Which Doctrines are Monergistic and which are not?

[Carbon]

Monergism and Synergism refers to "sotieriology" (how God saves), so when you start to talk about things like "baptism" you are getting into ORDINANCES (done because God said so) vs SACRAMENT (done because they contain power and are the actual MEANS that God uses). Protestants generally fall on the side of Ordinances and Catholics fall on the side of Sacraments.

Sotieriology debates/discussions typically center on "Grace" vs "Works" and TULIP (in some form).

If you really want to talk about Baptism, then the only important question is this:

"CAN GOD SAVE WITHOUT BAPTISM?"

• If God can save without baptism (like the thief on the cross), then it is "monergistic" ... God does not NEED it to save.

Amen!

 

[Arial]

I don't see how this is different that hard determinism.

Hard determinism says the human will is not a true cause.
Concurrence says the human will is a true cause, but a dependent one.

Here is the logical contrast:
Hard determinism

If an act is determined, the human wil is not a true cause​

Human acts are determined​

Therefore, the human will is not a true cause​

​

Concurrence

God determines acts by estaboishng secndar causes​

The human will is a real secondary cause​

Therefore, determined acts can still be truly caused by the human will​

​

Hard determinism explains your will away. Concurrence explains your will as real but dependent.

 

[Arial]

Would you agree the Prior Working is something like a Parent teaching her child to drive; but her child eventually drives on his own; he's then Synergisticly participating in his Sanctification? There's no room for Synergism anywhere?

No, because the analogy implies causal separation. The parent teaches and the child eventually drives without the parent's causal involvement.

Concurrence in monergism teaches continuous causal dependence. It is the very teaching of Phil 2 "Work out you own salvation"---"It is God who works in you---".

 

[Bruiser]

Monergism and Synergism refers to "sotieriology" (how God saves), so when you start to talk about things like "baptism" you are getting into ORDINANCES (done because God said so) vs SACRAMENT (done because they contain power and are the actual MEANS that God uses). Protestants generally fall on the side of Ordinances and Catholics fall on the side of Sacraments.

Sotieriology debates/discussions typically center on "Grace" vs "Works" and TULIP (in some form).

If you really want to talk about Baptism, then the only important question is this:

"CAN GOD SAVE WITHOUT BAPTISM?"

• If God can save without baptism (like the thief on the cross), then it is "monergistic" ... God does not NEED it to save.

10-4, I was reaching too far; sorry...

 

[Arial]

Human Agency...

Human Agency isn't Monergistic. Agency involves the Agent's autonomous volition...

Agency is acting according to one's own will.
Autonomy is acting independently of God.
Agency does not require autonomy. It requires that the act genuinely proceeds from the agent.

 

[fastfredy0]

Can you find a scripture that claims God actively created evil vs passively "allowing" evil to occur?

The question is based on the false premise that "evil" is a thing. As Augustine said, (yeah, I like to argue from authority... giggle) ... Augustine and Thomas Aquinas use the words “negation” and “privation” to define evil. Negation talks in terms of what something is not. For example, we say God is infinite which means He is not finite. Evil in this sense can only be defined against the backdrop of what is good. In biblical terms, evil is defined by words like ungodliness, unrighteousness, injustice, so that the term is used as the negation, the opposite of the positive thing that is being affirmed, so that injustice or un-justness can only be understood against the previous concept of justice.

... but I can give verses showing God controls "evil":
Joshua 11:20 For it was of the Lord to harden their hearts that they should come against Israel in battle, that [Israel] might destroy them utterly, and that without favor and mercy, as the Lord commanded Moses. The Canaanites were destroyed by Joshua

Joshua 23:15 But just as all the good things that the Lord your God promised concerning you have been fulfilled for you, so the Lord will bring upon you all the evil things, until he has destroyed you from off this good land that the Lord your God has given you

Judges 9:23 Then God sent an evil spirit between Abimelech and the men of Shechem, [which aided him in the killing of his brethren]

1 Samuel 16:14 But the Spirit of the Lord departed from Saul, and an evil spirit from the Lord tormented and troubled him.

God Decreed the Gravest of All Sins

• Acts 2:23 this Man, when handed over [to the Roman authorities] according to the predetermined decision and foreknowledge of God, you nailed to a cross and put to death by the hands of lawless and godless men.
• Acts 4:27-28 Indeed Herod and Pontius Pilate met together with the Gentiles and the people of Israel in this city to conspire against your holy servant Jesus, whom you anointed. They did what your power and will had decided beforehand should happen.

... I can give you another 30ish verses

Remember God's questions to Job.

Agreed .... we are dealing with a subject beyond our grasp. I often pray for forgiveness for my theological thoughts that must go astray in many places.

 

[fastfredy0]

Agency is acting according to one's own will.
Autonomy is acting independently of God.

Given that one's will is a creation of God (God created all things), I don't see how one can do anything independent of God.
One cannot create one's will per S. Charnock ... Nothing can act before it be. The “will” of man was not and therefore could not make itself to be. For the “will” to produce itself is to act; if the “will” acted before it was, it was then something and nothing at the same time; it then had a being before it had a being; it acted when it brought itself into being. How could the “will” act without a being, without it was? So that if it were the cause of itself, it must be before itself as well as after itself; it was before it was; it was as a cause before it was as an effect. Action always supposeth a principle from whence it flows; as nothing hath no existence, so it hath no operation: there must be, therefore, something of real existence to give a being to those things that are, and every cause must be an effect of some other before it be a cause.

 

[atpollard]

Is any human act really “autonomous”?
Even secular research into behavior and philosophy and thought is leaning towards “no”.

Let’s take something silly like the choice of cereal for breakfast “tomorrow morning”.
Leaving God 100% out of it, is it really an autonomous decision?

• Practically speaking, your choice is limited to the cereals that are actually IN your cabinet. If you did not buy it, or if the wife finished the box, then it is not an option no matter what to “want”.
• Are your “likes” completely free from outside influences, or have past experiences already influenced your “wants”? You are being controlled by forces outside of your control (like where you were born).
• Are you being chemically influenced by vitamin and mineral deficiencies or cravings based on what you ate yesterday? You are being controlled by past choices that you made.
• Why do you like t some flavors and not others? Are you being controlled by random neurological wiring in your brain?

With all these external forces acting on you, how much of any decision you make is “autonomy” and how much is “nature and nurture” (biology and environment).

Yet we shake our fist at the mere suggestion that God might be whispering in our ear to influence the outcome of important decisions for our good and His glory.

 

[atpollard]

The question is based on the false premise that "evil" is a thing.

Let us set evil aside for a moment.

What is “good”?

 

[Carbon]

Monergistic doctrines: Calling, regeneration, faith, justification, sanctification, perseverance, and glorification.

@Bruiser That dont leave much for synergism.