You must be born again

I have not seen quite this construct before -- or explained the way you just did that I can remember.

Unilateral is obvious -- God/Christ does the "drawing." I don't see that it is only certain ones, but, yes, unilateral.

Sovereign? Is that according to His choice of persons or circumstances or time or all 3? He's obviously sovereign in the way He calls (Adam with His Own voice - OT saints through the gospel of the kingdom -- NT saints via the gospel of grace).

Certain? That's like "irresistible?"

Is the effectualness of the call in God or in man? IOW, could God make a call that would be heard and heeded by all men? Or does it rely on some intangible God has put in them (many Calvinists say that the indwelling Holy Spirit is given at the point of the calling going out (being annunciated) but that would be regeneration, right?)?

I agree that the Spirit is necessary -- don't get me wrong. But He is the Word still outside the person, not inside the heart during the "call."

That makes sense if one understands the process from the word being preached to Christ being received, I guess.

This sounds like we are back at regeneration (new nature) precedes faith, Larry. What is the distinction between regeneration and new nature?

I agree wholeheartedly with this! There's always been some "response" on our part that "seals the deal."

I kinda see where you get to the same point as both me and Calvinists. I don't fully understand your ordo yet but you do seem to get to the same result. :applause:




skypair

 

His choice of persons. Election, in Scripture, is always of persons, not times or circumstances, though those are a part of his sovereign will.

Yes.

The effectual call is made effectual by God.

Yes, it's called the general call, or the universal call.

I don't think it is intangible per se. It is the sovereign work of God that brings a person to faith. Some call it regeneration. I don't think the name we call it is that important.

I don't know what the distinction between outside and inside is in this respect. God does call people to salvation through the gospel communicated, and he brings regeneration the same way. They cannot be separated.

Many people would say nothing. That's why I say this is the one argument that could convince me that regeneration precedes faith, but it doesn't because I see "life" in the NT as the result of faith. The new nature is a complex of attributes that enables a person to believe.

I don't konw about "sealing the deal." The deal was sealed in eternity past when God chose; he works it out in time. But virtually every Calvinist agrees that our response is necessary.

I am a Calvinist. If by "the same point" you mean people being saved by faith, then I suppose we get to the same point. But you and we get there very differently.

 

Larry, you know this is wrong. Rom 9-11 -- Israel, the nation, is elect.

It certainly couldn't be effective without Him. It is effectual when He regenerates us, for sure. And it is only effectual in individuals as your next remark notes. So we really are down to how effectuality is effectuated, eh? :laugh:

Do you mean that every other word in the Bible has a special Calvinist meaning to you except "regeneration?" That is very troubling, Lar.

Here's the distinction and it is HUGE in NT theology. In the OT, the Holy Spirit was WITH them. God's Word, to be more precise, was with them but they, all of them, had hearts of stone that it could not be IN them -- yet they could be saved!

So "inside" means that the Holy Spirit can INdwell. God changes His word to flesh in us as He did in Christ starting with our heart.

But here's the "coup de gras," Larry. The Spirit converts us from outside so that God can put the Spirit inside. It is antithetical to say that the Word is IN us before the Word is with us. That kind of thinking supposes that we hear and obey God before we hear Him. The Word -- preaching -- has to be OUT before it is IN.

The "new nature" -- and you know this, Lar -- is the spiritual nature we have after salvation (1Cor 2). It is "new" vis-a-vis the old CARNAL nature when we couldn't see spiritual things, just "conviction" and the gospel, right? So at some point according to our faith, God gave us the Spirit of the new birth.

Our response is how God chose us, Larry. Yeah, it happened in eternity past that God chose us based on "inside information." But we weren't saved then, were we?

And based upon some of the LS threads that are popping up, some Calvinists are not making the necessary response, either.

We have a "unity of the Spirit" issue, then. Cause there is only one gospel and all men press into it (Luke 16:16). Do you remember there were people who thought they were born by circumcision into salvation/election? That was the "way" of much of Israel even in Christ's day, right? Wasn't that an attitude that Jesus and the apostles had to change?

I'm not saying that Calvinists don't "respond" to God. Many are "God-fearers," for sure, like Cornelius. They even experience Christ's salvation in this life. Living the Christian life has its benefits/blessings.

But where are they going to be eternally if they merely presume that no act on their part can save them? I am imagining the following explanation to the one who would think to personally receive Christ: "God chose already, sir. It was His prerogative, not yours to be saved. Do you believe Christ died for your sins and rose again for your atonement? You're already saved. You're 'elect.' The spiritual sight and faith you are demonstrating right now is the fruit of God
s monergistic salvation of your soul."

What do you find wrong with that explanation, Larry?

skypair

 

SP said : I'm not saying that Calvinists don't "respond" to God. Many are "God-fearers," for sure, like Cornelius.

Yes , SP admits that someone in the Bible is a Calvinist , the godly Cornelius !

 

I was speaking of election to salvation, which is what Romans 9-11 is about, as you can tell by the mention of individuals. Israel is the chosen nation, but that is not about salvation.

I don't think any words in the Bible have a special Calvinist meaning. I am not sure where you get that from.

The preaching of the word is definitely outside, since when I preach I am not in anyone. But when they hear it, it is inside them. People today still have hearts of stone just as they did in the OT, so that's not really an OT/NT distinction. The role of the Holy Spirit in the OT is a matter of debate. The Scripture is not entirely clear. I tend to believe OT people were regenerated and indwelt due to the fact that there is no other way that people are saved, no matter what era. Other people differ with me on that. The Holy Spirit does not convert us from the outside though. I know of no such distinction in Scripture.

We certainly have the new nature after salvation. I am not sure that the Bible ever says that it comes from faith.

What Scripture says that God chose us based on our response? If you answer the question with Scripture, you will be the first.

So now you are questioning people's salvation?

I don't know of any Calvinist who believes this.

I find that 1) it is unbiblical, and 2) it is not Calvinistic (because it is unbiblical) and 3) no Calvinist I know believes it.

 

There are people mentioned in Rom 9-11. But even there, their mention was according to God's purpose -- not unto salvation. Take Pharoah for example. You aren't asserting that he was saved, are you. Satan hardened Pharoah's heart. Jacob and Esau -- same thing. It's not their salvation that is seen but their purpose. In particular, the purpose of their descendants since we do not see God's wrath against Esau during his life. And notice too -- it doesn't say "Jacob have I saved and Esau is lost." Doesn't say that.

Many discussions on this subject. Refresh time: "all," "whosoever," "sin nature." "total depravity," limited atonement," etc. You get the picture.

Correction. IF they are paying attention, it get's inside them. But does it stay? Or like David, can the Spirit be "taken from" them? Remember his prayer?

And this goes to your next comments -- why doesn't it stay?? Because the "Way, Truth, and Life" had not come to them, but He has to us. And when He went away, He sent another to live in us Who couldn't live in them. He, as a Person, was in heaven then, right?

There is a distinctive among believers then and now though. Jeremiah said the "heart of flesh" was yet future to his era too, remember (Jer 31:31)?

Debated back in Calvini's time. Not anymore by students of the world -- at least not so far as indwelling vs being "with." To summarize: 1) "with" means in the word of God and in the 7 spirits of God but not in men. 2) "filled" means a man's mind, emotions, and will are temporarily but completely focused on God. 3) "Indwelt" means that the Holy Spirit permanently resides in a believer (though through quenching, grieving, or rejection of His mind, we may not hear Him).

True, there is no other way for people to be COMPLETELY saved without the Spirit's SANCTIFICATION. But salvation begins as it began in the OT -- with JUSTIFICATION, with repentance resulting in being given the righteousness of God. See, this is why you and I are at "loggerheads" so pay attention.

What is required of believers of all time is to believe God, to repent toward Him and to receive justification by faith in Him. Would you agree that these things are true for both eras?

However, in the NT we get "some better thing." Having done just what the OT saints did (though with Christ as the Object of our faith), we receive the indwelling Holy Spirit Who SANCTIFIES us.

And so, you're point is well taken ---

There is no other way that people can be COMPLETELY saved --- so the OT saints will be resurrected to this earth and receive Christ and the Spirit postrib (Mt 24:31, Psa 50:3-5, Job 10:25-28, etal.). While we are resurrected bodily to heaven/NJ on account of our sanctification in this life, they will be resurrected bodily to earth for sanctification in preparation to be raptured postMK to glory!

Well, the point is, He has to or He doesn't convert at all! As the OT-NT dichotomy makes clear, no one is indwelt until they have already repented towards God. In order to effectuate that, the Holy Spirit must work from outside.

The Bible mentions 2 natures: 1) carnal nature of our birth and 2) spiritual nature of our rebirth. Wouldn't you have to agree that the "new" nature would be the latter?

What planet have you been living on?? :laugh:

Rom 10:9-10 believe with thy heart and confess with thy mouth, Lar. Responses. Or

"Men and brethren, what must we DO?

"Repent and be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ... and ye will receive the gift of the Holy Ghost." i.e. Response.

Were those who repented chosen? Were any that truly repented not chosen? Can you show that any of the chosen didn't repent?

I was saying the same thing you would say to a Catholic --- that if your response is only "works," you ain't saved yet.

What do you think comes of preaching that you cannot "do" anything to effectuate your own salvation? I know Calvinists who say that "believing" is a "work," Lar! When, in fact, Rom 4:5 absolutely contradicts this. If you can't even make a decision regarding your salvation, I would surmise that you can only presume to have it!

skypair