Just because OR says it doesn't mean it's the common belief of Calvinists.
No reformed belief says that man is born again against his will or in spite of his will.
I don't know where universalism comes in - because that's certainly not what the reformed belief is.
Let's look at some other quotes from those who stand on the doctrine of grace:
In reading these, I like the terms that they're using to better describe what happens.
The Holy Spirit "quickens" man and "enlightens" him - man responds in the way that he will respond to the Gospel by putting his faith in Christ - and he is "born" at that point.
It all happens so closely together that it seems to be one movement but it is, in fact, separate.
Acts 7:51 Ye stiffnecked and uncircumcised in heart and ears, ye do always resist the Holy Ghost: as your fathers did, so do ye.
People who are unregenerate always resist the Spirit (Or people without the Spirit or people who are in flesh alone). I dont think this is talking about the irresistable work of God's Spirit. I think this is talking about sinners who always reject God as He stands there with His arms open wide for people to repent, and they dont.
This was not said to me but it's one reason Calvinism seems to defeat itself by its followers - those who support it tell those who disagree that they are against the bible or the "doctrines of God's Sovereign Grace," or something like that. Isee this here all the time - all the time!
Allan is the only one who responded to my post #46.
Here it is again.
Don't the verses you quote show that belief precedes eternal life? I don't see how they are supporting the view that life precedes belief. one believes and one has eternal life.
Well? Any Calvinist here care to defend Kyredneck or respond?
Yes, being born again comes after being indwelt by the Holy Spirit.
However, there is a "quickening" where we have our natures changed from dead to being alive to respond to Christ - and we do.
A dead man cannot respond.
Think of Lazarus - he was dead and there was nothing he could do to become alive again.
But God made him alive again to hear Christ's voice - and he responded.
He didn't lay in the grave saying "Nah - I'll stay here".
So the reformed position is that God quickens the spirit of man to make him be ABLE to respond to Him and man will then respond in faith.
So man still makes the choice and puts his faith in Christ but it is not until the Word of God opens his eyes and stirs his heart to be able to respond.
The Arminian side says that man is able to respond to God in his natural human state but I just do not see that ability in Scripture.
If man is dead, how can he respond to God?
Ann, you are always nice and I like you. You are the nicest Calvinist on the BB, imo. :wavey:
I've heard this example of Lazarus before, but the story of Lazarus was not about salvation but about the power Jesus had to raise the dead. It should not be used as an allegory of salvation. That is just not good hermeneutics.
I don't see scriptural support, however, for the "quickening." It's just not there. The way God saves is hidden from us, as far as I'm concerned. He tells us we are elect and chosen and He tells us to believe. Salvation is a mystery that we cannot dissect.
Being spiritually dead means being separated from God, and unreconciled to Him, not unable to respond.
No they don't. If they did, then you or anyone else on this world would not be saved. The reason people are saved is that they yield themselves to the Holy Spirit. Consider the work of the Holy Spirit:
John 16:8-11
And when he is come, he will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment:
9 Of sin, because they believe not on me;
10 Of righteousness, because I go to my Father, and ye see me no more; 11 Of judgment, because the prince of this world is judged.
The Holy Spirits convicts the unregenerate of sin. If He didn't, they wouldn't be saved. Of sin because they believe not on me. This is specifically speaking of the unregenerate.
He was speaking of the Jews--God's chosen people in Acts chapter 7. He was referring to their fathers in the past--the Israelites. Stephen himself was an Israelite.
As on the Day of Pentecost, they had a choice to make. They were convicted of the Holy Spirit. They could either reject the Holy Spirit or receive Him. On the Day of Pentecost out of the thousands that were there, there were 3,000 that received Him, and thousands of others that resisted him. Why the difference? There was free will among the unregenerate. Some resisted and some did not.
No Marcia, it's people like you who are not only
'mean', but downright deceptive in your persistent insidious implications that all monergists are really just followers of Calvin.
One needs only to do a very brief scan of Winman's posts to realize his whole intent on this site is to bash the monergists and label them all as Calvinists, which really I take pride in the label, but for those newbies outside looking in, they could easily get the wrong impression towards us. Yeah, it is a shameful, deceitful tactic that you believers in 'Man's Sovereign Will' use quite often.
Is there a formula to follow to aquire eternal life? Yes, the bible states whosoever believes 'shall have' eternal or everlasting life.
What is eternal or everlasting life? “And this is eternal life, that they know you the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent.".
Eternal life = having a relationship with God, and His Christ, Jesus.
If one does not have a relationship with both God and His Son, Jesus, then according to scripture he does not have eternal life.
From all the PB's I have debated with and those on this board that I have specifically spoken with (as well as the materials I have read from them), believe the elect is composed up of those of faith as well as others that will never have/place faith in Christ. These 'others' consist of unbelievers, believers in other gods, atheists or haters of God, but after they die they will find out they are God's elect ones and are already saved.
They all state the same thing you seemingly did back in post #63.. there is no 'formula' in order for man to obtain eternal life.
For the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles because of you, even as it is written. Ro 2:24
I am convinced that when all this is said and done and over with it will be clearly seen that the Gentiles have done absolutely no better with the tenets of the second covenant than the Jews did with the first. Just as described in Ezek 34, 'the church' has virtually driven many of the sheep away and they want nothing to do with it.