straw men?

[CrowCross]

That sort of thing happens every day.

I'm sure it does...but I was asking why?

 

[Synergy]

If God puts a preacher in front of you..yeah, that's not regeneration. If God allows your "heart to be open" so to speak and believe the word that would be regeneration...or part of it.

I don't see a reference to a heart being opened. I see someone intentionally believing the word with his heart.

Where does that leave regeneration? Looks like it occurs only after one intentionally believes.

 

[Josheb]

If God puts a preacher in front of you..yeah, that's not regeneration. If God allows your "heart to be open" so to speak and believe the word that would be regeneration...or part of it.

What, exactly, do you mean by "allows" the heart to be open? How does that heart open once "allowed"? Is there a verse that actually, explicitly states God allows the opening of the heart while still in the sinful and unregenerate flesh-only state?

 

[Synergy]

What, exactly, do you mean by "allows" the heart to be open? How does that heart open once "allowed"? Is there a verse that actually, explicitly states God allows the opening of the heart while still in the sinful and unregenerate flesh-only state?

What I read in Rom 10:8-17 is someone intentionally believing the word with his heart. Where do you think that leaves regeneration? Where do you think it occurs in the sequence of events mentioned in those verses?

 

[Josheb]

Why would one man choose to believe yet another not when exposed to the exact same message?

That sort of thing happens every day.

I'm sure it does...but I was asking why?

Several explanations. People have differences in the following ways:

• Bondage to the sinful state
• Bondage to some stronghold in the redeemed and regenerate state
• Delusion
• Dissociation
• Divine intervention (either way: blindness or illumination)
• Emotion(s)
• Experience (or lack thereof)
• Knowledge (or lack thereof)
• Legalism
• Hypocrisy
• Personal preferences and/or biases
• Youth

Two or more people can view the exact same information and view it differently because of any one of the above (or a mixture thereof). Keep in mind the op is specifically soteriological in nature, not epistemological (doctrine of salvation, not philosophy of knowledge) and most of Christendom both Arminian and Calvinist hods to what we now call "Total Depravity" so there is a fundamental distinction made when it comes to salvation between how two people can and do respond to information pertaining to salvation. Sinful humanity absolutely cannot do so apart from God's work. Regenerate humanity absolutely can respond. Arminius argued a God-made intermediate state where the dead-in-sin was enabled to understand and choose prior to regeneration. The non-Arminian synergist (Pelagian or Provisionist) believes sinful man retains a natural ability in the flesh and does not need the indwelling Spirit to respond. That list above applies differently to each category of human (dead in sin and unable to respond, regeneratively enabled to respond, naturally able to respond). The monergist would typically relegate all but one of those bullet points to any and all unregenerate human and hold the regenerated person will always see, hear, understand, and respond differently in comparison to all the others who amidst their diversity remain unable to respond.

 

[CrowCross]

I don't see a reference to a heart being opened.

I see Lydia.

I see someone intentionally believing the word with his heart.

Chapter and verse.

Where does that leave regeneration? Looks like it occurs only after one intentionally believes.

Chapter and verse please.....otherwise all you have is opinion. Now, if you want to say to me I believe it to be this way because that's what I believe...have at it. But don't tell me my belief is wrong because you disagree with me and your disagreement can't be backed up with scripture.

 

[CrowCross]

What, exactly, do you mean by "allows" the heart to be open? How does that heart open once "allowed"? Is there a verse that actually, explicitly states God allows the opening of the heart while still in the sinful and unregenerate flesh-only state?

Yeah, John 6:65 is a beginning.

 

[CrowCross]

Several explanations. People have differences in the following ways:

• Bondage to the sinful state
• Bondage to some stronghold in the redeemed and regenerate state
• Delusion
• Dissociation
• Divine intervention (either way: blindness or illumination)
• Emotion(s)
• Experience (or lack thereof)
• Knowledge (or lack thereof)
• Legalism
• Hypocrisy
• Personal preferences and/or biases
• Youth

Two or more people can view the exact same information and view it differently because of any one of the above (or a mixture thereof). Keep in mind the op is specifically soteriological in nature, not epistemological (doctrine of salvation, not philosophy of knowledge) and most of Christendom both Arminian and Calvinist hods to what we now call "Total Depravity" so there is a fundamental distinction made when it comes to salvation between how two people can and do respond to information pertaining to salvation. Sinful humanity absolutely cannot do so apart from God's work. Regenerate humanity absolutely can respond. Arminius argued a God-made intermediate state where the dead-in-sin was enabled to understand and choose prior to regeneration. The non-Arminian synergist (Pelagian or Provisionist) believes sinful man retains a natural ability in the flesh and does not need the indwelling Spirit to respond. That list above applies differently to each category of human (dead in sin and unable to respond, regeneratively enabled to respond, naturally able to respond). The monergist would typically relegate all but one of those bullet points to any and all unregenerate human and hold the regenerated person will always see, hear, understand, and respond differently in comparison to all the others who amidst their diversity remain unable to respond.

Let me get this straight....ones salvation is dependent on their perception? Age? Preference? Knowledge?

 

[Josheb]

What I read in Rom 10:8-17 is someone intentionally believing the word with his heart. Where do you think that leaves regeneration? Where do you think it occurs in the sequence of events mentioned in those verses?

Romans 10 is explicitly written to already-regenerate believing saints. It states that at the beginning of the epistle and again in the first line of chapter 10. The "you" and "your" of verses 6-9 are also ALL regenerate saints and not unregenerate, sinfully dead and enslaved atheists. With verse 10 Paul uses third-person language, "a person," and "they" but the context established by then is ALL regenerate saints. There isn't a single verse in the entire chapter that even remotely specifies an unregenerate non-believing atheist. Therefore, if we kept to the explicitly established context the only ones "intentionally believing the word with his heart" are the saints in Rome (and by extension the saints of any time and place. Paul wrote several lines there that could be read applicable in a secularly psychological context were it not for the fact he explicitly stated he was writing to the brethren about the brethren's experience.

There is also a parallel context specific to Romans chapters 9-11 whereby Paul is writing about Israel, and the soteriological and eschatological conditions existing for Israel in the first century. We know this is limited specifically and solely to the first century because in chapter 11 Paul explicitly states, "at the present time" (Romans 11:5). In other words, Paul is not writing about soteriological or eschatological conditions that apply to the 21st century. The matter is complicated somewhat because despite Paul speaking about Israel and his "kinsmen," (v. 9:3) and "His people," (v. 11:2), he has explicitly stated not all Israel is Israel and they are not all descendants of Abraham (v. 9:6), and it is only those who are of God's promise that are descendants. There are larger contexts that apply here because the promises were all administered monergistically and everyone in the specified group lived also lived in a God-initiated, monergistically-initiated covenant relationship with God. They were also all people who believed in God. In other words, none of them were atheists. There's not a single sentence in the entire chapter of Romans 10 that is specifically or explicitly about any atheist individual or group. When Paul states, "So faith comes from hearing, and hearing by the word of Christ," there is NOTHING in that chapter that would allow that sentence to apply to a random atheist who walks into a worship service, hear the gospel, and then in his still-sinful unregenerate flesh believe what he heard and respond.

MAYBE that sentence could apply to the atheist were those words written in some other epistle and some other context where atheistic non-believers are explicitly specified and the faith cited is solely fleshly, still-sinful, unregenerate flesh, but that is NOT the case in Romans 10.




Since your handle is @Synergy, I suspect you disagree. The division between us can be resolved instantly if a verse in that chapter can be provided that explicitly mentions any atheist. Otherwise, any and all inferential reading will have to necessarily explain how all the explicit language should be dismissed or isn't applicable. Some justification for ignoring both the "you" and "your" AND the "they" or covenant Israel of promise.

If it is not going to be dismissed or rendered not applicable, then the Romans 10:8-17 passage CANNOT be made synergistic. The people having "faith comes from hearing" are only people already living in a covenant relationship, people already living in the promises of God, and/or people who Paul describes at the beginning of the epistle as "the called of Jesus Christ.... beloved of God..., called as saints."

Last point: Romans was written at the end of his first batch of letters. Five or six years would go by before he penned his letters to Ephesus, Philippi, and Colossae, and the pastoral letters to Timothy. His first batch of letters dealt with divisions in the Church and attacked various false teachings and heresies that arose in the early decades of the New Testament Church. Prior to his letter to the Romans Paul wrote to the Galatians where he explained how the promises made to Abraham and his seed were not promises made to Abraham and Israel, but Abraham and Jesus.

Galatians 3:16
Now the promises were spoken to Abraham and to his seed. He does not say, "And to seeds," as referring to many, but rather to one, "And to your seed," that is, Christ.


By the time the Christians in Rome received Paul's letter to them they had likely also heard his letter to the Galatians. They would have read chapter 10 of the Romans letter with the understanding Jesus, not Israel, was the seed. EVERY single mention of God's promises in the entire Bible should be read in that context. Paul explicitly excludes Israel of the law in the verses that follow Galatians 3:16. Even if the original Roman readers did not know the information contained in the Galatians epistle, we here in the 21st century should not and cannot read Romans 10 to contradict Galatians 3:16.

So I have worked from the specifics of Romans 10, then applied salient contexts from Romans as a whole, then the connects Paul himself made, those of the covenant and promises, and then Paul's other letters. Very little in the Bible is written about the atheist. NONE of it was originally written to them. Everything in the entire Bible was originally written by and to people already living in a God-initiated (monergistically) covenant relationship. None of it can be read outside that stated context without discarding that fact.


So.....


Show me the sentence in Romans 10 explicitly applying what is written to the atheist.

 

[Synergy]

I see Lydia.

Chapter and verse.

Chapter and verse please.....otherwise all you have is opinion. Now, if you want to say to me I believe it to be this way because that's what I believe...have at it. But don't tell me my belief is wrong because you disagree with me and your disagreement can't be backed up with scripture.

I mentioned the verses just a few posts earlier. See here:

https://christcentered.community.forum/threads/straw-men.1446/post-59597

I do not see Lydia mentioned in there.

Verse Rom 10:9 is where I see an exhortion for people to intentionally believe the word with their hearts.

Where does that leave regeneration?

 

[CrowCross]

I mentioned the verses just a few posts earlier. See here:

https://christcentered.community.forum/threads/straw-men.1446/post-59597

I do not see Lydia mentioned in there.

Verse Rom 10:9 is where I see an exhortion for people to intentionally believe the word with their hearts.

How does that demonstrate your point? It certainly doesn't address my point......God has to act..OR...you can't.
I presented Lydia as an example.

Where does that leave regeneration?

Logically the first step....in actuality it happens at the same time.

 

[Synergy]

Romans 10 is explicitly written to already-regenerate believing saints. It states that at the beginning of the epistle and again in the first line of chapter 10. The "you" and "your" of verses 6-9 are also ALL regenerate saints and not unregenerate, sinfully dead and enslaved atheists. With verse 10 Paul uses third-person language, "a person," and "they" but the context established by then is ALL regenerate saints. There isn't a single verse in the entire chapter that even remotely specifies an unregenerate non-believing atheist. Therefore, if we kept to the explicitly established context the only ones "intentionally believing the word with his heart" are the saints in Rome (and by extension the saints of any time and place. Paul wrote several lines there that could be read applicable in a secularly psychological context were it not for the fact he explicitly stated he was writing to the brethren about the brethren's experience.

There is also a parallel context specific to Romans chapters 9-11 whereby Paul is writing about Israel, and the soteriological and eschatological conditions existing for Israel in the first century. We know this is limited specifically and solely to the first century because in chapter 11 Paul explicitly states, "at the present time" (Romans 11:5). In other words, Paul is not writing about soteriological or eschatological conditions that apply to the 21st century. The matter is complicated somewhat because despite Paul speaking about Israel and his "kinsmen," (v. 9:3) and "His people," (v. 11:2), he has explicitly stated not all Israel is Israel and they are not all descendants of Abraham (v. 9:6), and it is only those who are of God's promise that are descendants. There are larger contexts that apply here because the promises were all administered monergistically and everyone in the specified group lived also lived in a God-initiated, monergistically-initiated covenant relationship with God. They were also all people who believed in God. In other words, none of them were atheists. There's not a single sentence in the entire chapter of Romans 10 that is specifically or explicitly about any atheist individual or group. When Paul states, "So faith comes from hearing, and hearing by the word of Christ," there is NOTHING in that chapter that would allow that sentence to apply to a random atheist who walks into a worship service, hear the gospel, and then in his still-sinful unregenerate flesh believe what he heard and respond.

MAYBE that sentence could apply to the atheist were those words written in some other epistle and some other context where atheistic non-believers are explicitly specified and the faith cited is solely fleshly, still-sinful, unregenerate flesh, but that is NOT the case in Romans 10.




Since your handle is @Synergy, I suspect you disagree. The division between us can be resolved instantly if a verse in that chapter can be provided that explicitly mentions any atheist. Otherwise, any and all inferential reading will have to necessarily explain how all the explicit language should be dismissed or isn't applicable. Some justification for ignoring both the "you" and "your" AND the "they" or covenant Israel of promise.

If it is not going to be dismissed or rendered not applicable, then the Romans 10:8-17 passage CANNOT be made synergistic. The people having "faith comes from hearing" are only people already living in a covenant relationship, people already living in the promises of God, and/or people who Paul describes at the beginning of the epistle as "the called of Jesus Christ.... beloved of God..., called as saints."

Last point: Romans was written at the end of his first batch of letters. Five or six years would go by before he penned his letters to Ephesus, Philippi, and Colossae, and the pastoral letters to Timothy. His first batch of letters dealt with divisions in the Church and attacked various false teachings and heresies that arose in the early decades of the New Testament Church. Prior to his letter to the Romans Paul wrote to the Galatians where he explained how the promises made to Abraham and his seed were not promises made to Abraham and Israel, but Abraham and Jesus.

Galatians 3:16
Now the promises were spoken to Abraham and to his seed. He does not say, "And to seeds," as referring to many, but rather to one, "And to your seed," that is, Christ.


By the time the Christians in Rome received Paul's letter to them they had likely also heard his letter to the Galatians. They would have read chapter 10 of the Romans letter with the understanding Jesus, not Israel, was the seed. EVERY single mention of God's promises in the entire Bible should be read in that context. Paul explicitly excludes Israel of the law in the verses that follow Galatians 3:16. Even if the original Roman readers did not know the information contained in the Galatians epistle, we here in the 21st century should not and cannot read Romans 10 to contradict Galatians 3:16.

So I have worked from the specifics of Romans 10, then applied salient contexts from Romans as a whole, then the connects Paul himself made, those of the covenant and promises, and then Paul's other letters. Very little in the Bible is written about the atheist. NONE of it was originally written to them. Everything in the entire Bible was originally written by and to people already living in a God-initiated (monergistically) covenant relationship. None of it can be read outside that stated context without discarding that fact.


So.....


Show me the sentence in Romans 10 explicitly applying what is written to the atheist.

Thank you very much for your time and for all your thoughts coming from multiple different angles. Permit me to ask you a question or two about your first paragraph before I venture into all your other paragraphs.

Are you saying that Rom 10:8-17 is speaking about regenerated but not-yet saved believers? If so, let's go along with that idea which evokes the following questions:

1) How is one a believer and not saved when Rom 10:9 says that belief produces salvation:

(Rom 10:9) Because if you confess the Lord Jesus, and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you shall be saved.

2) How is it possible to be spiritually alive (regenerated) but still spiritually dead in sins (not saved)?

(John 8:24) Therefore I said to you that you shall die in your sins, for if you do not believe that I AM, you shall die in your sins.

3) Titus 3:5 declares that you are saved at regeneration by the Holy Spirit. If so, then why are those regenerated believers still need to be saved according to Rom 10:9?

(Titus 3:5) not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to His mercy He saved us, through the washing of regeneration and renewal of the Holy Spirit,

 

[Arial]

Why would one man choose to believe yet another not when exposed to the exact same message?

John 3:3 Jesus answered, "Truly, truly, I say to ou, unless one is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God."
5. Jesus answered, "Truly,truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God. 6.That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.?"

1 Cor 2:14 The person without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God but considers them foolishness, and cannot understand them because they are discerned only through the Spirit.

It isn't a matter of choosing to believe, it is a matter of whether one is born again or not that determines whether one believes what he hears or not.

 

[Arial]

1) How is one a believer and not saved when Rom 10:9 says that belief produces salvation:

(Rom 10:9) Because if you confess the Lord Jesus, and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you shall be saved.

It doesn't say belief produces salvation. It says if you believe then you are saved. Eph 2 tell us that we are saved through faith, not that faith produces salvation.

2) How is it possible to be spiritually alive (regenerated) but still spiritually dead in sins (not saved)?

It isn't. And I did not read all of his post but I highly doubt @Josheb said anything remotely to that effect.

 

[Synergy]

It doesn't say belief produces salvation. It says if you believe then you are saved. Eph 2 tell us that we are saved through faith, not that faith produces salvation.

You're stating the same thing I asked. Let me rephrase my question according to your statement. How can a believer not be saved?

It isn't. And I did not read all of his post but I highly doubt @Josheb said anything remotely to that effect.

Sorry, "it isn't" is not a good enough response.

 

[Synergy]

How does that demonstrate your point? It certainly doesn't address my point......God has to act..OR...you can't.

Again, Rom 10:9 is where I see an exhortion for people to intentionally believe the word with their hearts.

I presented Lydia as an example.

Rom 10 does not present anything to that effect.

Logically the first step....in actuality it happens at the same time.

I'll stick with Biblical steps. All other forms of steps must be authenticated with what the Bible actually reveals.

 

[Josheb]

1) How is one a believer and not saved when Rom 10:9 says that belief produces salvation:

(Rom 10:9) Because if you confess the Lord Jesus, and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you shall be saved.

Romans 10:9 does not say belief produces salvation. You just quoted the verse to prove it! Nowhere is the word "produced" existent in that verse. More importantly, and more specifically and explicitly stated in the larger passage is the fact that the "believe in your heart.... you will be saved" is not written about atheists. It is written first and foremost to those already saved and then secondarily, about those of Israel that are Israel by promise - and those people already believe in God! They are not atheists. They were people who already believed in God and already believed in a coming Messiah, and already believed in sin, and already believed in the need for sin's address. None of that applies to the atheist. The athiest does not believe God exists. The atheist does not believe in Jesus. The atheist does not believe sin exist, nor does s/he believe there is any need whatsoever for any kind of salvation from the non-existent sin.

• Paul is not writing to atheists.
• Paul is not writing about atheists.
• Romans 10:9 is not about atheists and should not be applied to atheists.
• Atheists are completely different than the saints and those of Israel that are Israel of promise.

Do not misapply the verse.

1) How is one a believer and not saved when Rom 10:9 says that belief produces salvation:

I did not say they believers and not saved. Properly read the verse should be understood to say those who believe..... will believe. The saints to whom Paul wrote already believed. The "you" in verse 9 is the saints. Paul is not writing to anyone other than the saints in Rome. Now you might ask, "But Josh, the saints in Rome were already saved. They did not need to be saved. They did not need to believe in order to be saved." And I will answer by saying salvation is not an instantaneous event. Conversion is instantaneous. Salvation is a lifelong process that is not completed until we are raised incorruptible and immortal. The New Testament speaks of salvation in past, present, and future tenses. The saints will be saved. The converted will be saved. Those who believe will be saved. More importantly, however, Romans 10:9 does not actually make a causal relationship. It does not state "belief causes salvation." It most definitely does not state "if the non-believer believes solely in his or her flesh then that fleshly belief will cause his salvation." Neither does it state, "if the non-believer believes solely in his or her flesh then that fleshly belief will cause God to save the non-believer turned believer in flesh alone."

None of those interpretations are supported by the passage's actual statements.

2) How is it possible to be spiritually alive (regenerated) but still spiritually dead in sins (not saved)?

It isn't. First, the phrase "spiritually dead" is nowhere to be found in scripture. I never use it. I said the person was dead in sin. A person who is dead in sin is not saved. A person who is dead in Christ is saved. Those two people are two completely different types of people.

3) Titus 3:5 declares that you are saved at regeneration by the Holy Spirit.

Read it again. Read it exactly as written because it does NOT state "saved at regeneration by the Holy Spirit."

I want you to take great care and great pain to read scripture exactly as written while we discuss this because every time I read the scriptures misrepresented I am going to note that, and you are going to get frustrated. Let's avoid that. What Titus 3:5 actually states is that the saints about whom Paul was writing, were saved

not by works
according to God's mercy
by the washing of regeneration (is there a difference between regeneration and its washing, or are the two identical? )
and renewing by the Spirit.

That is what the verse actually states That is all it states. The "us" and the "we" of that passage is those who already have Jesus as their Savior (as stipulated at the beginning of the epistle).

If so, then why are those regenerated believers still need to be saved according to Rom 10:9?

Because salvation is a process that is completed at resurrection. We are converted in an instant, saved in the end. There would be no sense in ever writing "will be saved," if salvation from sin was all done, all wholly completed at conversion. Simply put, the saved will be saved. All of the epistles were written to saved believers being saved who would be saved. Most of what is contained in all of the epistles was written about the saved believers being saved that would be saved. Very little of it is written about non-believers who would be saved and only a very small portion of any of that can and should be applied to the atheist who believes nothing soteriological.

If you're going to mix Romans 10:9 with Titus 3:5 then you first have to have the correct rendering of both verses, and I advise not removing either verse from their stated contexts.

 

[CrowCross]

Again, Rom 10:9 is where I see an exhortion for people to intentionally believe the word with their hearts.

I look at scripture in light of scripture....John 6:59 has an impact.

Rom 10 does not present anything to that effect.

Lydia had her heart opened by God. You do know that?

I'll stick with Biblical steps. All other forms of steps must be authenticated with what the Bible actually reveals.

You now the steps? Post them, you'll be the first to get it right.

 

[Arial]

You're stating the same thing I asked. Let me rephrase my question according to your statement. How can a believer not be saved?

No one said that a believer was not saved, so your question was based on something that didn't exist. I was simply pointing out that you misstated what the scripture was saying.

Sorry, "it isn't" is not a good enough response.

When someone asks how it is possible for someone to be spiritually dead and spiritually alive at the same time, "it isn't" is the only answer. It is a ludicrous question and was in no way related to anything anyone said.

 

[Mr GLee]

For in Limited Atonement, those who are elect becomes confined to only a small group of people.; and in Unconditional Election this has nothing to do with our choices as moral agents and is also based solely on the sovereign choice of God to either save or condemn every individual.

Calvin is dead. We have the same book of the law.Same loving commandment study to show our approval to God not seen . No approval from Calvin.

The elect is only a small group. Many hear the gospel but do not mix faith in what they hear. . Looking to the literal historical temporal what the eyes, and not the eternal unseen things of the faith of Christ, as his labor of love. . . that works in those yoked with him .

Remember he is of one mind and always does whatsoevers His soul desires. Let there be and it was God good.

Hebrews 4King James Version4 Let us therefore fear, lest, a promise being left us of entering into his rest, any of you should seem to come short of it.2 For unto us was the gospel preached, as well as unto them: but the word preached did not profit them, not being "mixed" with faith (Christ's) in them that heard it.

Matthew 20:16 So the last shall be first, and the first last: for many be called, but few chosen.(elected )

Elected names writen in the lambs' book from the foundation the six days he did work

Matthew 22:14 For many are called, but few are chosen (elected )