Pelagius' teachings are the Kool-Aid Supporting Free-Willer Theology
- Thread starter UnitedWithChrist
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
L
The problem with "free will" theology is that it leaves so many in doubt. They question their sincerity because they believe that they made a decision for Christ. The number of people who get rebaptized because they were baptized at 10 or 12 and then later in life doubt as to whether they could be sincere in such a decision. So I find myself trying to convince people that live the Lord that they are fine because they believe and are baptized. And they still doubt because they believe that it was a decision they made, and it's nearly impossible to dissuade them and to be confident. And who wouldn't doubt their own sincerity, if they are honest?
I did this myself and had to learn latter that I was in error because it wasn't my decision. I didn't decide to believe it was revelation from God that caused me to believe, and conviction of his Holy Spirit that causes me to repent and the work of Jesus that saves me and gives me his righteousness.
I did this myself and had to learn latter that I was in error because it wasn't my decision. I didn't decide to believe it was revelation from God that caused me to believe, and conviction of his Holy Spirit that causes me to repent and the work of Jesus that saves me and gives me his righteousness.
-
1
- Show all
You need to think on it.
Example: I once had a friend who was beautiful by any standard, but she was not persuaded, she believed she was ugly.
Being persuaded of a truth is passive, not volitional.
Even when she stated she believed, she was not really persuaded and ended up with anorexia.
Example: I once had a friend who was beautiful by any standard, but she was not persuaded, she believed she was ugly.
Being persuaded of a truth is passive, not volitional.
Even when she stated she believed, she was not really persuaded and ended up with anorexia.
-
1
- Show all
Yeah, I understand the reference to that term. And I agree that it is a suitable label but I don't think that the normal person would understand the reference to it.
There are two books on my shelf about this (which are highly recommended by others), but I've yet to read them:
Charles Grandison Finney, Keith Hardman
Revival and Revivalism, Iaian H. Murray
The one I have read, which I would recommend, is
The Gospel and Charles Finney: The Tragic Pastoral Results of Bad Theology, John Gillespie
https://smile.amazon.com/Gospel-Cha...eywords=charles+finney&qid=1571077816&sr=8-17
I totally agree with you that this term of revivalism would apply, but those who are promoting similar theology on this site are calling themselves free-willers or they are making constant reference to free will in that context.
And, I have seen those with similar theology using free-willer as a label.
In the past I would have simply said "Arminian" but whether I like it or not, an Arminian is a pretty mild free-willer in comparison to what I'm seeing lately, especially on this site.
There are two books on my shelf about this (which are highly recommended by others), but I've yet to read them:
Charles Grandison Finney, Keith Hardman
Revival and Revivalism, Iaian H. Murray
The one I have read, which I would recommend, is
The Gospel and Charles Finney: The Tragic Pastoral Results of Bad Theology, John Gillespie
https://smile.amazon.com/Gospel-Cha...eywords=charles+finney&qid=1571077816&sr=8-17
I totally agree with you that this term of revivalism would apply, but those who are promoting similar theology on this site are calling themselves free-willers or they are making constant reference to free will in that context.
And, I have seen those with similar theology using free-willer as a label.
In the past I would have simply said "Arminian" but whether I like it or not, an Arminian is a pretty mild free-willer in comparison to what I'm seeing lately, especially on this site.
-
1
- Show all
Specifically, I'm talking about those who believe in decisional regeneration..that your faith and repentance causes God to create a regenerate heart, rather than faith and repentance issuing forth from a regenerate heart that God has already created.
In other words, if someone believes that a stony heart can somehow squeeze out faith and repentance in order to receive a heart of flesh, this person would be a free willer. If someone believes that God gives the person a heart of flesh, and faith and repentance issue forth from this heart of flesh, this person would not be a free-willer.
In other words, if someone believes that a stony heart can somehow squeeze out faith and repentance in order to receive a heart of flesh, this person would be a free willer. If someone believes that God gives the person a heart of flesh, and faith and repentance issue forth from this heart of flesh, this person would not be a free-willer.
-
1
- Show all
See also,
Acts 17:3-4 -
"2 As was his custom, Paul went into the synagogue, and on three Sabbaths he reasoned with them from the Scriptures, 3 explaining and proving that the Christ had to suffer and rise from the dead. “This Jesus I am proclaiming to you is the Christ,” he declared. 4 Some of the Jews were persuaded [G3982 - epeisthēsan (kjv has "believed")] and joined Paul and Silas, along with a large number of God-fearing Greeks and quite a few leading women."
Acts 17:3-4 -
"2 As was his custom, Paul went into the synagogue, and on three Sabbaths he reasoned with them from the Scriptures, 3 explaining and proving that the Christ had to suffer and rise from the dead. “This Jesus I am proclaiming to you is the Christ,” he declared. 4 Some of the Jews were persuaded [G3982 - epeisthēsan (kjv has "believed")] and joined Paul and Silas, along with a large number of God-fearing Greeks and quite a few leading women."
-
1
- Show all
7
report it
it is one thing to create an op about what you believe but this op is not trying to discuss anything
his insults and demeaning posts are not indicative of a person who wants discussion
what he wants, is to do what he is doing
bascially, he is flaming everyone who does not agree with him and it needs to stop IMO and obviously so do you and I am sure others
-
1
- Show all
U
Sad you do not understand faith and belief, but have defined it contrary to scripture and concept within that culture.
And yes of course "total and complete inability" to believe, can't have one without the other.
I just wonder why Jesus didn't just state you can't believe under any circumstances so I will believe for you?
And yes of course "total and complete inability" to believe, can't have one without the other.
I just wonder why Jesus didn't just state you can't believe under any circumstances so I will believe for you?
-
1
- Show all
L
You don't understand what I've said.
God regenerates the person, giving them a heart of flesh, from which faith and repentance flows from the person.
Therefore, the person can claim nothing as his own contribution to salvation.
Instead, you believe somehow a man with a stony heart manages to squeeze out faith and repentance. Then, he receives a heart of flesh.
Therefore, the person can claim, in essence, he contributed to his own salvation, even if he graciously concedes he only contributes, say, 1% and God contributes 99%.
That is what free-willer theology teaches, and it is called decisional regeneration.
God regenerates the person, giving them a heart of flesh, from which faith and repentance flows from the person.
Therefore, the person can claim nothing as his own contribution to salvation.
Instead, you believe somehow a man with a stony heart manages to squeeze out faith and repentance. Then, he receives a heart of flesh.
Therefore, the person can claim, in essence, he contributed to his own salvation, even if he graciously concedes he only contributes, say, 1% and God contributes 99%.
That is what free-willer theology teaches, and it is called decisional regeneration.