Paul said, "19 Though I am free and belong to no man, I make myself a slave to everyone, to win as many as possible. 20 To the Jews I became like a Jew, to win the Jews. To those under the law I became like one under the law (though I myself am not under the law), so as to win those under the law. 21 To those not having the law I became like one not having the law (though I am not free from God's law but am under Christ's law), so as to win those not having the law. 22 To the weak I became weak, to win the weak. I have become all things to all men so that by all possible means I might save some. 23 I do all this for the sake of the gospel, that I may share in its blessings." -1 Cor. 9
Question: If Paul believed that the only MEANS that actually saves is the "effectual call" of God, why would he make this statement? What would his becoming a slave, a Jew, or weak accomplish in saving some if indeed the effectual work of regeneration is all that is needed? Couldn't Paul be whoever he wanted to be and just proclaim the truth and let the chips fall where they may?
What does his "becoming all things to all men" accomplish?
By ALL means!
Discussion in 'Baptist Theology & Bible Study' started by Skandelon, May 23, 2011.
Page 1 of 2
-
God has elected out His own peoples, but uses the Gospel and other means to allow them the ability to place personal faith in messiah, and thus prove their election and calling is from God?
Why this either/or emphasis? -
-
God election is placed upon those who He actively "works" on to allow them to have their will bent now towards things of God, and he has chosen to work also thru the agaentas such as Gospel/circumstances/signs/wonders etc...
You and I would probably place same value on those 'external " works/things, its just that while you say your will allows you to resist and refuse to get saved, mine is that because God actively/specific way is 'working" in/on you, you will believe and receive Christ! -
-
the Gospel will "sound good" to an elected out person, but God still will have that person exercise their faith in what they heard to confirm their election is true! -
-
-
-
Jesus died in my place, all my Sins were placed upon Him
I place my faith in Him, receiving His grace and forgiveness, His gift of Eternal life
"confess witrh my mouth Jesus is Lord and believe in my heart that God raised Him from the dead"
Basically, realise I cannot save myself, and entrust myself to the One who died and paid my sin debt in full -
-
-
Calvinists explain that the gospel's purpose is to inform and call out the elect to faith, but what is the purpose of these other means if indeed the "effectual call" (regeneration) is all that can accomplish the changing of one's will? -
God grants you "ears to hear""heart able to respond" so that you can now receive the good news of the Cross, and believe ans receive your gift of eternal life in Christ.
the work of God in your life by the "quickening" is to allow you the means to actually receive the mew life in Christ... Still use personal faith in Jesus to get regenerated/saved, its just until tht "effectual call" you will keep on hearing and rejecting the Gospel of Christ... -
-
-
-
Martin Marprelate Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
We are also to take into account the situation of our hearers. When Paul was preaching to the Jews and 'Godfearers' in the synagogue, he quoted extensively from the OT (Acts 13:16ff), but that was wasted on those who didn't know the Scriptures, so to them he preached another way (Acts 14:15-18; 17:22ff). To the proud, he gave warning (Acts 13:40-41; 28:25ff) and to the weak and convicted he gave hope (Acts 16:31). But none of this worked for Paul (Acts 18:32) or will work for us unless Almighty God opens the heart of those who hear (John 6:44; Acts 13:48; 16:14; 2Cor 5:6 etc.).
It is exactly the same in sanctification. We are to work out our salvation with fear and trembling, not although, but actually because God is working in us to will and to do of His good pleasure (Phil 2:12-13). Why do we need to do it when God is doing it for us? Because it pleases God.
Steve -
Spoken like a true Calminian!
...or one that holds to a hybrid system half-way between Calvinism and Arminianism.
Calminian Baptists
http://dannychisholm.blogspot.com/2007/10/calminian-baptists.html
(don't worry JF, you're not alone, I suspect you stand with the majority of Baptists today)
Excerpts from the above article:
“God is sovereign, and is Lord over all creation. Human beings also have free will and can decide to accept or reject the gospel. Yes, we are all sinners in need of a Saviour but are not predestined to salvation in the sense that we have no choice in the matter. The "logical" conclusion is that God predestines some to heaven while others to hell. This "double-edged" predestination is what I find particularly dangerous. I cannot imagine a loving God allowing persons to come into the world only to condemn them to hell. This is a difficult axiom to accept and is inconsistant with a loving God. God's sovereignty must be affirmed along with the freedom of humans to determine their own response to the gospel. This paradox is not logical, but it is biblical.”
“There is a paradox when dealing with God's sovereignty and Human freedom of choice. I affirm both to be true, yet there is a mystery involved when trying to reconcile them. I am choosing to live with the tension and trust God with the results.”
Here's the connection between 'Fullerism' and 'Calminianism':
http://www.voxdeibaptist.org/baptist_heritage_andrew.htm
Perhaps Fuller’s greatest contribution to Christianity was to free us from the shackles of philosophical theology. Because many could not see any consistency between God’s sovereignty and man’s responsibility they rejected one or the other. Fuller on the other hand, concluded that any lack of logic in such thinking was due to his own lacking, not God’s.
"The truth is, there are but two ways for us to take: one is to reject them both, and the Bible with them, on account of its inconsistencies; the other is to embrace them both, concluding that, as they are both revealed in Scriptures, they are both true and both consistent, and that is owing to the darkness of our understandings, that they do not appear so to us."
But, it does seem that Fuller was more Calvinistic than you are JF (from the same article):
".... Fuller also reminded fellow Baptists and all Christians that regeneration precedes faith not vice-a-versa.
"Man’s response to the invitation to repent and to come to Christ is not simply a wise human decision, a balancing of the arguments for and against, and thinking that those for are more cogent. The decision is itself a work of grace." -
Earth Wind and Fire Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
Page 1 of 2