-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Unbelief vs Belief ?
- Thread starter percho
- Start date
What you wrote was:
That is what I was objecting to. Man has free will to refuse the Gospel (e.g. John 3:19). But he will not believe the Gospel until He is born anew (or 'born from above'). The relevant texts are John 3:3-7; 1 Cor. 2:14. Why do men freely reject Christ? Because they have wicked unbelieving hearts. But once he is born anew, he freely repents and trusts in the Lord Jesus. The idea that Man does not have free will is a myth. No one comes to Christ kicking and screaming "Give me my freedom back!" No, no! They come willingly. 'Your people shall be willing in the day of your power.'Anthony Pritchard said:
God did not drag Lydia into the kingdom against her will. Instead He 'opened her heart to heed the things spoken by Paul.' Christ laid down His life for His sheep (John 10:11). Who are these sheep? Well, there are many breeds of sheep; the Lord's sheep are distinguished by their ears and their feet. They hear the Shepherd's voice and they follow HIm (John 10:27). They are not forced into the kingdom; they freely hear and they freely follow.
All this is in line with the great Calvinistic confessions. Please do not confuse Calvinism with Hyper-Calvinism.
Oh, those awful hypers... hyper-Calminians, hyper-evangelicals, hyper-Dispensationalists, hyper-Calvinists, hyper -Arminians, THEY'RE EVERYWHERE!... hyper hyper hyper, hyper on the brain...
Last edited:
Ben1445
Well-Known Member
If you are born again but can reject the gospel, that is the end of perseverance of the saints.
Ascetic X
Well-Known Member
There is not a single verse in the Bible that says “Get born again, then repent and be saved”.
This backwards gospel is the nonsensical doctrine of Calvinism.
Anthony Pritchard
Well-Known Member
Hebrews 11:1 defines faith as substance and evidence. Conviction is the result of believing, not the definition of believing. Saul’s conversion was a unique apostolic encounter with the risen Christ; it is not the pattern Scripture gives for ordinary belief. The gospel calls men to believe, repent, and come, and those commands presuppose genuine human agency.
Anthony Pritchard
Well-Known Member
The inspired nouns in Hebrews 11:1 are hypostasis (substance) and elegchos (evidence). “Conviction” is an interpretive gloss, a paraphrase of one Greek word, in some English translations, not the lexical meaning of either word. The text defines faith as substance and evidence, not conviction.
Anthony Pritchard
Well-Known Member
Brother, Lydia actually illustrates the very point I’m making. Acts 16:14 is describing what enabled her belief, not what caused it. The Lord “opened her heart to heed the things spoken by Paul.” That opening was an act of divine enablement, giving her the capacity to respond, not an act of determinism that guaranteed her response.
If a person cannot believe until God opens the heart, and if the opening of the heart is what produces willingness, then belief is caused by God’s action. That is the standard Calvinist order of salvation.
My concern is simply the order Scripture presents: God moves upon the heart, He convicts, enlightens, and draws, and man then responds either by receiving or rejecting the free gift. That is genuine human agency.
In the Calvinist structure you described, regeneration must occur first, and regeneration itself changes the will so that belief will follow. That is why I said that, in Calvinism, belief is caused by God. I am not confusing Calvinism with Hyper‑Calvinism; I am simply following the logic of the order you laid out.
Ascetic X
Well-Known Member
People repent when God brings a preacher to them, they hear the gospel, and decide to obey the scriptures.
Otherwise, you have irresponsible robots that God controls, violating their free will, and forcing them to obey Him.
Being forced like a puppet to serve God does not bring any glory to God at all.
Jesus did not preach “hope that God will give you repentance, so you will believe the gospel.”
Since Jesus preached “repent and believe”, repenting and believing cannot be a work of man to earn salvation.
Mark 1:14, 15
Now after that John was put in prison, Jesus came into Galilee, preaching the gospel of the kingdom of God,
And saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe the gospel.
God’s goodness leads us to repentance, it does not put repentance into us.
[Rom 2:4 KJV] Or despisest thou the riches of his goodness and forbearance and longsuffering; not knowing that the goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance?
Otherwise, you have irresponsible robots that God controls, violating their free will, and forcing them to obey Him.
Being forced like a puppet to serve God does not bring any glory to God at all.
Jesus did not preach “hope that God will give you repentance, so you will believe the gospel.”
Since Jesus preached “repent and believe”, repenting and believing cannot be a work of man to earn salvation.
Mark 1:14, 15
Now after that John was put in prison, Jesus came into Galilee, preaching the gospel of the kingdom of God,
And saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe the gospel.
God’s goodness leads us to repentance, it does not put repentance into us.
[Rom 2:4 KJV] Or despisest thou the riches of his goodness and forbearance and longsuffering; not knowing that the goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance?
Silverhair
Well-Known Member
To be convinced of something you have to believe that the information is true.
KY they may be able to convince you that leprechauns are real as you have already shown that you can be convinced that what is not true is true.
Paul already knew the information regarding Christ having risen from the grave and His being divine but he did not believe it. When he encountered Jesus on the road to Damascus he acquired addition information which caused him to then reevaluate his position and believe in Christ as Lord. So Paul meeting Christ was the final piece of information that Paul needed before he trusted in Christ.
David Lamb
Well-Known Member
I am certain Martin did not mean that someone can be born again and then reject the gospel.
I have been through this so many times, but I suppose once more won't hurt. God's absolute sovereignty in salvation does not bypass the hu,am will.
John 6:37. 'All that the Father gives Me will come to me.....' Here is your Particular, Effective Atonement. The Father has given to the Son a vast number (Rev. 7:9) of people to be saved, and every single one will come to him; not one will be lost (v.39; 17:2 etc.). But:
'.....And the one who comes to Me I will by no means cast out.' The word of God goes out to all, and no one who responds in repentance and faith will be rejected. Let all come freely to the waters; everyone may drink of the water of life! But the reason they respond is that God has opened their hearts to believe just as He did Lydia's. That is is something of a paradox I freely admit, but there it is in the word of God. It is repeated in Matthew 11:25ff, so I think it should be believed.
Let me close by saying that I never insigate these Cal vs. Arm debates, which are invariably fruitless. I only respond when people accuse Calvinists of fatalism or determinism.
Ben1445
Well-Known Member
But if you are regenerated, then you have life. You are born again. To be regenerated and reject the gospel is to lose salvation.
I don’t say this to say that you can lose your salvation.
My point is that regeneration cannot be “pregeneration.”
Old Reg. Born and Raised
New Member
Absolutely! It only takes belief to receive forgiveness of one’s sins. Just as the paralytic in Mat 9:2 received forgiveness of his sins without specifically asking for it, he received such forgiveness based on his faith that Jesus is Lord! By the way, he also received his healing. With that being said, how much more likely is Jesus to forgive us of our sins when we ask him specifically for it?
Perhaps I should have been more clear. Before someone is born anew, he will always use his free will to reject the Gospel; after he is born anew, he is the recipient of a new heart and a new spirit and will use his free will to receive the Gospel.
I hope that clarifies. There are those who believe that the New Birth is not an 'all-at-once' operation, but something that happens in stages. The idea is as follows:
Everyone who is predestined is effectually called by God at some time in their lives. A large congregation may listen to a gospel sermon, but perhaps just one or two are affected by it; or someone may hear a portion of scripture, or perhaps just look at the beauty of nature and it sets him on a train of thought which will eventually lead him to Christ. This is the effectual call (1). It is the first movement of God upon the unconverted Spirit and as such it is entirely sovereign and monergistic. The subject, the unconverted person has no part in it. It may be thought of as the moment of conception of the New Birth, the implantation of spiritual life. It may lead to someone attending church for the first time or buying a Bible.
This call leads to awakening or quickening, when men and women begin to think seriously about the things of God for the first time. Conviction is a further step along the road, when awakened souls come to see themselves as sinners under the just condemnation of God. Now conviction is not just having a bad conscience or a sense of shame- many unsaved people have that. Those who are truly convicted by the Holy Spirit see their sin as God sees it- in all its vileness and wickedness in rebellion against the Creator, and they come to understand the justice of God in sending sinners to hell.
Then, finally, they come to understand from the word of God (whether preached or read) that Jesus Christ has done everything necessary to reconcile them to God and is standing ready to receive them. They repent and believe, whereupon God justifies them (that is, He judicially declares them righteous since Christ has paid the penalty for their sin upon the cross) and glorifies them by seating them with Christ in the heavenly places (Eph. 2:9; Col. 3:3).
I used to be a big fan of this idea, but I'm not quite so sure now.
Old Reg. Born and Raised
New Member
You leave out a very important piece of the concept of “belief” and that important piece of belief is “evidence”. Many naysayers would certainly laugh me to scorn by saying, what evidence do you have to prove God or Jesus is real? While I may have not seen an actual miracle take place in front of my own eyes, those blessed saints of old did and were willing to die for their testimony of such facts just as their leader, Jesus Christ willingly went to the cross himself to die.
There is no such testimony to the existence of Leprechauns…no one, much less many, have been willing to die based on their belief leprechauns exist.
It is that evidentiary information, along with the witness of the Holy Spirit to this truth that brings about that belief to salvation. However, once you become saved, you have your own evidence to go on as far as how your life is changed even if you don’t experience another miracle after that in your life, you still have your own salvation testimony and the change it made in your life as your own evidence.
Old Reg. Born and Raised
New Member
Absolutely! It only takes belief to receive forgiveness of your sins. Just as the paralytic in
Wrong! You couldn’t save yourself if you tried! You Christ’s by the Father’s election alone! Were it not for the Holy Spirit drawing and sealing you until the day of redemption, you would be utterly and hopelessly lost!
Anthony Pritchard
Well-Known Member
Brother, I understand the feeling. You say you’ve been through this many times; I’ve been having these discussions for over forty years now, and I too often find myself saying, “Well, once more won’t hurt.” After this long, I've learned to take these conversations with a kind of patient resignation, not because the truth changes, but because the same misunderstandings keep resurfacing.
I agree that God’s sovereignty does not bypass the human will. My point is simply that the Calvinist structure you are defending does more than influence the will; it guarantees the response of the will. And if a response is guaranteed, then the cause of that response lies in the guaranteeing act, not in the human will.
You cite John 6:37: “All that the Father gives Me will come to Me.”
The text says those given by the Father will come. I agree with that certainty. But certainty in Scripture does not automatically tell us the mechanism behind the certainty. Calvinism assumes the mechanism is determinative causation, that God changes the will so that coming is inevitable. My point is simply that the text itself does not state that mechanism. It states the outcome, not the internal cause.
That is the point I am making.
Acts 16:14 fits the same pattern. Lydia’s heart was opened to heed. The opening produced the ability, not the willingness. In Calvinism, the opening of the heart creates willingness and therefore causes belief. In the Scriptural pattern, the opening of the heart enables willingness, but the willingness itself is the human response to God’s gracious work.
You call this a paradox, but Scripture presents it as a sequence:
God acts upon the heart.
The heart is enabled, not compelled.
The person responds either by receiving or rejecting.
My concern is simply that Scripture also presents genuine human agency: God convicts, enlightens, and draws, and man responds either by receiving or rejecting the free gift. In that structure, God’s action enables belief, but does not guarantee it. The response remains truly human.
I am not accusing all Calvinists of being personal fatalists. My concern is with the doctrinal structure itself, which, by its own logic, is a form of fatalistic determinism. If God’s act guarantees the response of the will, then God’s act is the cause of that response. That is determinism in the theological sense.
I also want to note that the discussion is not confined to Calvinism on one side and Arminianism on the other. Those are two theological systems, but they are not the only possible readings of the biblical text. Many believers through history, including large portions of the early church, the Anabaptists, and many Baptists, have held neither system. So when I speak of determinism, I am not placing myself in the Arminian camp; I am simply describing the logical consequence of a particular doctrinal structure. The faith once delivered is not limited to those two labels.
This is the distinction I am trying to maintain.
Enablement preserves agency; determinative causation does not.
[Eph 2:1 KJV] 1 And you [hath he quickened], who were dead in trespasses and sins;
God does the quickening! To God be the Glory!
To me, this is as clear as it can be. A spiritually dead person is DEAD and can only respond to God if God awakens him.
Ascetic X
Well-Known Member
Calvinism is false. Total depravity is debunked by scripture.
Unsaved Gentiles without the law, still responded to what was contained in the law.
Romans 2
14 For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves:
15 Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another
16 In the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ according to my gospel.
These are gentiles in Romans 2 who have not the law, and have not repented, but by nature, not by Spirit, do what is in the law.
Romans 2
3 And thinkest thou this, O man, that judgest them which do such things, and doest the same, that thou shalt escape the judgment of God?
4 Or despisest thou the riches of his goodness and forbearance and longsuffering; not knowing that the goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance?