What does an unregenerate heart lack that keeps a person from coming to faith?

[Dave]

Excellent thread, my friend. If I may add, even the demons believe & shudder (James 2:19). As Luther, Calvin and the Augustine once wrote, it's a living Faith; a true Faith. And the battle cry of the Reformation is you are Justified by Faith Alone but not by Faith that is Alone. Meaning that the regenerating power of the Holy Spirit is transforming believing sinners into the image of Christ. And this is a live long process called Sanctification.

But to clarify when a sinner hears, believes and trust in Him who justifies the ungodly. That moment they are declared righteous before a Holy God apart from works of the Law. For a sinner cannot produce or offer God anything in exchange for redemption. In the Gospel announcement God provides everything we need in Christ. Which includes perfect holiness that Christ merits by His own obedience that is given or credited to those who believe. (1 Cor. 1:30).
​

People bring up how God wanted to make Israel jealous. God chose Israel out of sheer mercy and good pleasure, not because they earned it or were perfectly holy people. They transgressed against God over and over again. God who is rich in Mercy found a way to redeem gentiles too. But people always want to be pessimistic and ridicule the greatest news any guilty person can hear.

Hey Dodgers fan

I agree with everything that you've written above here. I only brought up the jealousy thing to highlight that maybe their faith wasn't motivated by the purest desires.

Not necessarily, the walking dead (sinners) suppress the truth because they lust the desires of the flesh and mind. They seek to worship idols made from human hands instead of Almighty God himself. They hate the light and love the darkness.

I just posted that same passage above to John. It paralleled a lot of the passages in the OT that we've been discussing in this thread recently. They all seem to say the same thing, that God finalized the process of the effects of sin as judgment, to a people who would have otherwise still had the potential to believe. At least those passages seems to suggests that.

You are looking at this in reverse. It's God himself who descended to us, revealed himself to us in His Son. Without Him coming to us first we will never come to him. His sheep hear his voice and follow him. He knows his sheep and his sheep knows him (John 10). He came to redeem his people from their sins.

It is possible that Jesus is referring to the OT believers with a true faith. They could very well be the ones that the Father gave Him. I know that there are other passages where the context could be the bigger picture, but this one could just as easily be the smaller context. All those who had a genuine faith in the OT revelation, before they had heard the the Gospel, would hear His voice, and come to Him, and He would give them eternal life, at the cross, where we all got our eternal life. They didn't have that yet. What they had was a promise, not yet realized.

I have some threads on this, try 'What happened in Acts and 'Regeneration and Born again are not synonymous' threads, if you're bored.

No, Faith is a Gift from God (Ephesians 2).

Does Eph 2 really say that? Maybe the faith once we are in Him. But we differ in opinion on when we are actually in him. This is where faith takes us. "For through Him we both have access by one Spirit to the Father"(Eph 1:18). Then and only then we're "...made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved), and raised us up together, and made us sit together in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus," (Ephes 4b-5).

Please challenge me, I was once an Arminian before I recanted that and become a convinced Classical Calvinism. I believe it's all of Grace; Monergistic not Synergistic.

I can do that. If you can be partial, I'll give some good questions to ask me.

By Grace Alone!

Agreed.

 

[Rescued One]

As far as morality goes...this passage seems to paint a different picture.

2:14-15 for when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do the things in the law, these, although not having the law, are a law to themselves, who show the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and between themselves their thoughts accusing or else excusing them)

From the perspective of seeking go.

Paul is quoting Psalms, which sheds a little more light on the context. This was discussed elsewhere in this thread about other passages that said the same. "They have all turned aside" begs the question, from what? Where they able to see before "they all turned aside" The fact that God looks down upon the children of that time to see if there were any who understand and who seek God would appear at a glance to answer that question. Psalm 53: says the same thing, but adds "They have together become corrupt". Interesting, that they "became corrupt". One could argue that sin needs to take it's course, and their comes a point in time, while being in a bad state, God, as judgment, puts the final nail in the coffin, lest they see, hear, and believe. Just a thought.

Psalm 14:2-4 The Lord looks down from heaven upon the children of men, To see if there are any who understand, who seek God. They have all turned aside, They have together become corrupt; There is none who does good, No, not one. Have all the workers of iniquity no knowledge, Who eat up my people as they eat bread, And do not call on the Lord?

Psalm 53:2-4 God looks down from heaven upon the children of men, To see if there are any who understand, who seek God. Every one of them has turned aside; They have together become corrupt; There is none who does good, No, not one. Have the workers of iniquity no knowledge, Who eat up my people as they eat bread, And do not call upon God?

Dave

You haven't convinced me that unregenerated people people seek or understand God.

Dave, try believing God's word:

Romans 3
10 As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one:

11 There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God.

12 They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one.

 

[Rescued One]

People have various reasons for seeming to follow Christ, but like Judas, in the end we see that they will turn away.

 

[John Bauer]

I disagree in the idea that there was no ability. Where there is opportunity, there is a possibility to believe—at least in potential. He did qualify what the hardening stopped: "Lest they hear," etc. That's ability or potential.

That inference holds water only if you read this text in isolation from the rest of scripture.

For example, your inference directly contradicts Romans 8:7-8, which declares that the flesh-governed disposition of the unregenerate person (Greek: to phronēma tēs sarkos) is inherently hostile to God and does not submit to his law (nomos tou theou, his moral will in covenantal form), that indeed it cannot. Paul is clear: The flesh-governed disposition of the unregenerate person cannot please God. To make the point obvious: To believe in the Son whom the Father sent is pleasing to God (and something he commands).

And it contradicts John 8:47, which teaches that only those who belong to God listen and respond to his words; "You don't listen and respond, because you don't belong to God." In other words, the potential to believe is not universal. It exists only in those who belong to God and only by his powerful grace. The issue is belonging, not opportunity.

It also contradicts John 6:65, which testifies that no one has the ability to come to Christ (oudeis dynatai elthein pros me) unless the Father grants him the ability (ean mē ē dedomenon autō ek tou patros).

And so on.

The notion that mere exposure to opportunity can unlock a universal ability to believe (even if only a potential) appears to be flatly rejected by the very scriptures that define the nature of unregenerate unbelief, moral inability, and the necessity of sovereign monergistic grace. According to Romans 8, unregenerate sinners are hostile to God and incapable of submitting to or pleasing him whether in the presence or absence of opportunity. In scripture, hardening is a withdrawing of mercy from a rebellious heart, not a denial of grace to a willing heart (and God's judgment is seen in him giving them over to their debauchery). This is not preventing faith, it is confirming unbelief by judicial abandonment.

When Isaiah and John talk about God withholding grace or removing the means thereof (e.g., prophets), that doesn't somehow imply that man universally has the ability to respond. Such a conclusion does not follow from the stated premises.

Question: The ability of the unregenerate to believe—however small, even if only a potential—does it belong to human nature (Pelagian), or is it attributed to prevenient grace (semi-Pelagian)?

People come to the conclusion that sin is self-destructive when they bottom out in it. Just like an alcoholic bottoms out. That's why, at that point, they start to ask questions and seek for the truth, because they realize that they were living a lie, and a self-destructive one at that.

For the first time, they have what is called a moment of clarity. And for the first time in maybe forever, they begin looking for the truth. It's the Truth that sets us free, right? It's really the first step towards faith. For the first time, seeking truth, thus seeking God, even unknowingly.

Agreed. But your position maintains that this realization occurs to an unregenerate sinner, a conclusion which you haven't drawn from any biblical text (although it has operated in your reading of certain texts).

And from that we might want to do what is good, maybe even come to faith in Jesus Christ, ...

Dave, you're going to have to contend with Romans 8:7-8. Paul teaches that the flesh-governed disposition of the unregenerate person is (a) inherently hostile to God, (b) does not submit to God's moral will in covenantal form (which would include his command to believe in Christ Jesus: 1 John 3:23; cf. John 6:29)—(c) is unable to submit to that will, and (d) cannot please God (and believing in the Son whom the Father sent is pleasing to God).

Yes, people can bottom out in their sin, realizing it is self-destructive and seeking for the truth—the first steps toward faith—but not in their flesh-governed unregenerate state. That is the part you need to demonstrate from scripture, if you want to maintain that yours is a biblical position. (Drawn from scripture is what biblical means.)

Can a person answer the call to faith selfishly? ... And can that faith, by the grace of God, mature into something that is not selfish?

I think they usually do start that way. (I did, too.) But can they do it apart from regeneration? You seem to think so, but I need to see that drawn from scripture.

Paul said that by the flesh he wanted to do good, but was unable to do so (Romans 7:18).

First, Paul is speaking as a believer there (v. 22). Second, it is not "by the flesh" that he wanted to do good but rather his "inner being" (kata ton esō anthrōpon); see Galatians 5:16-24. In other words, his ability here is a product of regeneration (consistent with what Christ said in John 6:65).

The one thing that I'm noticing is that a lot of the Scripture that speaks about God working in us, is that it fits just as well or better from faith forward as is does with the idea that it starts before faith.

Yes, sir, God working in us prior to faith is called "effectual calling" and "regeneration."

When I started this thread and a few like them, I really didn't even entertain the idea that a person could believe outside of the grace of God. But now I wonder.

Let's keep digging, then.

 

[Josheb]

That inference holds water only if you read this text in isolation from the rest of scripture.

Amen! This is critically important for all understanding of scripture. The very first thing any believer should do is fix him/herself upon the task of reading the Bible from the first page all the way through to the last and then re-reading a second time with all the diverse and prodigious information learned from the first reading in mind. After having read the Bible through from beginning to end every single smaller portion should also be read with the knowledge of the whole in mind.

Why?

• Because the definitions God uses for words are often different than what we think they means (due to the added contexts, use of literary devices, the way culture and language changes over centuries, and many other reasons.
• Because the Bible is not predominantly about the reader and reading it through the self-referential viewpoint obstructs a lot of knowledge and understanding (the Bible is first and foremost about Jesus).
• Because thinking a particular single verse, or a particular small passage, is definitive is like wantonly opening the Bible to a random page and putting one's finger down on a verse while blindfolded. God's revelation is progressive; it builds on itself and relies on itself (because the Bible is foremost about Jesus, the entire book is Christological, soteriological, in content).
• Because the Bible itself portrays generation after generation of individuals, one individual culture in particular, entire nations in general, and one particular theological perspective that completely misunderstood and misapplied God's word (we're supposed to learn from their mistakes and that can't happen if the whole hasn't been read in its entirety.
• Because any one verse, small passage, or single book, episode, or period of time may lead the reader astray if s/he doesn't know the whole in which the smaller portion exists. Because many pre-existing biases are confronted and forced to be abandoned when the whole is known and understood.
• Because that is the only way to know if a preacher/teacher has made a mistake, the only way to know what teachings to accept and believe and which to discard.

And there are many other reasons in addition to those just listed. No verse should ever be interpreted in any way that is contrary to the whole of scripture. Inferential interpretations - especially those found within synergism - always violate that precept somewhere.

 

[makesends]

Because the Bible is not predominantly about the reader and reading it through the self-referential viewpoint obstructs a lot of knowledge and understanding (the Bible is first and foremost about Jesus).

THERE !!!

In fact, it could be said that it is not at all about the reader —though there are myriad references to the reader, the status and responsibility and so on, even that is about God and what he has done.

 

[Josheb]

THERE !!!

In fact, it could be said that it is not at all about the reader —though there are myriad references to the reader, the status and responsibility and so on, even that is about God and what he has done.

Well... sorta.

It would not make much sense to have God working absent an object of that work. We, the creaturely sinner, are the object of God's work through His resurrected Son (this is one of the reasons the no-trin povs also don't work: there is no object of love or justice with a solitary, lone, lonesome deity). Synergism is fundamentally about God working with the sinfully dead and enslaved creature, whereas monergism is God first working on the sinfully dead and enslaved sinner.

 

[Josheb]

THERE !!!

In fact, it could be said that it is not at all about the reader —though there are myriad references to the reader, the status and responsibility and so on, even that is about God and what he has done.

Well... sorta.

It would not make much sense to have God working absent an object of that work. We, the creaturely sinner, are the object of God's work through His resurrected Son (this is one of the reasons the no-trin povs also don't work: there is no object of love or justice with a solitary, lone, lonesome deity). Synergism is fundamentally about God working with the sinfully dead and enslaved creature, whereas monergism is God first working on the sinfully dead and enslaved sinner.

The salient point is that this op and its supporting posts do not render verses in light of whole scripture. Inferences are constantly being made and most of them are made on an eisegetic reading of the text. My many observations to that effect have gone ignored and remain unattended. @John Bauer's observation in Post 84 will likely receive the same response or, at best, move of the goal posts to discuss Rom. 8 and not the gospels' use of Isaiah. Instant red herring. Understand what this op asks. It asks what the unregenerate heart lacks but we're discussing listening and hearing (or what the ears and brain lack). This op got off track many posts ago. The question asked has been answered and the answer ignored That practice or pattern has (and will likely continue to) replicated itself with every point brought to bear on the condition of the unregenerate aside from their heart.

It's just like every other thread in the Cal v Arm debate.

My dad grew up on a dairy farm that his father worked as a tenant farmer (like a sharecropper). He grew up dirt poor. I once asked him how he hunted squirrels and he said, "If I could afford it, I'd use a .22," meaning he'd take his .22 caliber rifle with him and shoot the squirrels. Thinking about that I then asked, "What did you use if you couldn't afford the bullets?" HIs answer was, "I'd leave home in the morning with a burlap sack full of rocks and come home after lunch with a bag full of squirrels.?" I tell that story as background because when I was about 14 my dad took the family to a working farm. There was a tour people went on but my dad spoke with someone in charge and got permission for us to walk the farm unattended. My dad told us all about working with pigs, cows, horses, chickens, geese, even the dogs. He showed us the tobacco barn the smoke house and how the hams were salted, and a bunch of stuff those tour people never saw or heard. The most remarkable event, however, was when a wild rabbit happened to cross our path. My 40-year-old, 240-pound dad chased that thing down and caught it! He went left, right, forward, backwards and every which way. I'd never seen a grown man move that fast.

It's impossible to chase down a synergist and the chase is all that synergism has.

 

[Eternally-Grateful]

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. It may be lacking in the details, but they'll give some basic understanding. We call it a simple Gospel message for a reason. It's simple. From the perspective of the flesh, get delivered from that which is killing you. Jesus can do that. The Gospel message is not a message for the healthy, but for the sick. The people who come to Jesus are the ones bottoming out. They may be incapable of seeing the love in it, but they still want to be cured.

Jesus said "Come to Me, all you who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. Take My yoke upon you and learn from Me, for I am gentle and lowly in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. For My yoke is easy and My burden is light."

Even in Alcoholics Anonymous, before it was secularized, they invited people in and began walking them through the repentance process, the steps, and it was through the steps that they were introduced to Jesus. In the steps if you replaced the term alcohol with sin....and in the term Higher power was assumed to be God, or Jesus. The idea was that only Jesus could set a person free from the bondage of alcoholism/sin. The alternative is the modern day higher power and being what is called a dry drunk. They stopped drinking, but the bondage was still there. Anyways, the only qualification that one needed to go to A.A. was that you bottomed out and where ready for the truth. There was no great spiritual insight, or great love that motivated this. They just wanted out from the mess that they created and admitted, that they were powerless to do it.

If you want to see the steps for yourself

The Twelve Steps | Alcoholics Anonymous

The “Twelve Steps” are the core of the A.A. program of personal recovery from alcoholism.

www.aa.org

The Gentiles were grafted in to provoke the Jews to jealousy. That doesn't sound like the perfect spiritual motive, does it? God drawing people, or to drag, pull, or persuade, as someone mentioned in another thread, isn't necessarily motivated by way of Holy Ghost goose bumps. It's from the Spirit, but doesn't seem to be producing any kind of regeneration.

You might say what about desire? But anyone who is sick desires to get better.

Can a person come to Jesus genuinely wanting, but not yet genuinely loving, and have that considered a genuine faith?

If yes, can a person produce that faith without an unregenerate heart?

What does an unregenerate heart lack that keeps him from coming to faith?

What is enough faith? What makes a faith genuine?

I might challenge your interpretation of scripture. If you don't like that, please don't respond. This will not be the run of the mill Calvinism-Arminianism thread. At least I'll try to test everything that can be legitimately questioned, even if it's not popular.

Dave

faith of a mustard seed can move mountains

I think of the person who came to jesus to heal his daughter. jesus said if you believe.

The guy answered. I believe, help me with my unbelief.


How much faith did it take for the tax collector to cry out on his knees.

as much as it takes to start trusting God in every day matters?

 

[Dave]

You haven't convinced me that unregenerated people people seek or understand God.

I could only test your definition of Romans 3:10-12, since that was the only passage that you gave me. If you ever feel the desire to answer that post, I'll be looking forward to that. If it was your intent to prove that man must be regenerated to seek or understand God from that one passage, Romans 3:10-12, especially by reposting it, then I believe that I have adequately overturned your position with Scripture. The insufficiency is not on my behalf, I answered what you gave me.

It would appear that the further context of the Psalms passages quoted by Paul in Romans 3:1012, with Romans 1:18-28, and also the fact that even the hardening of Israel as judgment, so that they cannot hear, see, etc., the final nail in the coffin, was only a partial hardening. They can be grafted back in by God (Romans 11:20-25), if the do not continue in unbelief. Belief seems to dictate the grafting in, as unbelief seems to dictate the branches broken off.

Dave

 

[Dave]

That inference holds water only if you read this text in isolation from the rest of scripture.

Actually, just the opposite. When I hold it to the rest of the text, problems arise.

For example, your inference directly contradicts Romans 8:7-8, which declares that the flesh-governed disposition of the unregenerate person (Greek: to phronēma tēs sarkos) is inherently hostile to God and does not submit to his law (nomos tou theou, his moral will in covenantal form), that indeed it cannot. Paul is clear: The flesh-governed disposition of the unregenerate person cannot please God. To make the point obvious: To believe in the Son whom the Father sent is pleasing to God (and something he commands).

Correct, the Law even provokes our flesh to sin. But How do we get the Spirit, to live by the Spirit? By faith. Living by the Spirit starts with faith, not vise versa. You're assuming that the life that Paul is describing begins before faith, no it begins when we receive the Spirit. Having begun in the Spirit...Gal. 3. Which is the result of faith.

And it contradicts John 8:47, which teaches that only those who belong to God listen and respond to his words; "You don't listen and respond, because you don't belong to God." In other words, the potential to believe is not universal. It exists only in those who belong to God and only by his powerful grace. The issue is belonging, not opportunity.

Because Jesus would not lose one of them (John 6:39 and John 17:12). If they truly belonged to the Father, meaning saved by OT revelation, they would have heard Him, believed Him and came to Him.

It also contradicts John 6:65, which testifies that no one has the ability to come to Christ (oudeis dynatai elthein pros me) unless the Father grants him the ability (ean mē ē dedomenon autō ek tou patros).

This too, I believe is best understood in the same context.

6:35 "This is the will of the Father who sent Me, that of all He has given Me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up at the last day." (OT true believers)

Here next it says that everyone has been taught by God. All the children of Israel (Isaiah (54:13)

6:45 It is written in the prophets, 'And they shall all be taught by God.' Therefore everyone who has heard and learned from the Father comes to Me.

6:65 And He said, "Therefore I have said to you that no one can come to Me unless it has been granted to him by My Father."

Can still apply, even universally.

Later in John 12:32 And I, if I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all peoples to Myself."

Start at and so on---rest of reply later

 

[Ladodgers6]

You have two points you have concerns with:

1) God descending down to redeem His people.

2) Is Faith a Gift from God or is it a human capability to choose God from a free-will standpoint.

Do I have this correctly before I retort?