I just don’t understand why Christians deny that no Fallen person seeks God. I know why, they pick sides; I just don't understand why they pick sides...
Romans 7
. The thing they do not want to do, they do. It is very
natural to explain things through our own experience, to do explain things from our own human-centric experience, to want to anthropomorphize divinely made conditions. Humans do not face the depths of their sinfulness, or the profundity of the resulting depravity. It's hard even for Christians. We'd rip the skin off ourselves if we grasped the entirety of our condition. I once thought I was a contributor to my own salvation. I could have sworn I chose God and gladly told everyone to whom I bore witness (because of my conversion experience and ability to tell a good story I was often chosen to give my testimony, and I made the rounds and the local evangelical (and some non-evangelical) congregations. I used to argue vigorously with monergists. It was only in my submitting to Go's word that I changed my knowledge, understanding, and conduct. There isn't an example of a sinfully enslaved unregenerate non-believer coming to God on his/her own to seek his own salvation independent of God already at work in that individual's life to that specific effect. There are no verses anywhere in the Bible ascribing causality to the sinner's volition. Where stated, they all assign causality to God.
It's like playing Poker. Picking sides is like only trying to get a Flush. Not picking a side is like trying to get a Straight. You can use All the Cards then; it's like using All Scripture...
Use All Scripture; there is no one who seeks God, no not One. But they try for a "Total Ability" Flush, and trade Romans 3:11 for a fresh card from the deck. No, let's play the hand God dealt; even when it means our side loses...
Yep. Confirmation bias owns many slaves. That's why I connected this op to my own most recent op. No verse selected in support of this op will occur outside the contexts I cited there, yet neglecting those contexts (especially the audience affiliation) is perhaps the most frequently occurring and the most exegetically failing mistake made in synergism. It is why asking for an example of what is espoused almost always results in non-responsiveness or, if answered,
always reveals the aforementioned human-centric, eisegetic, inference-based inferences (instead of statement-based exegetical inferences).
An appeal to what atheists know is an odd way to justify synergism - especially if it is incorrect. An appeal to whether atheists know
the gospel does nothing to preclude the truth of statements like Romans 1:21 and 26, Romans 8:6-8, or 1 Corinthians 2:14. It does nothing to preclude the three monergisms of covenant context, audience affiliation, and divine causality. Pursuing only a flush with half a hand dealt when other possibilities - other more exegetically rational alternatives - exist
is a bad play. I did a little Googling about atheists' knowledge of the gospel and every source cited a minority knowledge and understanding of the Christian gospel (stats ranged from 18 to 39%). The opening statement of the op is factually incorrect. AI curiously came back with a reply, "
Defining "correct understanding" is subjective: The definition of 'correct' understanding varies, even within Christianity. There is no universally accepted standard, particularly when considering the diverse interpretations and denominations within Christianity."
That will NOT be true of anyone who stands before God in judgment.
Everyone stands before God in judgment,
There will not be any debate over what constitutes the gospel, and no debate will be allowed by those who've soiled their pants dreading their circumstances. Stench (of sin, not what's in their britches) will be their only contribution to that conversation. It all boils down to a very simple axiom:
If God exists then we are not in charge.
Yeah, but I chose my salvation.
It's not your salvation; it is God's, and His alone.
He gave it to you.
Romans 4:4 NIV
Now to the one who works, wages are not credited as a gift but as an obligation.
Ephesians 2:8
For by grace you have been saved through faith; and this is not of yourselves, it is the gift of God...
.
Stop ten atheist on the street and ask them what the Gospel is, and most will give you an answer that shows that they get the gist of it.
Intellectual assent is not salvific.
They may be incapable of seeing the love in it, but they still want to be cured.
As it has been written: “There is none righteous, not even one; there is none understanding; there is none seeking after God. All have turned away; together they have become worthless (Rom. 3:10-12 BLB). That was written
to Christians
about the unsaved.
Psalm 10:4
The wicked, in his haughtiness, does not seek Him. There is no God in all his schemes.
Psalm 14:1
The fool has said in his heart, “There is no God.”
That would make all atheists fools. Very odd thing upon which to build a soteriology.
Matthew 13:11-15
And he answered them, “To you it has been given to know the secrets of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it has not been given. For to the one who has, more will be given, and he will have an abundance, but from the one who has not, even what he has will be taken away. This is why I speak to them in parables, because seeing they do not see, and hearing they do not hear, nor do they understand. Indeed, in their case the prophecy of Isaiah is fulfilled that says: 'You will indeed hear but never understand, and you will indeed see but never perceive.' For this people’s heart has grown dull, and with their ears they can barely hear, and their eyes they have closed, lest they should see with their eyes and hear with their ears and understand with their heart and turn, and I would heal them.’
Atheists do not want to be cured. Atheists deny the affliction. They
cannot be healed because they do not understand. The secrets of the kingdom have not been given to them. The disciples did not fully grasp what Jesus meant. Few if any Christians fully understand the gospel new in their new birth. God saved us in spite of ourselves, not because of ourselves.
