Consistent Hermeneutics: Calvinism vs Arminianism

[GeneZ]

If it isn't about our sins what do the words propitiation, reconciliation, justification,redemption, and atonement mean?
And what do these passages mean?
1 Peter 2:24 He Himself bore our sins in His body on the cross, so that, having died to sins, we might live for righteousness; by His wounds you have been healed.

Hebrews 9:11-12 But when Christ appeared as a high priest of the good things that have come, then through the greater and more perfect tent (not made with hands, that is not of this creation) he entered once for all into the holy places, not by means of the blood of goats and calves but by means of his own blood, thus securing an eternal redemption.

Col 2:13-14 And you, who were dead in your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, God made alive together with Him, having forgiven us all our trespasses, by canceling the record of debt that stood against us with its legal demands. This He set aside, nailing it to the cross.

Tell me, what must one think about Jesus Christ in order to have our sins forgiven?

There is a communication gap here.

Of course sins were an issue in salvation.
Of course they were.
But, they are not "the" issue now in being saved.

When it comes down to salvation?

Are we told to stop sinning and be saved?
Or, are we told to believe in Jesus Christ to be saved?

Are we told to do good deeds and be saved?
Or, are we told to believe in Jesus Christ to be saved?

Because of the unlimited atonement of the Cross God made us free to give the Gospel to every man.
Not only to give the Gospel to a designated select group of people.
For men's sins are not what is keeping them from Heaven.
Its their unbelief in Christ that sends people to Hell.

If unlimited atonement were not a reality?
We would not have been told to preach the Gospel to all men.
There would be some different system which we do not have.

​

And He {Jesus} is the propitiation {atoning sacrifice} for our sins
and not for our sins only but also for the entire world." 1 John 2:2​

There is no limited atonement.

There is only a limited acceptance of that truth. Unbelief.

If the unbelievers sins were not paid for they would be with legitimate protest as to why they must spend eternity in the Lake of Fire.

"We had no choice! How can you condemn anyone who you gave no choice?"


Even Cain was prompted by God to make a right choice.

Genesis 4:6-7

Then the Lord said to Cain, “Why are you angry? Why is your face downcast? ​

If you do what is right, will you not be accepted? But if you do not do what​

is right, sin is crouching at your door; it desires to have you, but you must rule over it.”​

God's grace enables man to make the right choices towards Christ.
But it is not irresistible.

Grace makes us able not to resist.

A man rejecting grace is depraved.

grace and peace ...............

 

[ReverendRV]

Jesus is LORD!

 

[Arial]

Both sides are wrong in several ways. Yet each side will check the other with the showing of the other's inconsistencies,

What inconsistencies do you find in Calvinism or what any Calvinist as said?

Arminianism presumes that "total depravity" does not apply to mankind. It believes there is innately a "touch of good" in all of us. A good that God taps into for salvation. That is false. Man, when left to his own abilities, can not believe in God.

Classic Arminianism did believe in total depravity, in that without grace no one could believe in the person and work of Christ. What Arminius did was put forth that God gave the grace to believe to all and then they made the choice. That is the predominate view that I have come across. But Arminianism became even more liberal after his death, even the remonstrance was not put forth by him but by followers and is more liberal than his view. And through the centuries it has taken on many differing views, some denying total depravity altogether, but all contain the idea that man can freely choose Christ from within himself, and that it is the choice he makes that determines the effectiveness of both the cross and grace.

Calvinism never breaks it down properly with total depravity. It tells us that each soul, as well as each body, is depraved.
When in actuality? It is man's fallen flesh that is enslaving the human soul inside the body to be against God.

That is incorrect and if you insist it is correct, you will need to demonstrate it.

Calvinism does not separate the soul and the body. It does not say that the body is depraved. From R.C. Sproul:




I like to replace the term total depravity with my favorite designation, which is radical corruption. Ironically, the word radical has its roots in the Latin word for “root,” which is radix, and it can be translated root or core. The term radical has to do with something that permeates to the core of a thing. It’s not something that is tangential or superficial, lying on the surface. The Reformed view is that the effects of the fall extend or penetrate to the core of our being. Even the English word core actually comes from the Latin word cor, which means “heart.” That is, our sin is something that comes from our hearts. In biblical terms, that means it’s from the core or very center of our existence.

So what is required for us to be conformed to the image of Christ is not simply some small adjustments or behavioral modifications, but nothing less than renovation from the inside. We need to be regenerated, to be made over again, to be quickened by the power of the Spirit. The only way in which a person can escape this radical situation is by the Holy Spirit’s changing the core, the heart

Grace when applied from God? That grace neutralizes the negative influence of the flesh over the soul. In doing so,
that grace power frees up that soul to either choose for, or against, Jesus Christ.

Where in scripture does it say or present the concept of grace being a neutralizer of the negative influence of the flesh over the soul? That is just things being made up.

In John 3 Jesus tells us that no one can even see the kingdom of God unless they are born again of the Spirit. 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 the will of man, but of God. (John 1:12-13)

Calvinism instead works with a perpetually vague concept that God's grace is "irresistible."
Claiming in effect, that God sovereignly chooses to make man believe...

In that case? Man's volition, in effect, is no where to be found when choosing to believe in Christ.
Choosing? No. Irresistible grace amounts to forcing a person to believe.

There is nothing vague about it at all. It is carefully and systematically, using the whole counsel of God, established. And it says nothing about God making anyone believe as though by force. It is grace.

Did you have any say so in your natural birth---which God is the first cause of that, but that aside for a moment? Do you ever look at it as your parents forcing you to be born against your will? Why do you look at it that way if it is God by pure grace, giving you a new birth in Christ?

Who is the Creator in this debate? Who is the Potter? Who is the clay? Where does it say that man must choose of his own volition in order for the Almighty to save? Where does it say God ever answers to us? Who do you think you are? You live and move and have your being in Him, according to God. You don't breathe unless He gives you life. When He removes your life, your body no longer functions and goes to the grave.

In the new birth God changes our volition, and thank God for that! He does not violate our volition. Irresistible grace is effective grace. It does exactly what God sends it to do. And He sends it to save. Is 55:10-11"For as the rain and the snow come down from heaven and do not return there but water the earth,making it bring forth and sprout, giving seed to the sower and bread to the eater, so shall my word be that goes out from my mouth; it shall not return to me empty, but it shall accomplish that which I purpose, and shall succeed in the thing for which I sent it.

 

[Arial]

There is a communication gap here.

Of course sins were an issue in salvation.
Of course they were.
But, they are not "the" issue now in being saved.

When it comes down to salvation?

Are we told to stop sinning and be saved?
Or, are we told to believe in Jesus Christ to be saved?

Are we told to do good deeds and be saved?
Or, are we told to believe in Jesus Christ to be saved?

Because of the unlimited atonement of the Cross God made us free to give the Gospel to every man.
Not only to give the Gospel to a designated select group of people.
For men's sins are not what is keeping them from Heaven.
Its their unbelief in Christ that sends people to Hell.

If unlimited atonement were not a reality?
We would not have been told to preach the Gospel to all men.
There would be some different system which we do not have.

​

And He {Jesus} is the propitiation {atoning sacrifice} for our sins​

and not for our sins only but also for the entire world." 1 John 2:2​

There is no limited atonement.

There is only a limited acceptance of that truth. Unbelief.

If the unbelievers sins were not paid for they would be with legitimate protest as to why they must spend eternity in the Lake of Fire.

"We had no choice! How can you condemn anyone who you gave no choice?"


Even Cain was prompted by God to make a right choice.

Genesis 4:6-7​

​

Then the Lord said to Cain, “Why are you angry? Why is your face downcast? ​

If you do what is right, will you not be accepted? But if you do not do what​

is right, sin is crouching at your door; it desires to have you, but you must rule over it.”​

God's grace enables man to make the right choices towards Christ.
But it is not irresistible.

Grace makes us able not to resist.

A man rejecting grace is depraved.

grace and peace ...............

Instead of just rambling on, would you please address this:

Tell me, what must one think about Jesus Christ in order to have our sins forgiven?

We cannot come near God unless we are cleansed of all sin, and we can only come near God in/through Jesus.

And this:

If He paid for all the sins of everyone, there would be no need to come to Him. The way you see it, it He doesn't really pay for them. It is the sinners choice that causes them to be paid or not paid for. It is an oxymoron to say He paid for them with His life and at the same time say He didn't. We both agree that it is through belief/faith that the work of Jesus is applied. But you say belief is a choice to believe/trust in Jesus and you need to validate that with scripture. Either way the atonement is limited to those who believe.

Calvinism solves the "dilemma" by using the whole counsel of God.
First of all, who is God? And who is Jesus? According to what God says about Himself and who He says Jesus is, and work through from there. We know that He is sovereign over all His creation. We know He is the Creator and we are but a creature. We are obligated to Him, He is not obligated to us. He rules over all and always does as He pleases. And we know He is good and holy and righteous and perfect, possesses all wisdom and knowledge, and power, so whatever He pleases will not be capricious or arbitrary but work towards His ultimate purpose.

We know Jesus is the eternal second person of the Trinity, the Son come as one of us for the purpose of redeeming a people from their fallen state in Adam. And He did this by perfect obedience to the Father, even unto the horrendous suffering and humiliation of dying on the cross---in the place of the sinner, and in doing so took the penalty for their sins on Himself.

We know from the scriptures that in this working out of His plan of redemption and the restoration of all things through man's redemption, there is not one place where God leaves the end result up to man's choices. He is always doing the choosing of everything.

We have countless scriptures that speak of "calling," "elect", "chosen," "foreknew," "predestined,". And in all of them it is God doing it. We have the scriptures where Jesus speaks of those who God is giving Him as being the ones He is going to lay down His life for.

It is inconceivable that in all this, at the most crucial point of this redemption that has been working in and through thousands of years; that when God sent His Son to suffer and die to redeem a people for Himself; that He would then in effect step back away from the Son and say "We'll see how many you die for when the yes's and no's are counted. In the meantime die for them all anyway." That would be rude.

Post #60

 

[His clay]

Very nice. I have a question (serious curiosity here). When you see people talking about this, do you also picture the two level existence of the universe? (There may be others, but I think of the most important ones to these questions) The two levels of God, then us? And, if you do, do you believe that most of the dissension from arminians (I can't say 100% for LFW, though perhaps them to) would be removed if everyone considered the differences between the two levels of existence? (In this case, Creator and I'll tag on Sovereign, to created/humanity.) Owner to property. Would understanding that dynamic remove most of the objections to understanding just where Calvin was coming from?

[So you understand the last question better, my thought process is how Calvin had to take the time to answer/rebut those who claimed he taught that God is the author of evil. (I think he did an amazing job, might I add.) I don't believe someone who understands the dynamic that exists between creator and created, and in this case God and us, has any ground to make such a statement. I do understand that there are some other contingencies, but, from what I have noticed over the years is that these questions and statements seem to come from not truly understanding God's position, and our position, which are not the same. We cannot judge God in human terms, and in fact, we shouldn't judge Him at all.]

I'm definitely getting back to this post. TMSO, definitely expect a response soon (within the next week).

 

[Arial]

I'm definitely getting back to this post. TMSO, definitely expect a response soon (within the next week).

Good. I have missed your input.

 

[GeneZ]

Where in scripture does it say or present the concept of grace being a neutralizer of the negative influence of the flesh over the soul? That is just things being made up.

That is why we are commanded to be "filled" with the Spirit. Ephesians 5:18
So the flesh will not dominate over our soul.

When we are not filled with the Spirit and neglecting growing by grace and knowledge? We will grieve the Spirit.

The filling of the Spirit is the Spirit having control over our flesh as to make our soul able to have freedom to think
and choose according to truth. Truth that we will find ourselves being guided into if we are filled.

​

The mind governed by the flesh is death, but the mind governed by the Spirit is life and peace. ​

The mind governed by the flesh is hostile to God; it does not submit to God's law, nor can it do so. ​

Those who are in the realm of the flesh cannot please God." Romans 8:6-8​

.......

 

[GeneZ]

It is inconceivable that in all this, at the most crucial point of this redemption that has been working in and through thousands of years; that when God sent His Son to suffer and die to redeem a people for Himself; that He would then in effect step back away from the Son and say "We'll see how many you die for when the yes's and no's are counted. In the meantime die for them all anyway." That would be rude.

You say, "rude?"

So, your opinion is to override what Scripture tells us?
For it says? He did die for the entire world.

​

And He Himself is the propitiation/atonement for our sins, ​

and not for ours only but also for the whole world." 1 John 2:2​

Who are you to contradict God like that? The clay is speaking to the potter?

Why not instead try to find out why he died for all who will reject Him?
After all, it does says that He did die for all the world's sins.

Don't you realize? The way 1 John 2:2 is worded?
God wants us to wonder why He did atone for the sins of the whole world.


.......

 

[Arial]

Because of the unlimited atonement of the Cross God made us free to give the Gospel to every man.
Not only to give the Gospel to a designated select group of people.
For men's sins are not what is keeping them from Heaven.
Its their unbelief in Christ that sends people to Hell.

You argue with straw men always and forever. Calvinism does not teach that the gospel is to be give to a designated select group of people. Because of the straw men you use to fight your battles, you come up with illogical conclusions and call it fact.

"For men's sins are not----" is just word salad. What is the cause of God's wrath coming against men? Sin. They go to hell because of sin. Why do they go to hell because of sin? Because they rejected the One who paid for them. So if they reject Christ, they meet God's wrath in hell because their sins are still held against them.

If unlimited atonement were not a reality?
We would not have been told to preach the Gospel to all men.
There would be some different system which we do not have.

How on earth do you arrive at such an illogical conclusion? Is this your support for unlimited atonement? That because God did not give us another system of reaching men other than preaching the gospel then atonement is unlimited? It is utterly void of reason.

You see the Calvinist know a few things in regard to that, and they know it from the Bible. Romans 10:13-15,17)For everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved. How then will they call on Him in whom they have not believed" And how are they to believe in Him of whom they have never heard? ANd how are they to hear without someone preaching? And how are they to preach unless they are sent? 17 So faith comes from hearing, and hearing through the word of Christ.
And since they believe the scriptures that say all whom God gives to Jesus will come to Him. And that His sheep hear His voice and follow Him. And that God calls those He predestines to give to Christ; and because the Bible tells us to preach the gospel; then our job is to preach the gospel far and wide, for it is the voice of Him calling His lambs. God does His work of regeneration. Ours is to preach the gospel so they hear. It is not our job to make it look so appealing for all the wrong reasons that people say I will take that and turn our to be seed scattered in unregenerate soil, trusting in the wrong thing, their choice, and not Christ at all.

If the unbelievers sins were not paid for they would be with legitimate protest as to why they must spend eternity in the Lake of Fire.

But you say He did pay for them. Do you know what Paid In Full means?
You have Jesus paying for something with His life no less, and then having the person paying for it again in hell, making Jesus' sacrifice of no account. You also have a truly limited atonement that you won't admit to. You will not admit or even address either the oxymoron of what you say or that it creates a limited atonement. And the reason you won't is because you can't. The Bible won't support what is not true.

 

[GeneZ]

If He paid for all the sins of everyone, there would be no need to come to Him. The way you see it, it He doesn't really pay for them. It is the sinners choice that causes them to be paid or not paid for. It is an oxymoron to say He paid for them with His life and at the same time say He didn't. We both agree that it is through belief/faith that the work of Jesus is applied. But you say belief is a choice to believe/trust in Jesus and you need to validate that with scripture. Either way the atonement is limited to those who believe.

He paid for our sins as to make us free to come to Him. Not all will automatically want to come to Him.

It just can not be understood why some would choose not to come to Him.
Unless one realizes that the rejecting ones are examples of Satan and his angels.

For Satan and his angels were at one time free to be with Him.

 

[Arial]

That is why we are commanded to be "filled" with the Spirit. Ephesians 5:18
So the flesh will not dominate over our soul.

When we are not filled with the Spirit and neglecting growing by grace and knowledge? We will grieve the Spirit.

While that is true it does not justify changing it to me something it does not even apply to, and the referenced scripture is not about. Which is what you said below, and it was concering irriesistible grace. And irrresistible grace concerns grace in salvation or saviing grace, not every grace.

Grace when applied from God? That grace neutralizes the negative influence of the flesh over the soul. In doing so,
that grace power frees up that soul to either choose for, or against, Jesus Christ.

The filling of the Spirit is the Spirit having control over our flesh as to make our soul able to have freedom to think
and choose according to truth. Truth that we will find ourselves being guided into if we are filled.

We are not---talking about the filling of the Spiriit. We are talking about irresstible grace in salvaton. But interesting that you rail at God, saying if He doesn't allow us to contribute to our salvation by choosing Him, but instead sends grace to actually save us, He is forcing us to believe. And here you seem to think it is all right if the Holy Spirit controls our flesh.

 

[Arial]

So, your opinion is to override what Scripture tells us?
For it says? He did die for the entire world.

We have been over that scripture already. Here, I will direct you to what said about it so you can address it.Post #34 and post #60 I think this is the second time I have asked you to do so. And by address I do not simply mean disagree with but show me how what I said is wrong and why and why and how you correctly interpret it.

Who are you to contradict God like that? The clay is speaking to the potter?

I am not contradicting Him and I am not speaking to the Potter. I am telling you what He means and I find it highly unlikely that even an eight year old would read that passage and think world meant what you say it means. And I didn't just tell you what it meant, I made a legitimate case for it. Ignoring it and having no way of proving it wrong will not make it go away. It is you who say to the Potter, your have no right to violate my rights. You have no rights before God. He is free. You are not. He is the Potter. You are the clay. Can the clay talk back to the Potter? If you don't like that, and would not worship such a God, then you indict yourself.

Why not instead try to find out why he died for all who will reject Him?
After all, it does says that He did die for all the world's sins.

He didn't so I will be unable to find that out. Why don't you simply give a logical definition as used of "world" in that passage. That word is used in other ways than every person for all of time without exception. And one would be hard pressed to find a place anywhere, inside or outside the Bible, that it is ever used that way. God is pretty specific when He means every single person ever. He says things like "All have gone astray. No one does good," and to further stress the point adds, "no not one,"

Don't you realize? The way 1 John 2:2 is worded?
God wants us to wonder why He did atone for the sins of the whole world.

Too funny. Now I would believe your view if God had said for instance, that Jesus died for everyone, past present and future, but not really, just for those who believe.

 

[Arial]

He paid for our sins as to make us free to come to Him. Not all will automatically want to come to Him.

He paid for the sins of His people so that they could and would come to Him. He purchased them (know what that means?) with His blood. They are His posession. There is nothing wishy washy, iffy, hopeful, passive about God. Please get that through your head. When you purchase something you pay for it right? And then it is yours. Same with Jesus.

It just can not be understood why some would choose not to come to Him.
Unless one realizes that the rejecting ones are examples of Satan and his angels.

Nonsense about the anges. And it is easily understood why some come to Him and some don't. The Bible tells us point blank and without equivocaton a number of places. Here are a couple:
John 10: 14-16 I am the good shepherd. I know my own and my own know me, just as the Father knows me and I know the Father; and I lay down my life for the sheep. And I have other sheep that are not of thes fold. I must bring them also, and they will listen to my voice. So there will be one flock, one shepherd.
25. Jesus answered them, "I tol dyou, and you do not believe. The works that I do in my Father's name bear witnes about me, but you do not belive becasue you are not among my sheep. My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and the follow me. 29 My Father, who has given them to me, is greater that all, and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father's hand, I and the Father are one."

It is simple and clear as a bell. Jesus has specific sheep. He knows them. They hear His voice and follow Him. The ones who do not believe don't believe because they are not His sheep.

 

[GeneZ]

We are not---talking about the filling of the Spiriit. We are talking about irresstible grace in salvaton.

So that I do not presume to think what I know what irresistible grace means?

Which was taught according to Theodore Beza and not John Calvin?
https://www.gotquestions.org/Theodore-Beza.html

In your own understanding?
What does Irresistible grace consist of?

grace and peace ............

 

[GeneZ]

I like to talk...

Is Romans 3:12 also a Doctrine or Fundamental? I can answer your new question, but wasn't I first? Answer me, and I'll answer you; I promise...

Doctrine is a theological construct with a conclusion that was constructed with fundamentals.

Fundamentals are building materials. Not doctrines in themselves.

​

For no one can lay any foundation other than the one already laid, which is Jesus Christ.
If anyone builds on this foundation using gold, silver, costly stones, wood, hay or straw,
their work will be shown for what it is, because the Day will bring it to light. It will be
revealed with fire, and the fire will test the quality of each person’s work." 1 Cor 3:11-13​

Knowing one has salvation in Christ is our foundation.

 

[Arial]

So that I do not presume to think what I know what irresistible grace means?

Which was taught according to Theodore Beza and not John Calvin?
https://www.gotquestions.org/Theodore-Beza.html

In your own understanding?
What does Irresistible grace consist of?

grace and peace ............

In the new birth God changes our volition, and thank God for that! He does not violate our volition. Irresistible grace is effective grace. It does exactly what God sends it to do. And He sends it to save. Is 55:10-11"For as the rain and the snow come down from heaven and do not return there but water the earth,making it bring forth and sprout, giving seed to the sower and bread to the eater, so shall my word be that goes out from my mouth; it shall not return to me empty, but it shall accomplish that which I purpose, and shall succeed in the thing for which I sent it

We are saved by grace, through faith, and that is not of ourselves but is the gift of God that no one should boast. God sends grace to save, not potentially save. It is God doing it, not we ourselves. Stand back out of the way and look at God.

God gives graces to do the things that sanctify and to give understanding, and to learn and teach and all sorts of things. But the grace that is spoken of as the grace that saves is doing just that. Nothing in or about the person merited it, nothing they did contributed to it. He sends the Holy Spirit to raise the one dead in trespasses and sins to life, just as Christ was raised from the grave. That very same power and purpose.

 

[His clay]

We have been over that scripture already. Here, I will direct you to what said about it so you can address it.Post #34 and post #60 I think this is the second time I have asked you to do so. And by address I do not simply mean disagree with but show me how what I said is wrong and why and why and how you correctly interpret it.

I am not contradicting Him and I am not speaking to the Potter. I am telling you what He means and I find it highly unlikely that even an eight year old would read that passage and think world meant what you say it means. And I didn't just tell you what it meant, I made a legitimate case for it. Ignoring it and having no way of proving it wrong will not make it go away. It is you who say to the Potter, your have no right to violate my rights. You have no rights before God. He is free. You are not. He is the Potter. You are the clay. Can the clay talk back to the Potter? If you don't like that, and would not worship such a God, then you indict yourself.

He didn't so I will be unable to find that out. Why don't you simply give a logical definition as used of "world" in that passage. That word is used in other ways than every person for all of time without exception. And one would be hard pressed to find a place anywhere, inside or outside the Bible, that it is ever used that way. God is pretty specific when He means every single person ever. He says things like "All have gone astray. No one does good," and to further stress the point adds, "no not one,"

Too funny. Now I would believe your view if God had said for instance, that Jesus died for everyone, past present and future, but not really, just for those who believe.

"You have no rights before God. He is free. You are not. He is the Potter. You are the clay. Can the clay talk back to the Potter?"

Exactly the reason my screen name is His clay. God is God; and I am not. @GeneZ stumbles over this most basic truth. Hence, the repeated blasphemy from GeneZ.

 

[GeneZ]

We are saved by grace, through faith, and that is not of ourselves but is the gift of God that no one should boast. God sends grace to save, not potentially save. It is God doing it, not we ourselves. Stand back out of the way and look at God.

God gives graces to do the things that sanctify and to give understanding, and to learn and teach and all sorts of things. But the grace that is spoken of as the grace that saves is doing just that. Nothing in or about the person merited it, nothing they did contributed to it. He sends the Holy Spirit to raise the one dead in trespasses and sins to life, just as Christ was raised from the grave. That very same power and purpose.

That is not answer that explains what the grace does. Its only waxing poetic.

The question: What does grace do? What is its power to do for man?

Grace in the Bible has various applications.
One is in bringing us to salvation....
Then after salvation to continue working in our lives to bring us to maturity in Christ.

And be growing in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. ​

To Him be the glory both now, and to the day of eternity. Amen." 2 Peter 3:18​

There is one truth about God's grace that applies in all phases of God's use.

Its "enabling power" for the powerless.

But he said to me, “My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness.”
Therefore I will boast all the more gladly about my weaknesses, so that Christ’s power may rest on me." ​

2 Cor 12:9​

Grace is real power that God administers to those whom He chooses for the purpose of His plan.


Before regeneration..

Our natural fallen state was powerless to overcome the tyrannical dominance of our flesh over our soul.
Without God's grace? No one could be free to believe.

For the flesh craves what is contrary to the Spirit, and the Spirit what is contrary to the flesh. ​

They are opposed to each other, so that you do not do what you want." Galatians 5:17​

While drawing us God's grace will push down our flesh's power that would otherwise dominate over our soul.
In doing that? Our soul is made to be free (by grace) to finally be able to choose what we want to believe.
And, if we found ourselves wanting to? Grace also makes a soul equally free to reject God.
But this time, rejection comes freely from the soul without the flesh dictating the decision against God.
That soul, like Satan did, ends up making that evil choice freely. That is why God will punish as He will.

Those whom the Father is able to draw to a predetermined level which He sees as the point of completion?
That one will be ready. God will know that they will want to believe in Jesus. That is when the Father hands that soul over to the Son.

God created man in His image. (Gen 1:26-27)

To be in God's image means man is to reflect the nature of God.

To be a true reflection? God granted man his own area of sovereignty to be within a domain specified by God.
That sovereignty of man resides in his volition within a realm God designated for man to choose from.

Man's sovereignty is so absolute in how God created man in His image?
That God Himself can not change our mind if we should end up resenting Him and wanting no part of Him...

In that manner God has truly created man in His image. Having sovereignty within a realm of choosing determined by God.

For now.....

grace and peace!

 

[GeneZ]

"You have no rights before God. He is free. You are not. He is the Potter. You are the clay. Can the clay talk back to the Potter?"

Exactly the reason my screen name is His clay. God is God; and I am not. @GeneZ stumbles over this most basic truth. Hence, the repeated blasphemy from GeneZ.

But indeed, O man, who are you to reply against God? Will the thing formed say to him who formed it, ​

“Why have you made me like this?” Does not the potter have power over the clay, from the same lump ​

to make one vessel for honor and another for dishonor?​

​

What if God, wanting to show His wrath and to make His power known, endured with great patience ​

the vessels of wrath prepared for destruction." Romans 9:20-22​

He is the potter who molds and forms our souls with trials and pressures that He brings our way.
The excuse makers will blame God for their failures. They have no right to talk back to God.
For out from the same types of pressures and trials? Some making right decisions will become noble souls.

Those noble souls who faced the same pressures will leave those who wanted to talk back to God to be without excuse.

Its comforting to know what that passage is talking about.

 

[TMSO]

I'm definitely getting back to this post. TMSO, definitely expect a response soon (within the next week).

That's fine. Remember, it is curiosity. I hope this is because you find the question interesting. I have a way of thinking that isn't something set in stone, other than, God is not us, and we are not God. I am interested in how you look at this, basically when considering God's sovereignty next to who we are. In my comment, just asking if this comes to mind when you see some of the comments non-calvinists make.