other christians).
Take care to what you consider as precious that it not become your down fall.


I will let the matter rest with this post however since I know from experience we can all do this without thinking it through.

 

No, because man still has to believe. Even if God gave it man must do 'something' in order to be saved. That something that man must do is to believe.

Man must do.. in order to..

Regardless of if God gives him everything, salvation will not occur until man himself believes or places that faith in Him. Man has to do.. in order to be..

 

Have you checked your 'p' and 'a' lately? ( PS. That's a-r-r-o-g-A-n-t )

 

Allan, you're doing a great job on these threads and I think open-minded readers can see the weakness in the arguments that the calvinists on this board are making. Hang in there! And I love the irony of this quote:

Here, the calvinist defends God's great soveriegnty while he simultaneously displays his ability to read your mind. Hmmm

 

I was arguing the point OF Monergism weakness.. :laugh: Ok, that was funny.

Secondly, it does and has been a consistant teaching in the church since the early church and the Apostles
Oh well...

 

How do you know what has influenced Allan? It seems that he would either have to tell you, you have been spying on him, or you have the ability to read minds. I have argued with quite a few calvinists and I find it quite typical to be subjected to the kind of mind reading ability that you have claimed here. That's why I picked up on it.

As for heavy lifting, no thanks. I'll stay out of it. Out of over 2,000 posts on the BB, I imagine 1/3 to 1/2 have been on this topic on the old C/A thread. Feel free to search them out on the old threads and when you get through reading all that I wrote, perhaps you can say that you have read my mind as well! I have heard the arguments and I have made mine. At this point, and I mean this for myself, not for anyone else on either side, this topic falls under the category of "foolish arguments' and "senseless debates" which Paul advised Timothy to stay out of. I think you have to work you way through the issues and come to a conclusion, but once you do, stay humble and stay open minded, for "who has known the mind of the Lord?" "whose ways are past finding out".

 

What, you've read my posts and you still don't know?