Is irresistible grace (effectual calling) a biblical doctrine?
- 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.
Concerning pride, it is you, who is unwilling to acknowledge that God is the author and finisher of your salvation, that struggles with pride. It is a common affliction of free-willers, because the focus is on their decision, rather than the work of God in regeneration.
God ordains both the means (sanctification) and the end (salvation).
Salvation is being united with Christ. This union produces spiritual fruit, and culminates in vindication at the resurrection.
You are very confused about salvation, apparently, if you don't know that.
Salvation has an "already" aspect, along with a "not yet" aspect.
The problem with many free-willer groups is that they consider justification to be the end, rather than being conformed to the image of Christ.
God ordains both the means (sanctification) and the end (salvation).
Salvation is being united with Christ. This union produces spiritual fruit, and culminates in vindication at the resurrection.
You are very confused about salvation, apparently, if you don't know that.
Salvation has an "already" aspect, along with a "not yet" aspect.
The problem with many free-willer groups is that they consider justification to be the end, rather than being conformed to the image of Christ.
-
1
- Show all
No, election was from before the creation of the world, not before. Election is God choosing(I know you loathe God having the audacity of choosing over man choosing) those who He gave to the Lamb, who lived, died, rose again for.
Man left to himself will never choose God, never seek Him. You can’t can’t get that biblical truth, but trump it with man choosing. Unless God changes a person’s will by giving Him the new birth, he/she would never choose Him.
Man left to himself will never choose God, never seek Him. You can’t can’t get that biblical truth, but trump it with man choosing. Unless God changes a person’s will by giving Him the new birth, he/she would never choose Him.
-
1
- Show all
Are you assuming the posture of a teacher?
I'm not interesting in being your disciple.
Exegete 1 Cor 1:26 ff for me.
How does God choose weak things, to demonstrate his glory, so there is no boasting, if free willers claim that God chooses NO ONE?
I'm not interesting in being your disciple.
Exegete 1 Cor 1:26 ff for me.
How does God choose weak things, to demonstrate his glory, so there is no boasting, if free willers claim that God chooses NO ONE?
Does 1 Cor 1:26 teach election as Calvinists claim? No.
1 Cor 1:26 For ye see your calling, brethren, how that not many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called:
27 But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty;
28 And base things of the world, and things which are despised, hath God chosen, yea, and things which are not, to bring to nought things that are:
29 That no flesh should glory in his presence.
30 But of him are ye in Christ Jesus, who of God is made unto us wisdom, and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption:
31 That, according as it is written, He that glorieth, let him glory in the Lord.
Calling in the verse is an invitation not a position. Many were bidden to the marriage feast but were too good to attend. God bids men come and not by royal decree but through humble men of lowly estate.
I do not know how man could boast beyonf what Christ has done for them.
For the cause of Christ
Roger
If your position were true man could not be responsible for his sin. God predetermined to create some to eternal life and others to eternal condemnation. God created all that He created good. Man because Adam was permitted to choose sin in the garden is now required to choose between sin and righteousness. God is not glorified if man has no choice. God did not create man to be a robot any more than He created man to serve sin.
Your doctrine leave much wanting and negates the love of God.
For the cause of Christ
Roger
Your doctrine leave much wanting and negates the love of God.
For the cause of Christ
Roger
Notice how you focused on "calling" versus "God hath chosen".
I guess your free-willer lenses blinded you from this lol.
And, v. 30 is plainly talking about salvation terms.
By the way, I understood predestination and election prior to salvation, simply from reading the Bible. I belonged to a free-willer cult at the time I became a believer, and was informed by the minister of the cult that God didn't know the future, and predestination was a false teaching.
Therefore, your claim breaks down. I learned about Reformed theology much later, and it made total sense given my own conversion experience. God simply regenerated me and this enabled faith and repentance. I know it's true
We are humble in the sense that we know that God caused our salvation, and we did not cause it ourselves. There is a tendency toward pride in ALL MEN, whether Reformed or not.
But, the cause of pride in Reformed people is not because we think we brought ourselves into salvation, because we know we did not. We know we did nothing to merit our salvation whatsoever.
And, we know that all is to the glory of God. That is why we strongly affirm Soli Deo Gloria, which is something you rarely hear from the lips of free-willers.
I guess your free-willer lenses blinded you from this lol.
And, v. 30 is plainly talking about salvation terms.
By the way, I understood predestination and election prior to salvation, simply from reading the Bible. I belonged to a free-willer cult at the time I became a believer, and was informed by the minister of the cult that God didn't know the future, and predestination was a false teaching.
Therefore, your claim breaks down. I learned about Reformed theology much later, and it made total sense given my own conversion experience. God simply regenerated me and this enabled faith and repentance. I know it's true
We are humble in the sense that we know that God caused our salvation, and we did not cause it ourselves. There is a tendency toward pride in ALL MEN, whether Reformed or not.
But, the cause of pride in Reformed people is not because we think we brought ourselves into salvation, because we know we did not. We know we did nothing to merit our salvation whatsoever.
And, we know that all is to the glory of God. That is why we strongly affirm Soli Deo Gloria, which is something you rarely hear from the lips of free-willers.
-
1
- Show all
Notice how you focused on "calling" versus "God hath chosen".
I guess your free-willer lenses blinded you from this lol.
And, v. 30 is plainly talking about salvation terms.
By the way, I understood predestination and election prior to salvation, simply from reading the Bible. I belonged to a free-willer cult at the time I became a believer, and was informed by the minister of the cult that God didn't know the future, and predestination was a false teaching.
Therefore, your claim breaks down. I learned about Reformed theology much later, and it made total sense given my own conversion experience. God simply regenerated me and this enabled faith and repentance. I know it's true
We are humble in the sense that we know that God caused our salvation, and we did not cause it ourselves. There is a tendency toward pride in ALL MEN, whether Reformed or not.
But, the cause of pride in Reformed people is not because we think we brought ourselves into salvation, because we know we did not. We know we did nothing to merit our salvation whatsoever.
And, we know that all is to the glory of God. That is why we strongly affirm Soli Deo Gloria, which is something you rarely hear from the lips of free-willers.
I guess your free-willer lenses blinded you from this lol.
And, v. 30 is plainly talking about salvation terms.
By the way, I understood predestination and election prior to salvation, simply from reading the Bible. I belonged to a free-willer cult at the time I became a believer, and was informed by the minister of the cult that God didn't know the future, and predestination was a false teaching.
Therefore, your claim breaks down. I learned about Reformed theology much later, and it made total sense given my own conversion experience. God simply regenerated me and this enabled faith and repentance. I know it's true
We are humble in the sense that we know that God caused our salvation, and we did not cause it ourselves. There is a tendency toward pride in ALL MEN, whether Reformed or not.
But, the cause of pride in Reformed people is not because we think we brought ourselves into salvation, because we know we did not. We know we did nothing to merit our salvation whatsoever.
And, we know that all is to the glory of God. That is why we strongly affirm Soli Deo Gloria, which is something you rarely hear from the lips of free-willers.
For the cause of Christ
Roger
Your claims are using human logic.
You are claiming that man cannot be held responsible for his sin if predestination is true.
This is the same claim that Paul addresses in Romans 9:19.
The answer is, who are you, o man?
What right do humans have to define the acceptable parameters of God's behavior with regards to salvation?
The answer is, none.
He can do what he wants.
He is Creator.
If he chose some to save in the Ark, and others to perish, who can say anything about it? No one.
if he chose to destroy whole families for the sin of one man in the family (Achan), who can say anything about it? No one.
If he chooses to eternally torment those who are lost, who can say anything about it? No one.
You are claiming that man cannot be held responsible for his sin if predestination is true.
This is the same claim that Paul addresses in Romans 9:19.
The answer is, who are you, o man?
What right do humans have to define the acceptable parameters of God's behavior with regards to salvation?
The answer is, none.
He can do what he wants.
He is Creator.
If he chose some to save in the Ark, and others to perish, who can say anything about it? No one.
if he chose to destroy whole families for the sin of one man in the family (Achan), who can say anything about it? No one.
If he chooses to eternally torment those who are lost, who can say anything about it? No one.
I already exegeted it.
I showed you that the context is salvation, and that God has chosen specific individuals with specific characteristics.
By the way, there's a reason why most reputable Protestant systematic theologians are Reformed. It's because free willer theology cannot hold up to scrutiny. Norm Geisler is about the only contemporary systematic theologian guy who is Arminian, and he claims to be moderate Reformed (which is a laugh because he is really an Arminian who believes in eternal security).
I showed you that the context is salvation, and that God has chosen specific individuals with specific characteristics.
By the way, there's a reason why most reputable Protestant systematic theologians are Reformed. It's because free willer theology cannot hold up to scrutiny. Norm Geisler is about the only contemporary systematic theologian guy who is Arminian, and he claims to be moderate Reformed (which is a laugh because he is really an Arminian who believes in eternal security).
The first part of the thread explains general calling versus effectual calling.
The chosen (elect or chosen) are effectually called, and the reprobate (non-elect) are not effectually called.
As I described in the first part of the thread, no one denies that reprobates, and even some elect, resist the calling. Regeneration of the elect causes a willing response. God replaces the heart of stone with a heart of flesh, and that is what causes faith and repentance. A heart of stone cannot generate faith and repentance.
The chosen (elect or chosen) are effectually called, and the reprobate (non-elect) are not effectually called.
As I described in the first part of the thread, no one denies that reprobates, and even some elect, resist the calling. Regeneration of the elect causes a willing response. God replaces the heart of stone with a heart of flesh, and that is what causes faith and repentance. A heart of stone cannot generate faith and repentance.
-
1
- Show all
The first part of the thread explains general calling versus effectual calling.
The chosen (elect or chosen) are effectually called, and the reprobate (non-elect) are not effectually called.
As I described in the first part of the thread, no one denies that reprobates, and even some elect, resist the calling. Regeneration of the elect causes a willing response. God replaces the heart of stone with a heart of flesh, and that is what causes faith and repentance. A heart of stone cannot generate faith and repentance.
The chosen (elect or chosen) are effectually called, and the reprobate (non-elect) are not effectually called.
As I described in the first part of the thread, no one denies that reprobates, and even some elect, resist the calling. Regeneration of the elect causes a willing response. God replaces the heart of stone with a heart of flesh, and that is what causes faith and repentance. A heart of stone cannot generate faith and repentance.
-
1
- Show all