Featured Monergism vs. Synergism

Adam did not need a saviour until AFTER he sinned, Jesus came to save us from our SINS, not our nature.

Mat 1:21 And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins.

The point is, people just assume doctrine like Original Sin is true, and do not actually look at the words of scripture. Jesus himself said the prodigal son was alive AGAIN, if we are born dead in sin then no man could ever be said to be alive again.

As you said earlier, Jesus came to reconcile us to God. You have to have had a previous relationship with God to be reconciled to him.

Peter said we are now RETURNED to the Bishop and Shepherd of our souls. You cannot return someplace you have never been.

Words have meaning, many folks seem oblivious to the words of scripture.

 

This post is just plain pitiful. You should be ashamed of your self for being so hateful of those who give you truth.
MB

 

So did Adam transgress the Commandment of God or not? I believe Scripture tells us he did, unless you want to throw out Adam and Eve and Genesis. But that creates a problem because Jesus commended the marriage of the first couple!

 

What is this, a joke? Is this the best you can do?

 

Debusey ( I think)

BTW, Skan responded much more elegantly then I ever could on describing the differences we have regarding "total inability". I can only wish I were so theologically articulate.

Hope you and the family are doing well this Christmas Season.

Blessings

 

It would be Debussy, as in Claude Debussy.

And, one big "thumbs-up" for the NY Philharmonic. One of my trumpet teachers was the principal trumpet player there. I follow that orchestra like a baseball team.

As far as composers go...let me say a good healthy dose of the British composer Ralph Vaughan Williams is never a bad thing (his first name is pronounced "Raif"). The London Symphony Orchestra has many fine recordings of his symphonies and other works--highly recommended.

Blessings,

The Archangel

 

Some more general eisegesis my Mr. humble...

 

Faith is not the object of the gift in this passage. In Romans 3:24 we see that the gift is grace and faith is not listed as part of the gift. Romans 5:15 is as well. No passage in scripture shows the gift as being faith but always grace.

 

Calvinists are so messed up, they even have themselves confused. Faith is not a work, faith is always contrasted to works in scripture, faith is the opposite of work, it is a rest.

If someone tells me something and I believe them, how is that a work? What work? God promised Abraham he would be the father of many nations and Abraham believed it. How is that a work, what action did he perform?

If God gave you faith it would defeat the whole point of giving a promise. God gives a promise, if we believe he delivers on that promise. It is God proving himself to us, we do nothing but sit back and watch God deliver.

Psa 24:14 Wait on the LORD: be of good courage, and he shall strengthen thine heart: wait, I say, on the LORD.

The problem with Calvinism is that it has corrupted the word of God and the definitions of words in scripture. Faith is not a work, but there are works that show faith.

Say you are in a theater and someone shouts "Fire!". It is easy to know who believed, they will run for the exits. Running to the exit is a work, but faith existed in the mind first, and this faith prompted the person to run for the exit, but faith itself is not a work, it is simply believing someone else.

The scriptures say "For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved". This is a promise from God, you either believe it or you do not. If you believe it you will call on Jesus to save you. Yes, calling is a work, but faith existed in the mind and heart first, if you did not believe you would not call to Jesus.

Calvinism is foolish. God said if you call on Jesus to save you that he will. You can call it a work all you want, I called on Jesus to save me and I am saved.

 

By that definition, then even Calvinists must affirm we are saved by Grace through works, because don't you affirm that man must believe before being saved? Granted, that faith may flow effectually from a regenerated heart, it is still 'anything' that man must do.

True, apart from the powerful work of the Holy Spirit we wouldn't be enabled or willing, but the Holy Spirit by the means of the powerful Gospel appeal enables us by (1) informing us of our need and His solution and (2) appealing for us to respond to his provision of reconciliation. Since we are held responsible for that response to his appeal there is no reason to presume we are not enabled a response.

 

I like that. Good stuff!

 

So that 'exercise' is not consider 'a-n-y-t-h-i-n-g?' Forgive me, but the word 'exercise' sounds like a lot more WORK than even believing does.

I'm trying to get you to admit that faith isn't a work because it doesn't merit anything. A WORK as in 'works based salvation' is in reference to a 'meritorious work,' not a response that God credits as righteousness because of His Grace.

Yet the bible says the gospel is the power of God unto salvation and that we are born again through his word.

So you think one must be given life in order to believe, yet scripture clearly teaches that life comes through faith.

 

Faith is the same for both of us. We both believe God's divine aid is needed for us to have it. We both believe its a gifted ability..i.e. must be enabled. We simply disagree as to the irresistibly of the means God grants this ability. Must a gift be irresistibly applied for the giver to get full credit for giving it?

I praise God for some "PERCEIVED" Calvinistic inconsistencies too, so I understand.

 

This is my position and understanding of Ephesians 2:1-10.

 

It is a simple question; just answer it.