“Let’s contrast that with Robertson who most certainly does not understand and “believe in predestination,” as you assert. That’s an old papist trick - keep the bottle, change the wine.”
Robertson supports predestination’s arguments on some other verses. He seems to me to be an honest broker, who tries to follow where the Greek text takes him.
And as usual, adding “papist” offends folks without need...as is the implication that Catholics are liars. Perhaps insulting people God died for - oh, wait, you think he didn’t die for anyone not on his list - is a way to make sure only those overwhelmed by God’s irresistible grace come...good job! It is a pity Paul didn’t understand this principle of evangelism.
“There really are only two religions — synergism (I activated and authenticated my own salvation by my free will decision to believe) and monergism (God is the author and finisher of my faith, having ordained the end from the beginning.)”
Then you should like Jacob Arminius. He taught:
“* Humans are naturally unable to make any effort towards salvation (see also prevenient grace).
* Salvation is possible only by God’s grace, which cannot be merited.
* No works of human effort can cause or contribute to salvation.”
“I choose carefully this day. And that ability to chose carefully comes from God alone and not our “free will” which has been forever corrupted by Adam’s fall.”
Good! You’ve become an Arminian! You agree we have choice, and that the ability to choose is founded in God’s grace.
To find out more about your new beliefs, read about prevenient grace:
http://www.eternalsecurity.us/prevenient_grace.htm
You write: “Wow. That’s so sad I’m going to post it again...bigger, and be sure I attribute it to the proper author... / MR. ROGERS: “And I would remind you that salvation has more than one meaning. It can mean justification, it can mean sanctification, or it can mean both.”
Thanks for repeating it. It is true. I’m surprised it surprises anyone.
“Read Ephesians 2. Faith is not of ourselves. It is a gift from God alone by His grace alone.”
Actually, no. As Barnes puts it, “And that not of yourselves. That is, salvation does not proceed from yourselves. The word rendered that—\~touto\~—is in the neuter gender, and the word faith—\~pistiv\~ —is in the feminine. The word “that,” therefore, does not refer particularly to faith, as being the gift of God, but to the salvation by grace of which he had been speaking.”
I’m still interested in what you think Jesus meant when He said:
“And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, so must the Son of Man be lifted up, that whoever believes in him may have eternal life. For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him. Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God.”
You agree we have choice, and that the ability to choose is founded in God's grace.
All men have a choice. But the ability to choose God is not merely "founded in God's grace," but 100% enabled by God's grace from beginning to end.
"To suppose that whatever God requireth of us that we have power of ourselves to do, is to make the cross and grace of Jesus Christ of none effect." - John Owen
And "prevenient grace" is a cop-out not taught in Scripture. God either saves his children completely, according to His good pleasure and purpose, or men save themselves by their prudent free will decision to believe, which leaves God in debt to men for their response.
And that is not reality. That is ego. It's Pelagianism which is where Arminianism leads.
Arminian theology is a continuation or refinement of Pelagianism, the doctrine of the 5th century English Catholic monk. Jacobus Arminius would deny that he was a proponent of Pelagian heresy, because he did not teach against the concept of original sin as did Pelagius, but the fact remains that the two schools of belief are very similar and ultimately lead to the same actions by believers. The doctrinal error in Arminianism is that it substitutes an act of man that is of greater authority than the sovereignty of God and makes God subservient to the actions of man rather than man subservient to the actions of God... The teaching of Jacobus Arminius came about as a result of his belief that the teachings of John Calvin, with respect to the role of God in salvation, were not correct. Although he had previously been a supporter of Calvin and had accepted the Dutch Reformed doctrines of the absolute sovereignty of God in salvation, predestination and foreordination, he changed his mind and taught against those beliefs. Chief among his beliefs was the idea that man chooses God of his own free will. He believed that man was affected by original sin and could not choose God in that condition, but that God grants to the individual a special grace that removes the effect of the fall and allows the person to make a choice of their own free will.