Ordo Salutis

You're right.You did mention Gene as holding that unique position before.I had forgotten.

I know you just acknowledged that that it's not a mainstream view of Calvinists.But for you to say that you have spoken to many who hold that stance I find incredible.I'm considerably older than you and have not once encountered anyone who personally took that position.I have never even seen it mentioned in any Systematic Theology.It doesn't even qualify as a minority report.

 

Gill is not "mainstream";neither is Calvin for that matter.

The subject was my belief that no mainstream Calvinist denies that faith is a gift in Ephesians 2:8.The word Mainstream means (according to the 4th Edition of The American Heritage Dictionary):"The prevailing current or direction of a movement,influence,or activity."

Here are two quotes from you:It seems to me from my own reading that many "mainstream" conservative commentaries are reformed leaning.

The ESV seems a little too "Calvinistic" for me in places,and is the main version used by mainstream Calvinists.

Quotes from three other BB'ers who have used the word will follow.

This creed which runs counter to mainstream evangelism...

This is MAINSTREAM Hyles theology folks.

You and he are arguing against positions that exist only in the fringe elements.You are not discussing mainstream Calvinism.

 

I couldn't find anything on Ed.But there is a Bob Hamilton on sermonaudio.com who has just one message called:"The Mighty Winds Of God's Providence".Is that the right guy?Even if he's not your friend he's worth a listen I'd say.

Not too long ago you mentioned S.Lewis Johnson favorably.I love listening to his sermons/lectures.He was a fine servant of the Most High.

 

I was being silly. The thread seemed to have dropped and I wanted to see more discussion about it. There is a joke for latin students that goes "Semper ubi sububi" the direct translation is "always where under where" but you can figure out the joke from there. Anyway I'm not savvy enough to find it after it passes out of view. So since you started the subject and it's in latin I was asking where is the order of salvation in holy scripture?

 

OK, that's progress. I would put regeneration into the sanctification category since it is the Holy Spirit that teaches and guides us in our spiritual lives following our justification.

To me, the only time we respond to God on our own behalf is when we, not having the Holy Spirit in us, respond to His convicting through believing the gospel and receive Christ as Savior. To me, it's like applying the blood to our doorposts -- we believe and, still under our own power/sovereignty, obey the gospel unto salvation.

skypair

 

All Scripture Cited Is From The HCSB

Bunk!You're still peddling this stuff?"Our own power/sovereignty"!! Before regeneration the mind is hostile toward God and can't understand spiritual things.We're dead in our sins."So then it does not depend on human will or effort,but on God who shows mercy." (Romans 9:16)"Who were born,not of blood,or the will of the flesh,or of the will of man,but of God."(John 1:13)"By His own choice,He gave us a new birth by the message of truth..."(James 1:16)

Man is not a little god with power and sovereignty.That smacks of Kenneth Copeland's stuff.

 

What it "smacks of" is David and Jesus, rip. Hath David not said, 'Ye are gods?" (John 10:34-36)?

We are in the image of God, rip. God has 2 wills even among Calvies: 1) Sovereign will and 2) permissive will. What God permits, men are given their own sovereignty in (In reading RC Sproul last night, he said it took him years to overcome the burden that what he believed regarding predestination was in "fate" and that he was a "puppet."). This is all easily resolved if we begin by establishing that man is permitted a totally free will, that he has a spirit/mind that is not blinded or dead like his soul, and that God expects man to respond to the gospel unto salvation.

skypair

 

Basically, you are saying that one passes from "lost" to "saved," not on account of the cross, but on account of being "chosen"/"elect." Is that right?

Are you saying that God applies the work of the cross to you "for no apparent reason" other than that He chose you?

How many people you reckon He has applied the cross to that never heard of Christ? I'm thinking you just took what God said was "cause and effect" out of the consideration. God said preaching the gospel was the cause and salvation was the effect. But now you seem to be saying that they are saved because they are saved -- "unconditional election."

I won't, BTW, deny that faith and obedience are the fruit of election -- they are. We call it "sanctification." That would be speaking of a lifelong work God does in you.

What concerns me is that your "justification" before God has a false foundation -- the "hypothetical" of an "exchanged life" (that you are elect/saved) vs. the personal commitment of an "exchanged death."

Recall Rom 5:10 again -- "For if ... we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life." What concerns me is that your theology teaches us to exchange lives with Christ but not to die with Him first. It's like going to the cross and seeing Jesus crucified and then saying you will live for Him. Well, what about dying for Him? Do you think you live for Him in obedience and faith without choosing to surrender your own life? Isn't that also a decision you must make? Isn't that what baptism and Baptists preach?

IOW, no -- you are not saved because you are elected. And faith and obedience (sanctification) neither proves you are saved not does it save you. It is belief that is not in vain -- belief that has chosen death to self in Christ -- that saves.

skypair

 

be careful they'll start calling you a catholic.

 

That really made no sense

 

RB,

You are taking everything personally now so let me just say (from another thread) what I believe the Bible says and be done.

I've been "pushing" this all along -- that we must be saved soul, spirit, and body. If the soul dies on acount of sin (Ezek 18:20), then it would seem clear that the soul would have to be reconciled and in some kind of relationship to God before He would indwell it. It would also seem that it having been us who broke the relationship in sin, it would need to be us who turns back to the relationship whereby we may be indwelt. That's the "decisional justification" half of spiritual salvation -- the salvation of the soul.

The "Sovereign Sanctification" is classic Calvinist -- we are given faith, Holy Spirit indwelling, eternal life, etc. sovereignly by God. We are also given into Christ's kingdom, the church, for sanctification through discipleship or, as Paul puts it, "being reconciled to God, we are much more saved by His life." (again, justified, then sanctified, Rom 5:10) Calvinism seems to begin with this step and assume that the soul is already saved/reconciled to God by God.

skypair

 

RB,

I haven't forgotten you brother. I have become really busy just recently.. I have quite a few things to discuss with you on this but no real time to set it out .. yet (you know me :laugh: )

But I will get back with you.

 

And you told RB that he takes things too personally.Sp,these snipes of yours are all-too frequent in your posts.You have done it to me scores of times also.

Just state your wacky beliefs and be done with it.

 

RB,

I wanted to get back to this since this is more the crux in my mind that shoudl be examined first.

Even though though faith and regeneration are or at the very least nearly simultanious it is the reformed belief or view that regeneration precedes faith in a 'logical' order. Thus to the reformed mind, regeneration is not actually salvation but that which comes before it.

When I asked the questions to which you gave the above answers it was specifically with regard to regeneration 'before' faith is excersized and thus being actually saved.

So to re-cap and make sure I'm understanding you correctly:
You hold that before a person excersizes faith unto salvation they are regenerate and this regeneration before faith entails the person being justified before God, sanctified unto God, filled with the Holy Spirit, placed in Christ (thus alive).

Do I have that correct so far?