God's Part and Man's Part in Salvation

John G. Reisinger ^ | John G. Reisinger

[Jean Chauvin]

"Are you saying that God DOES NOT know who will believe in Him?

Or are you just saying that election isn't predicated on what God foreknew even though you accept that God does foreknow who will believe in Him? "

Seeing as I was a rather "vocal" critic of your flirtation with "Open Theism", you tell me.

Actually, I'm not remotely suprised you felt the need to ask this question.

Jean

[xzins]

Of course God knows who will believe in Him. And he will have always known who would believe in Him. Absolute foreknowledge means there never will have been even an instant when God didn't foreknow anything/everything.

Do you accept that?

(And you mistake reading up on something with buying into it.)

[RnMomof7]

And those ALL will have first come under the power of God's prevenient grace. Might as well go to them first.

So then prevenient grace is NOT a general grace..God determines who gets it and how much and when?

[RnMomof7]

Of course God knows who will believe in Him. And he will have always known who would believe in Him. Absolute foreknowledge means there never will have been even an instant when God didn't foreknow anything/everything.

Can God change the future?

[Frumanchu]

Absolute Foreknowledge, Rn. There are no more people saved than God foreknew. And those ALL will have first come under the power of God's prevenient grace. Might as well go to them first.

Is there anything of God's character that prevents Him from providing said prevenient grace ONLY to those He "foreknew." Is there anything of Christ's character that prevents Him from taking only the sins of those He "foreknew" with Him to the cross?

We're all abundantly familiar with the quoted Scripture we volley back and forth regarding limited atonement or irresistable grace, but I'm curious to know what from a character standpoint (meaning His love, justice, omnipotence, etc.) would prevent God from doing these things.

By the way, if God foreknew who would choose Him, is there any possible way for those men to reject Him anyway? If not, wouldn't that violate their "free will?" :D

[xzins]

Let's focus on those who respond.

[xzins]

It is not possible to limit an absolutely omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent God....especially not to mere human understandings.

[xzins]

There is little difference in the end result between absolute foreknowledge and absolute predestination. OP and I had a discussion early in January that we never finished and were trying to form propositions for.

What thread was that OP?

The telling question is this: Is there EVER a time when God did NOT have absolutely perfect knowledge, to include absolutely perfect foreknowledge (a subset of knowledge)?

If there was such a time, then at that time God wasn't God.

[Calvinist_Dark_Lord]

Jean,

You do insist on making me work on the day of rest. (sigh,)

Ok, let's look at the verse in the Greek:

kai; tiß gunh; ojnovmati Ludiva, porfurovpwliß povlewß Quateivrwn sebomevnh to;n qeovn,h]kouen, h|ß oJ kurioß dihvnoixen th;n dardivan prosevcein toi?ß laloumevnoiß uJpo; tou? Pauvlou.

Acts 16:14 UBS 4th ed.

And a certain woman, (in) name Lydia, (a) purple (cloth)seller, (of the) city (of) Thyatira [who] while (devoutly)worshipping God, (she)heard [imperfect ind., continuous action in past time] [us], who {feminine) the LORD opened [aorist ind. simple past tense]{def. (Moulton) to open... met. to open the sense of a thing, explain, expound...to open the mind, the heart, so as to understand and recieve,} the heart to attend [present infinitive](to the things) being spoken (pres pass participle) by Paul.

Arminian counter argument irrelevant: Action of opening performed by God Purpose infinitive [to attend] defines reason of opening, worship, being imperfect in knowlege and truth is incidental to purpose of God.

Since when does the devil need advocates?

Regards,

CDL

[xzins]

Opened her heart to attend.

Any idea if "attend" here means "to listen/pay attention?"

If so, then we have:

1. Opened heart (for purpose of)
2. Listening/attending

[The Grammarian]

Very good explanation, X. Locke, I haven't forgotten our posts on that other thread, however, I have yet to find time to really "defend" the views. I would explain them, however, similarly to X's explanation. Wesleyan-Arminianism has prominent theologians (i.e. Watson, Pope) who claim that this system of theology is actually monergistic. In Wesleyan-Arminianism, it is God's work, but God makes it so that we are able to reject the retention of grace; Watson's Theological Institutes and, I believe, Pope's Compendium of Christian Theology both (Wesley and Fletcher of Madeley, as well) say that there is an irresistibility to grace. In the beginning, we cannot not receive grace, but what we do with it afterwards is another affair.

Keep in mind that this is an explanation and not a defense.

P.S. Xzins, how do you pronounce "Wesley"? Is it Wez-ley or Wes-ley? I'm having this argument with a friend (silly as it sounds--it's all in fun).

[Calvinist_Dark_Lord]

prosevxw

To have in addition; to hold to, to bring near; absol. to apply teh mind to a thing, to give heed to, attend to, observe, consider,... to take care of, provide for,...when followed by ajpov, mhv, or mhvpote, to beware of, take heed of, guard against,... to assent to, yield credence to, follow, adhere or be attached to,...to give ones self up to, to be addicted to, engage in, be occupied with.

Moulton, Analytical Greek Lexicon

i'd say that was pretty clear X

Regards,

CDL

[Calvinist_Dark_Lord]

gotta go be back later tonite!

[drstevej]

***DrJ's logical order is "regeneration, faith, justification, salvation, sanctification....If I remember correctly." ***

I don't put salvation in the list since it is a general term and can refer to past (justitifaction - deliverance from the penalty of sin), present (sanctification -deliverence from the power of sin) or future (glorification - deliverance from the presence of sin).

I also do not put sanctification in the list. Practical sanctification is subsequent in time to regeneration, faith and justification. Positional sanctification is complete at the time of R,F, & J but is really similar to justification.

Just a clarification. You did get RF&J is the logical sequence that I have suggested.

[RnMomof7]

Let's focus on those who respond.

That my friend is a cop out..I always understood that everyman was given the grace necessary to believe was I wrong? This is a new discussion to me..You seem to be saying that God only gives the grace to those that will believe and Wesley felt those were the only one to be focused on..am I hearing you wrong?

[RnMomof7]

It is not possible to limit an absolutely omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent God....especially not to mere human understandings.

But it seems to me when you say that a man can overcome Gods grace you have limited God

Here is my question IF God foresees who will be saved and only gives them Prevenient Grace, then he has a limited atonment..If God determines that He wants a particular person saved can he give them that grace?

[Corin Stormhands]

Corin, you must realize that Wesley and Arminius redefine "grace" and "election".

Yes. Thankfully, they corrected Calvin's errors.

[Corin Stormhands]

Is it Wez-ley or Wes-ley?

John Wes-ley

Wez-ley Crusher

[lockeliberty]

The grace that brings faith, and thereby salvation into the soul is irresistible at that moment. With regard to....Irresistible Grace, I believe, that the grace which brings faith, and thereby salvation into the soul, is irresistible at that moment:

That most believers may remember some time when God did irresistibly convince them of sin:

That most believers do, at some other times, find God irresistibly acting upon their souls:

Yet I believe that the grace of God, both before and after those moments, may be, and hath been, resisted:

And that in general, it does not act irresistibly; but we may comply therewith, or may not:

And I do not deny, that, in some souls, the grace of God is so far irresistible, that they cannot but believe and be finally saved.

But I cannot believe, that all those must be damned, in whom it does not thus irresistibly work."
-Wesley

Perhaps you can help me understand Wesley. On the one hand he says that Grace is irresistable at the moment of regeneration. Later he equivocates and says that the Grace provided at regeneration is later resistable, even perhaps, to the point of damnation. The logical conclusion is therefore that Justification continually loses it legal status dependent upon the the actions of the individual. This seems contradictory to what is written in Hebrews.

[xzins]

Strictly phonetic.

weS - ley