[OrthodoxPresbyterian]

Hey OP, thanks for the allegory. I know you are trying to help me understand and I appreciate the effort. Where I am still lacking in understanding is related to my nature. My sinful nature. In your example, before my terrible accident it was my nature to breath. I required oxygen. After your choice to bring me back to life it still remains my nature to breath. Would a better example be that I am a fish and as such my nature requires that I live in the ocean and breath water. Then you come along and for your good pleasure or glory you decide to change my nature and give me lungs instead. Now you throw me back in the ocean and I'm drown. Then by your grace you decide to throw me on land and clear the water from my lungs. You choose to bring me back to life. My nature has changed. I still need oxygen to breath but can no longer by my nature extract that oxygen from the water and now must live on land and breath air in order to live. Could you restate your allegory using this fish or something similar which shows my changed nature?

No need for a new allegory. Just go back to my original example.

Your nature was "dead", and therefore you did not breathe. (breath here corresponding to belief)

Your nature was then changed to "alive", and therefore you breathed.(breath here corresponding to belief)

Clear enough??

[PFKEY]

Breath here corresponding to belief

 

Correspond: means to be equivalent or parallel.

 

Clear enough??

 

So far so good; breath=belief.

 

Just go back to my original.

 

Ok, your original post does this corresponding thing with breath and life

 

Clear enough??

 

So far so good; breath=belief=life.

 

Original Post....................................................................................................................................................................

 

You've just been in a terrible accident, and you're dead [no breath=no belief=no life] (it's an analogy, follow me through on this).

 

However, I have a pair of electro-shock paddles on hand, and I can bring you back to life [breath=belief=life] -- if I so choose.

 

Now, if I choose to shock you back to life, you are going to breathe -- for breathing is what living men do {Yes... [breath=belief=life]} Is breathing necessary for life? {Yes... [breath=belief=life]} Sure, living things require oxygen. Is it you who are doing the breathing, or me? [Me] Obviously, you. [Yes] So was it your choice to live and breathe? [No] No, it wasn't. You were dead -- you weren't choosing anything.

 

It was my choice which caused you to live and breathe (again, in this example), not yours. So you are doing the breathing, and breathing is necessary for life -- but the fact that you live and breathe was all of my choice, and none of yours.

 

.............................................................................................................................................................End Original Post

 

Clear enough??

 

So far so good; an allegory of grace.

 

Was there a larger premise or was this your entire point?

 

I thought we were attempting to cover the tenets of Calvinism. If that be the case your allegory remains unclear to me.

 

I say this because your analogy does not cover those tenets. Before my tragic accident I had [breath=belief=life]; then my tragic accident and I lost my [breath=belief=life]; then the grace of a benevolent stranger restored my [breath=belief=life].

 

I chose to use the word allegory instead of analogy because an analogy is somewhat weak in meaning when discussing truths.

 

Analogy taken to mean inference that if two or more things agree with one another in some respects they will probably agree in others.

 

Versus

 

Allegory taken to mean the expression by means of symbolic fictional figures and actions of truths or generalizations about human existence; a symbolic representation.  

 

If I have not exhausted your patience would you be willing to expand my understanding of the tenets of Calvinism? The theology is very logical if you accept these tenets.

 

My lack of understanding or disbelief is in the acceptance of the tenets as I weigh them against the entirety of scripture.