Can A Person Be a Monergist and a Synergist At the Same Time? Can One Be Neither?

[Eternally-Grateful]

Regeneration. But the passage does not say he draws them to faith. It says he draws them to Christ.

Drawing someone to Christ would be drawing them to trust Christ.

 

[makesends]

So. Using this. A monergist may be saved. It’s not possible a person deemed as a synergist could be saved.

Talking past each other, I guess.

It doesn't matter WHAT a person is deemed to be. I deem you a synergist. That does not mean you are not saved. Most people I grew up with and grew up around, and lived most my life I deem to be synergists. I also deem them to be saved. Synergism doesn't disqualify anyone from election and salvation. It is only their construction of soteriology. It is not how they are saved.

 

[Arial]

Drawing someone to Christ would be drawing them to trust Christ.

It would be God giving them to Christ.

John 6:37 All that the Father gives me shall come to me: and him that comes to me I will in no wise cast out. 39. And this is the Father's will which hath sent me, that of all which he gives me I will lose nothing, but shall raise it up again at the last day. 40. For this is the will of my Father, that everyone who looks on the Son and believes in him should have eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day. 65. ANd he said, "This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless it is granted him by the Father.

John 1: 12-13 But to all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God, who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but God.

John 3:3 Jesus answered him, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God."

 

[Eternally-Grateful]

Talking past each other, I guess.

It doesn't matter WHAT a person is deemed to be. I deem you a synergist. That does not mean you are not saved. Most people I grew up with and grew up around, and lived most my life I deem to be synergists. I also deem them to be saved. Synergism doesn't disqualify anyone from election and salvation. It is only their construction of soteriology. It is not how they are saved.

Once again your right synergism does not mean your saved or not

But if you believe we are saved by god plus you (works of merit). By all accounts in scripture you no better than a oharisee

It’s God plus nothing

You deem me a synergist because I believe faith is the pipeline for which gods grace saves, ie I willed myself to salvation?

I do not believe I am a synergist because I believe it is God plus nothing

And again that’s why I do not like isms

 

[makesends]

It would be God giving them to Christ.

John 6:37 All that the Father gives me shall come to me: and him that comes to me I will in no wise cast out. 39. And this is the Father's will which hath sent me, that of all which he gives me I will lose nothing, but shall raise it up again at the last day. 40. For this is the will of my Father, that everyone who looks on the Son and believes in him should have eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day. 65. ANd he said, "This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless it is granted him by the Father.

John 1: 12-13 But to all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God, who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but God.

John 3:3 Jesus answered him, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God."

Reminds me of the conversation not long ago, of whose work it is, that we believe— John 6:29 Jesus answered, “The work of God is this: to believe in the one he has sent.”

 

[makesends]

You deem me a synergist because I believe faith is the pipeline for which gods grace saves, ie I willed myself to salvation?

I do not believe I am a synergist because I believe it is God plus nothing

And again that’s why I do not like isms

Has this been why you insist a synergist cannot be saved?

No. I deem you a synergist because you say that faith is the result of being convinced, and not the convincing, itself. I deem you a synergist because, in effect, you make faith the effort of man unto salvation. I deem you a synergist because you think, in effect, that man's cooperation is a necessary component of salvation. I deem you a synergist because you actually say that one must voluntarily receive, in order to become saved.

Your synergism does not condemn you. It is, thank God, only a mistaken construction, based upon your worldview insisting on self-determination. It is not the Gospel by which you are saved.

You are right it is 'God plus nothing'. You are wrong that you must 'reach for it', in order for it to become yours.

 

[prism]

I will try one more time. From what I see synergism and monergism are terms given to describe people who believe different ways

Ie. If you believe that God alone is the agent of salvation you are deemed a monergist

It’s not that he is saved or not saved by being a monergist it is that he believes he is saved by God alone. Ie grace. Ie his faith is on God not his works (as I see it).

I would add a monergist would not see it as "his" faith but every step in his salvation coming as a gift from God.

 

[Eternally-Grateful]

Has this been why you insist a synergist cannot be saved?

No. A person who believed we are saved by grace plus works would in my view be lost because they lack true faith in Christ alone

By defenition of what u see, you would call them a synergist

No. I deem you a synergist because you say that faith is the result of being convinced, and not the convincing, itself. I deem you a synergist because, in effect, you make faith the effort of man unto salvation. I deem you a synergist because you think, in effect, that man's cooperation is a necessary component of salvation. I deem you a synergist because you actually say that one must voluntarily receive, in order to become saved.

Your synergism does not condemn you. It is, thank God, only a mistaken construction, based upon your worldview insisting on self-determination. It is not the Gospel by which you are saved.

You are right it is 'God plus nothing'. You are wrong that you must 'reach for it', in order for it to become yours.

I believe a person is saved by grace through faith. That as many as have received him to them he gave the right

I believe he who sees and believes has eternal life and has passed from death to life

I believe he who believes is not under condemnation but he who does not believe is condemned already

I believe it is the work of Gid we believe in the wine he sent (it’s not my work)

It’s all of God. That would make me a
Monergist or more importantly. A child of God born of him. Not of works lest anyone should boast

 

[Eternally-Grateful]

I would add a monergist would not see it as "his" faith but every step in his salvation coming as a gift from God.

It’s the work of God we believe in him. Not of ourselves lest we boast

 

[Arial]

No. A person who believed we are saved by grace plus works would in my view be lost because they lack true faith in Christ alone

By defenition of what u see, you would call them a synergist

I believe a person is saved by grace through faith. That as many as have received him to them he gave the right

I believe he who sees and believes has eternal life and has passed from death to life

I believe he who believes is not under condemnation but he who does not believe is condemned already

I believe it is the work of Gid we believe in the wine he sent (it’s not my work)

It’s all of God. That would make me a
Monergist or more importantly. A child of God born of him. Not of works lest anyone should boast

Synergism is not the gospel. Monergism is not the gospel. The question is, does God do all the saving or is this saving work and this saving grace useless without the contribution of a man's choices to accept this grace and this gift?

That would be like having a car in your driveway. The car is there, the key is there, you have a drivers license, everything You need to go where you want to go in that car. But it is all useless unless you choose to put the key in the ignition and drive it.

The thing is, and the problem that always occurs with analogies of God and his working, is that Jesus is not a car, and he really did die on that cross for the purpose of redeeming the elect for the Father. That being the case, and God being who he is, being born again is not a offer dependent on the decision you make after "He has helped you to understand the gospel." and having understood and believed it, rejected it. "Believe and you will have eternal life." Believing it sets a person firmly in Christ so there is no room for rejecting it.

Why? Because you think that would be saying you think you are saved by your works? You have made it perfectly clear that you do not believe you are saved by your works. What you do not realize is that saying you cannot be saved unless you reach for the lifesaver that is offered, IS a work of contribution to salvation and the only thing that makes salvation effective for you. That does not mean you are not saved. It means that you are looking at it incorrectly. Interpreting many scriptures incorrectly, because you are trying to make monergism and synergism both true concerning the same thing at the same time---the way in which we are saved.

And whether you like "isms" or don't like "isms" is completely beside the point.

 

[Eternally-Grateful]

And whether you like "isms" or don't like "isms" is completely beside the point.

If they do not represent My belief. Then they are meaningless

If you use them to try to put
Me under an ism that does not represent me. Then you are bearing false witness against me. Even if you think you are not. You are.

So I. Effect they mean nothing.

Listen to the person humbly. And do
Not think just because it appears they belief this according to your ism. You understand them

Or in pride listen for key words then accuse them of something not true

This is prety Much what happens is many chatrooms and why there is usually No peace

 

[Arial]

If they do not represent My belief. Then they are meaningless

If you use them to try to put
Me under an ism that does not represent me. Then you are bearing false witness against me. Even if you think you are not. You are.

So I. Effect they mean nothing.

Listen to the person humbly. And do
Not think just because it appears they belief this according to your ism. You understand them

Or in pride listen for key words then accuse them of something not true

This is prety Much what happens is many chatrooms and why there is usually No peace

I explained in detail why what you are calling monergism concerning yourself and what you referred to yourself as, is not monergism but synergism, when you had your choice to accept as a condition to your redemption. You can't make use of "ism's" and at the same time discount everything others say if they refer to an "ism". So instead of doing that, please address what I said about it. The one making "ism's" central to all conversations is you. This is a discussion board and the "ism" conversation should have moved on ages ago.

 

[makesends]

makesends said:
Has this been why you insist a synergist cannot be saved?

No. A person who believed we are saved by grace plus works would in my view be lost because they lack true faith in Christ alone

By defenition of what u see, you would call them a synergist

That is logically reversed. Yes, a person who is lost lacks true faith in Christ alone, but true faith does not rest in the structure they think they believe.

makesends said:
No. I deem you a synergist because you say that faith is the result of being convinced, and not the convincing, itself. I deem you a synergist because, in effect, you make faith the effort of man unto salvation. I deem you a synergist because you think, in effect, that man's cooperation is a necessary component of salvation. I deem you a synergist because you actually say that one must voluntarily receive, in order to become saved.

Your synergism does not condemn you. It is, thank God, only a mistaken construction, based upon your worldview insisting on self-determination. It is not the Gospel by which you are saved.

You are right it is 'God plus nothing'. You are wrong that you must 'reach for it', in order for it to become yours

I believe a person is saved by grace through faith. That as many as have received him to them he gave the right

I believe he who sees and believes has eternal life and has passed from death to life

I believe he who believes is not under condemnation but he who does not believe is condemned already

I believe it is the work of Gid we believe in the wine he sent (it’s not my work)

It’s all of God. That would make me a
Monergist or more importantly. A child of God born of him. Not of works lest anyone should boast

I agree with all of that.

You claim to believe it is all the work of God. Yet, you insist that one must REACH for it, in order to become saved.

 

[Eternally-Grateful]

I explained in detail why what you are calling monergism concerning yourself and what you referred to yourself as, is not monergism but synergism,

One more time you explained according to your belief system. I reject that defenition

You can explain it 1000 times. You will still be wrong according to my belief

So again you can be proud or humble. The choice is yours

when you had your choice to accept as a condition to your redemption. You can't make use of "ism's" and at the same time discount everything others say if they refer to an "ism". So instead of doing that, please address what I said about it. The one making "ism's" central to all conversations is you. This is a discussion board and the "ism" conversation should have moved on ages ago.

Again this is according to your belief system it is not mine

You want to talk to me talk to me and interpret me according to my language not yours. As you all are demanding I do for you

 

[Eternally-Grateful]

makesends said:
Has this been why you insist a synergist cannot be saved?

That is logically reversed. Yes, a person who is lost lacks true faith in Christ alone, but true faith does not rest in the structure they think they believe.

Sorry but this makes no sense

Faith comes by hearing and hearing by the word. It is the substance of things hoped for the evidence of things not seen

Those are the biblical defenitions

Faith in the Greek is a name
Given when someone trusts another or has assurance in that person

makesends said:
No. I deem you a synergist because you say that faith is the result of being convinced, and not the convincing, itself. I deem you a synergist because, in effect, you make faith the effort of man unto salvation. I deem you a synergist because you think, in effect, that man's cooperation is a necessary component of salvation. I deem you a synergist because you actually say that one must voluntarily receive, in order to become saved.

Your synergism does not condemn you. It is, thank God, only a mistaken construction, based upon your worldview insisting on self-determination. It is not the Gospel by which you are saved.

You are right it is 'God plus nothing'. You are wrong that you must 'reach for it', in order for it to become yours

I agree with all of that.

You claim to believe it is all the work of God. Yet, you insist that one must REACH for it, in order to become saved.

lol round and round we go

Again show me how the tax collector was a synergist

 

[Arial]

One more time you explained according to your belief system. I reject that defenition

It has nothing to do with my belief system. It has to do with facts and logic. Why do you keep trying to put me in an "ism" box? You complain about people trying to put you in one and yet you constantly dismiss what other's say by putting them in a box. "Oh that is just your "ism" or your belief system, so it is worthless and means nothing."

Here is a definition from the world, from no belief system:

Synergy: The interaction of two or more agents or forces so that their combined effect is greater than the sum of their individual effects.

Salvation: Grace, regeneration, faith, sanctification.

Grace: God
Regeneration: God
Faith: God
Sanctification: God

That is monergistic: God alone is the agent of human salvation, meaning that salvation is entirely the work of God without an cooperation from the individual.

Synergism: Your presentation.
Grace: God
Regeneration: God
Faith: God helps you. Two parties involved.
Sanctification: ?

But according to you, that is lifeless so to speak UNLESS you accept it. And if you accept it, it comes to life (comes into effect). If you reject it, it remains lifeless as far as you are concerned. God provides all the ingredients, but the cake doesn't get baked unless you put it in the oven. Cooperation. In addition, though you say faith is a gift from God, you say he helps you understand and then you decide to accept or reject.

You can explain it 1000 times. You will still be wrong according to my belief

Unless of course your belief is wrong. Truth is not arbitrary or relative.

So again you can be proud or humble. The choice is yours

Stop accusing me!

Again this is according to your belief system it is not mine

WHy are you painting me into a corner according to what you perceive my belief system is? What is a belief system anyway?

You want to talk to me talk to me and interpret me according to my language not yours.

I do interpret you according to your language and I believe we speak the same language. Words have meanings. If we are not using the same meaning of the word, the meaning needs to be clarified and form the OP on, people have been explaining the meaning of monergism and synergism. It is not up for grabs as to what those two words mean. The problem is not with the meaning of the words. It is not with a belief system. It is that you refuse to acknowledge that if you say you are saved because you accepted the gift of grace, you are the deciding factor in your salvation. God stands by with his fingers crossed hoping you will accept. Gentleman that he is.

 

[makesends]

makesends said:
That is logically reversed. Yes, a person who is lost lacks true faith in Christ alone, but true faith does not rest in the structure they think they believe.

Sorry but this makes no sense

Try saying, "...this makes no sense to me." It'll help me, if nobody else, respond more kindly to you.

But let me try a different set of words. What a person thinks they believe is not what comprises their faith, if they have salvific faith. It is what the Spirit of God in them is doing in them, that is valid faith. The degree of purity and accuracy and frills and noise their 'belief system' has is not what saves them. Again: what they THINK they believe is not what saves them.

Faith comes by hearing and hearing by the word. It is the substance of things hoped for the evidence of things not seen

Those are the biblical defenitions

(Actually, that is A biblical definition, not plural. I don't know what else you intended to write there). But the fact it is a biblical definition doesn't mean that YOUR look at it, YOUR use of it, YOUR reading of it, is accurate. The Spirit of God takes up residence, not by the will of man, but of God. I don't pretend to understand the use of the Word of God as a means by which that is accomplished. all figured out, but there are several pretty strong hints, such as the Son Himself is called The Word of God. What the Trinity does is pretty well described in Scripture as it pertains to many things, but HOW they do it is more than I can do more than to try to understand.

The "How the Trinity does that" that those insisting on self-determinism claim to understand is necessarily short of understanding. When I see their systems, their false equivalence and logical sloughing of terms and 'plain reading' of Scripture, uh, nah...

You have consistently shown —though you claim that it is not 'your' faith in that God has convinced you of the Gospel and his trustworthiness— that it actually IS 'your' faith in that it is a product of your mind and self-changed will. That faith is a necessarily synergistic faith.

Faith in the Greek is a name
Given when someone trusts another or has assurance in that person

And this proves what?

lol round and round we go

Again show me how the tax collector was a synergist

Where did I say the tax collector was a synergist? But whether he was a synergist, monergist, or doesn't even have a mental structure of how he was saved, is irrelevant. He could not, according to Romans 8, come to Christ while at enmity with God; only God can change his mind-governed-by-the-flesh. He cannot, even if he thinks that is what he wants.

 

[Eternally-Grateful]

makesends said:
That is logically reversed. Yes, a person who is lost lacks true faith in Christ alone, but true faith does not rest in the structure they think they believe.

Try saying, "...this makes no sense to me." It'll help me, if nobody else, respond more kindly to you.

But let me try a different set of words. What a person thinks they believe is not what comprises their faith, if they have salvific faith. It is what the Spirit of God in them is doing in them, that is valid faith. The degree of purity and accuracy and frills and noise their 'belief system' has is not what saves them. Again: what they THINK they believe is not what saves them.

Again this makes no sense to me. Faith means trust or assurance. If I do not know what I trust or are not assured in someone or something I do not have faith in them

Either Gid brought me to this state or my unbelief would not see what God wanted to see so he allowed me to reject him and make up my own God as in Roman’s 1

(Actually, that is A biblical definition, not plural. I don't know what else you intended to write there). But the fact it is a biblical definition doesn't mean that YOUR look at it, YOUR use of it, YOUR reading of it, is accurate. The Spirit of God takes up residence, not by the will of man, but of God.

Actually I quotes to verses where god interpreted faith it is not my defenition

As for the will Of man is this not what I said. How many times do I have to say I did not will myself to heaven before someone believes me?

I don't pretend to understand the use of the Word of God as a means by which that is accomplished. all figured out, but there are several pretty strong hints, such as the Son Himself is called The Word of God. What the Trinity does is pretty well described in Scripture as it pertains to many things, but HOW they do it is more than I can do more than to try to understand.

We can only understand what God gives us. I doubt we will fully understand the trinity until we see God

The "How the Trinity does that" that those insisting on self-determinism claim to understand is necessarily short of understanding. When I see their systems, their false equivalence and logical sloughing of terms and 'plain reading' of Scripture, uh, nah...

self determination? Those words again. I did not self determination anything God determines

You have consistently shown —though you claim that it is not 'your' faith in that God has convinced you of the Gospel and his trustworthiness— that it actually IS 'your' faith in that it is a product of your mind and self-changed will. That faith is a necessarily synergistic faith.

My faith is a product of God. Come on. You have to be kidding me you keep going back to this

If my faith was in self I would own credit I would boast I would pump My chest. I can only assume you continue to go here because this is what you have been taught. It is not my reality and it is offensive to continue to be told you believe or do something you do not

And this proves what?

It Rand what it means

Is your trust outward or inward where is your trust and assurance in?

A legalism has assurance in self and what they do. That’s why they lack faith in God and have no assurance because deep down their faith is flawed

Where did I say the tax collector was a synergist? But whether he was a synergist, monergist, or

When you claim I am a synergist

doesn't even have a mental structure of how he was saved, is irrelevant.

He was saved because he cried out to God. As opposed to the Pharisee who pumped his chest. That’s all he did and Jesus said he went home justified

He could not, according to Romans 8, come to Christ while at enmity with God; only God can change his mind-governed-by-the-flesh. He cannot, even if he thinks that is what he wants.

He came to Christ because he realized he was at enmity and came to the end of himself he realized he needed mercy hence why he cried out for Gids mercy. I did this also. Did not you?

 

[makesends]

Which is what Jesus told nicodemus in the Ceres following vs 10 until the verse in question

Again this makes no sense to me. Faith means trust or assurance. If I do not know what I trust or are not assured in someone or something I do not have faith in them

Either Gid brought me to this state or my unbelief would not see what God wanted to see so he allowed me to reject him and make up my own God as in Roman’s 1

Actually I quotes to verses where god interpreted faith it is not my defenition

As for the will Of man is this not what I said. How many times do I have to say I did not will myself to heaven before someone believes me?

We can only understand what God gives us. I doubt we will fully understand the trinity until we see God

self determination? Those words again. I did not self determination anything God determines

My faith is a product of God. Come on. You have to be kidding me you keep going back to this

If my faith was in self I would own credit I would boast I would pump My chest. I can only assume you continue to go here because this is what you have been taught. It is not my reality and it is offensive to continue to be told you believe or do something you do not

BTW you never did address the difference—at one point you said your faith was from God, but specifically said it was not produced by God. Now you are saying it was produced by God.

But whichever, you do not mean it monergistically, but only grammatically, because it is (in your mind) caused by God only in that God convinced you—thus, specifically, denying what Romans 8 says: That one is unable to please God, to submit to God's law, and is at enmity with God.

I'm not saying that your faith is in yourself, (though that may be a theoretical/logical outworking of what you do say). I'm saying that your idea of faith is done by your effort, will, decision—call it what you want. By your notion of how faith happens, it is by being convinced and changing your mind accordingly. (Which, ironically, as you claimed monergism teaches, happens "while in sin".)

It Rand what it means

Is your trust outward or inward where is your trust and assurance in?

A legalism has assurance in self and what they do. That’s why they lack faith in God and have no assurance because deep down their faith is flawed

I have told you repeatedly that I don't consider you unsaved. You have some things right. God is indeed altogether trustworthy, but knowing that is not how one is saved. Their faith is not only intellectual/emotional. It is not decided by the will of man upon being convinced.

When you claim I am a synergist

Yep

He was saved because he cried out to God. As opposed to the Pharisee who pumped his chest. That’s all he did and Jesus said he went home justified

Where does it say he was saved because he cried out to God? You notice, though, even you say, "That's all he DID..." (my emphasis). You still don't get me? You keep insisting a person is saved because he DID something.

He came to Christ because he realized he was at enmity and came to the end of himself he realized he needed mercy hence why he cried out for Gids mercy. I did this also. Did not you?

I do so pretty much daily. Not for salvation but for renewed fellowship, confidence and joy. You do understand that your lexicon is replete with Christian-isms? "-came to an end of himself", you say... I know of nobody that can do that, though I have heard that terminology almost my whole life. It is not biblical—in fact, I remember hearing it for probably the first time and realizing how it appealed to the flesh, to the "need" to relinquish my will, etc, as though doing so was the "decision to accept Christ". We are fickle as the day is long. He demonstrated his feeling of despair. His despair did not save him, nor did his crying out save him.