The Highway Forums General Discussion Theology Discussion Forum true calvinism.......MJM please read

I have stated, repeatedly, that Billy graham offers a different gospel. He offers a merely possible gospel where mans sovereignty is key. I believe in an effectual gospel, where Jesus death actually paid for sin and secured the salvation of many. We both limit the atonement; I limit its scope, you limits it efficacy.


I also doubt you could offer any examples of bashing in that paper. Disagreeing with somebody and saying so is not bashing. If you could offer an example, maybe.


This is correct. This doctrine is known as Total Depravity. Its basis was confirmed early in church history. Man is incapable of doing anything to save himself. Please note this, because everything must be Gods doing. This is a monergistic salvation rather than a synergistic. Jesus says; "he who commits sin is a slave to sin" (John 8:34), and this is what it means to be `dead in your sins and transgressions'--that `the natural man receives not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness to him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned' (1 Cor. 2:14). The `natural' man cannot know the things of the Spirit of God. Jesus also confirms this when He says “no man can unless the Father draw him” (John 6:44). So far we agree. However, this starting point, mans ability and the condition of his will, is important.


If God was drawing the jailer, it was either an effectual calling or general, though ineffectual pleading. I believe, that since God purposed to save a remnant, an elect, a people of God, he brings about their conversion. In the Arminian scheme, God only draws all people to a point of salvability, and then leaves the final choice to man sovereignty. This is an ineffectual call. This would also cause us to wonder where in scripture this middle ground, this spiritual equipoise, because it is never mentioned. I uphold what is known as Irresistible Grace. The result of God's Irresistible Grace is the certain response by the elect to the inward call of the Holy Spirit, when the outward call is given by the evangelist or minister of the Word of God. Christ, himself, teaches that all whom God has elected will come to a knowledge of him (John 6:37). Men come to Christ in salvation when the Father calls them (John 6:44), and the very Spirit of God leads God's beloved to repentance (Romans 8:14). What a comfort it is to know that the gospel of Christ will penetrate our hard, sinful hearts and wondrously save us through the gracious inward call of the Holy Spirit (I Peter 5:10). To me, there is no “what if”. Either the jailer was effectually called to repentance or his “choice” was made from his sinful nature.


The Holy Spirits drawing. Here is another passage from Acts tom illustrate this…….

And another…….

These people were called efficaciously. This is confirmed in that “My sheep hear my voice”, Jesus said in John 10:27. This is a major point of division between the Arminian and Calvinist. The Calvinist believes God elected specific people, provided real salvation for them, and calls effectually His chosen. The Arminian believes God elected a plan, made a way for salvation for all, and begs every person to “choose the right thing”. The difference here is a matter of efficacy. Who makes grace efficacious?


Calvinists do not classify faith as a work, nor do they exclude it from the process of salvation. They say with Paul `by grace [we] are save through faith, and this is not from [ourselves] but is God's gift; not from works so that none may boast' (Eph. 2:8-9). Calvinists do say that no fallen man will ever exercise saving faith, nor have the desire to do so unless God regenerates their heart and renews their mind (as per. 1 Cor. 2:14). If man must exercise free will in order to be saved; that is `agree with God', or `accept God's offer', etc., then man in a state of sin must be said to have the ability to do some amount of good, even if it be only a small amount, and thereby please God to the ends of salvation. How can this view be made consistent with verses like John 8:34, 1 Cor. 1:18; 2:14, Rom. 8:7-8, John 6:44 where it is plainly stated that sinful man has no ability to please God, agree with, receive or understand the things of God, or come to Christ, prior to regeneration?


Since you didn’t show how I do not uphold the new birth, or how my position is in opposition to it, I don’t see what you are saying exactly. I believe this was answered by somebody else already, though.


That’s correct, but your next set of statements contradicts these. However, I never claimed God would “read His word to me”. This claim has no meaning, unless it is a personal evaluation of my study habits. Nor did I ever claim you helped God write the Bible. I fail to see how this applies.


Wait. You can appropriate, by something you do, a work, Gods blessings? I disagree, in that grace, by definition, is unmerited favor. I believe that all are sinners (Romans 3:23) and unable by human performance to earn, deserve, or merit salvation (Titus 3:5). We believe that the wages of sin is death (Romans 6:23), and that apart from God's grace, no one can be saved (Ephesians 2:8-9). We believe that none are righteous, or capable of doing good (Romans 3:10-12), and that apart from the conviction and regeneration of the Holy Spirit, none can be saved (John 1:12-13; 16:8-11; I Peter 1:23-25). Mankind is clearly fallen and lost in sin.


I hope this helps to understand the differences in our positions, and which scripture upholds.


God bless,

william