I like this analogy as well! The patient is convinced by another that his heart is bad and made the decision to have his heart fixed, then it is out of his hands and the surgeon must do all the work. As does God in giving those who desire a new heart! good stuff!
You are
comparing modern slavery to biblical slavery. Biblical slavery was completely the choice of the slave. It was modern day bankruptcy. The slave to sin analogies MUST be kept in propert perspective and context.
In your twist, the patient could be 14 konths old, unable to comprehend the gravity of the situation,
unable to rationalize the need, unable to request, and utterly helpless.
I guess in that case, doctor would act upon the request of the parents
Are you advocating the possibility that a parent might say a prayer to save their child from hell? That God would then regenerate the child based on the parents prayer?
Ah, now you shift to a child who has no ability to make a choice. So then, you must believe all babies which die go to heaven, but if they mature to some majical age of accountability, then they could be lost.
If our nature was changed then it only seems reasonable we would no longer sin because, we would not be willing to sin. God does not change the nature of man. We all still have that same old nature and when we sin we prove this to be true.
MB
I see no difference between Hyper Calvinism and just plain old Calvinism. There is no responsibility in Calvinism. Indeed there can be none because God made you the way you are. You have no choice. Freewill or the ability to choose the Light does not exist in spite of what the Word of God has to say. After all you would not sin if God hadn't planned for it to happen just the way it does. It's ridiculous to say Calvinist call it human responsibility. They have none. It's all God's fault according to Calvinism.
MB
:thumbsup: Yes, that is a difficulty that plagues many.
It is not limited to non-Calvinists.
Many can simply not understand the other’s position enough to engage opposing doctrines.
Some cannot help but view Calvinism as making it all God’s fault.
Others cannot help but view non-Calvinists as making salvation all man’s glory.
It is refreshing to see someone actually acknowledge that they do not understand the doctrine at hand (in this case,
Calvinism) and back it up by stating their misunderstanding. At least that's a start.
Do you understand that Calvinists believe that the New Birth/Regeneration PRECEEDS repentance and faith (John Chapter 3- as it relates to the Spirit doing as He wills?) and that faith and repentance are gifts of God (Eph. 2:8-10 and II Tim 2:25)?
Calvinists believe that man is at God's mercy which means that until God does something (READ HERE: regenerate or change out hearts) that man can do nothing?
That is the major difference in Calvinists and Non Calvinists.
It is called the ordo salutis or order of salvation
Calvinists DO believe that God has commanded us to repent and believe, but that we do not have the ability to do so in our own power (it requires an act of God's mercy or Regeneration by the Holy Spirit.
Remember that he also commands us to keep the 10 Commandments and that we do not have the power/ability to do that as well).
You say it's my misunderstanding although I believe the same is true of you. So sure you and your fellow Calvinist to have all truth.
The only thing that saves you is that you might believe in the life ,death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ. It isn't your make believe election of you as a Gentile. You are save by believing in Jesus Christ alone...
Act 16:31
And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus, and thou shalt be saved, thou and thy house.
Interesting that the Apostles told them to do something a Calvinist says cannot be done. The Calvinistic answer should have been "you can do nothing! If you believe then you were chosen by God to believe".
You have misunderstood me.
I was not speaking of your theological view as being in error but your understanding of Calvinism (based on your comments on this thread).
For example, while I disagree with Calvinism (I'm not a TULIP kinda guy), I understand their position and I see the logic in their conclusions.
What you present as Calvinism is what you see as “logical conclusions,” yet while they may be logical they are not the only conclusions to be made.
In other words, you cannot see the logic or biblical basis of their conclusions regardless of your opinion or viewpoint.
Your comments betray a lack of understanding regarding Calvinism.
(This is, BTW, evidenced by the comment "you and your fellow Calvinists").
Man isn't free in the least, while in their fallen state. They are bound in sin, enslaved by, and to, sin. There is no other freedom than that which Christ brings(John 8:36).
Jesus stated in John 6 that no man could come unto Him except His Father draws them(John 6:44). The word "except' shows there's a stipulation involved, that being, being drawn. If sinners were truly free as most on here purport, then they wouldn't need to be drawn. Jesus even went further and said that all My Father has given Him, will come, and whosoever comes to Him, He would in no wise cast them out(John 6:37).
That is why regeneration in the ordo salutis is so important to understand. Man, in his fallen state, is dead in trespasses and sins(Ephesians 2:1). He isn't like a corpse dead, but seperated from God via sin. He is at enmity with God(Romans 8:7). He is dead to righteousness, seeing his righteousness is as filthy rags(Isaiah 64:6). It's like the story of Lazarus in the tomb in John 11. Jesus had to call him before he could ever come forth. Here was a literal example of a Spiritual truth. We were dead in trespasses and sins, and in a spiritual tomb, just as Lazarus was in his natural tomb. Jesus called him by name, and he heard. He came forth by Jesus calling out from among the dead. That is the way salvation works. They, the sinners, are dead. Jesus calls them, gives them life to come forth, and they come forth. This is what is called the effectual calling.