Monergism versus Synergism

I’m not preoccupied with them, I’m just calling them what they are: credits for doing what one is instructed to do.

Not by a longshot.

“Responsive participation”??? Ha! I’m a Christian monergist: Free Will is an illusion. So, although I would agree that there’s “responsive participation”, I suspect that you and I don’t agree on what it is. To me, “responsive participation” is “fruit of the Holy Spirit” and not a reward for obedience.

1 Like

Well then; I guess you were fated to be a monergist, and I was fated to disagree.

Now … to find the “Christian monergist” emoji … dang! There are a lot of categories the emoji industry hasn’t covered yet! If somebody ever needs a job …! :pencil2:

3 Likes

That’s why I’m not. We do have real responsibility and God is absolutely sovereign… at the same ‘time’. Except God is not bound in or by time. Have I mentioned the wonderful mystery of how God providentially orchestrates the timing and placing of events in his interventions? Maybe you have seen me mention Maggie before. :grin:

“We have to believe in free will, we have no choice.” I.B. Singer :stuck_out_tongue_closed_eyes:

Though it’s a bit off topic, or rather a more specific subtopic , I am seeing it pop up which could give the illusion that “once saved always saved” is tied to one of the polled choices.

I just wanted to add that’s not necessarily true. I got one don’t believe in once saved always saved and believe that the terms “predestined” is aligned towards the body as a whole and nkt the individual. The church will never become lost, the body will always be his bride, but the individuals can reject their salvation and turn back to sin. Just like how you can get off the wide road you can also get back on it.

Fated? Is the opera over? I haven’t heard Brünhilde sing yet.

2 Likes

One adopted, always adopted is necessarily true. Start here.

I have read a lot of it. I just don’t have time to list out scripturally why I believe this. But it’s also something I’m fully convinced off. I place OSAS into the same boat as other subjects I have spent years on and tracing statements made in the New Testament to the Old Testament and placing it in proper context. The verses fit so much better with predestination referring to the entire body versus the individual Christians inside of it. Later on I’ll make an thread backtracking two or three of the most scriptures I see from the new testament being quoted as OSAS and how it was used in the Torah to mean Israel will be saved, not necessarily the Israelite.

I think that the books by Dan Corner did a great job of tracing down these verses and what they mean.

I don’t really fit into either synergist or monergist categories, but I suppose I am more in the synergist category since it is monergism which is the more uncompromising.

Salvation is 100% the work of God, but it is work on living beings with free will in order to change what they want. Thus describing our role as passive receivers is absurd. So while the process of change requires us to want that change at some point, we do not have the knowledge or ability to be in charge of that change – especially in the beginning! So to suggest that we are the initiators is equally absurd.

To position myself on the posted table of positions:
salvation: is sanctification, the removal of the self-destructive habits of sin. It is not divine magic but the result of a long, difficult and painful process, where God teaches us through experiences (before and after death) to change who we are.
assurance of salvation: not possible. It is a contradiction in terms. To look for assurance is to seek damnation for that is the only result to which one can ever be entitled.
predestination: election only refers to roles in God’s providential work not to the eventual personal outcome. Sin makes us predictable. The liberation from sin can only bring us back to Adam where the fall into sin is possible once again.
reprobation: something that people do to themselves by refusing to let go of their sin.
human bondage to sin: Everyone is not the same with regards to sin except in the eventual outcome. For sin is a progressive degenerative illness destroying free will and leading to hell.
original sin: original event with consequences for all including the contamination of the inheritance of the mind we have from God through Adam to include self-destructive habits. We have no guilt from Adam’s sin and we are not born sinners. We are condemned only by our own choices and actions.
where does human contribution come in: at every point. It is after all a change in us. So result is indistinguishable from contribution – they are one and the same thing.
what is justification: After God liberates our free will enough for us to do so, justification is the assent God requires for continuing His work for our salvation. It is to leave the law of sin and put ourselves in the hands of God. But as God lifts us up our freedom only increases. So to say that we cannot jump out of His hands is wrong.

I have previously described myself as a incompatibilist libertarian open theist opposed to both Calvinism and Arminianism.
libertarian: believe in free will… far from absolute or universal, it varies a great deal and is quite fragile, and its role in our actions is probably rare, but it does exist and is the essence of life itself.
incompatibilist: free will is not compatible with determinism or predestination.
open theist: The future only exists as as a superposition of real possibilities, and thus even for an omniscient being the future is only knowable as such a superposition unless one becomes the cause of that future precluding the power to change it (i.e. moving forward in time and making it the past instead). Free will means that God refrains from being the sole cause to chose what happens in such a way.

God’s choosing:

For I am with you, and no one will attack you to harm you, for I have many people in this city.
Acts 18:10

…and yet we are responsible.

I’m not going to rehash what we have covered before, Mitchell. You were shown to be incorrect. Start here.

That’s not about if your name is in the book of life or not. That’s about God comforting and commanding Paul to enter the city with the assurance he will be safe and that there are many Christians in that city which will be able to help.

1 Like

Most likely he was not shown to be incorrect, but shown a opinion that someone refused to see as being wrong. Which is the same as mine. It’s like saying Dan Corner has proven OSAS to be heretics. It’s a statement that is bolder than reality.

1 Like

It is implicit. He knew how many and he them by name.

I have many people in this city.
Acts 18:10

It is not about heresy (I don’t know Dan Corner), it is about understanding the reality of God’s providence and sovereignty. Was Maggie’s sequence accidental?

I don’t even know who Maggie and nothing she says about miracles or her life has any bearing on my beliefs at all. Its no different than a muslims opinion on his experiences with God. It’s anecdotal. It’s through the lens of a persons worldview. Which is the same for almost every religious experience including mine. But has no weight as far as countering scripture.

Sure God knew how many Christians was alive in that city on that day. That includes the ones saved that morning and the ones that abandoned the faith. I’m still at work and listening to podcasts about caves prepping for some cave kayaking I’m drawing near to. So I’m bouncing from the convo for now. Depending on what size this thread takes I’ll read back through and respond down the road. Or just take notes and make a thread. Just chiming in that OSAS is not a necessary belief for the choices in the poll.

I have mentioned her multiple times since she first posted her testimony, so that is surprising. One more time: Maggie’s testimony is a wonderful case in point demonstrating God’s sovereignty and ‘planning’ in his providential interventions. It ain’t jus’ luck.

I understand. I’m just saying I have never read it. It’s been cursed as a source to prove several things to me. What I’m saying is that it won’t change a thing. I can cite stories of people who swear they were probed by aliens and people who swear Bigfoot killed their friend. Whatever it means to you, it won’t mean the same thing to me. A persons religious experience could be lies, disorders, mistaken interpretation, or even tricks by others being carried out. Including mine. So a persons personal experience will have no change at all on my beliefs. There has been several people in here who have sworn things like seeing miracles. I still don’t believe it. Same goes for whatever Maggie claims. I don’t understand why someone would believe it’s significant to another as evidence.

That is an uninformed opinion.

You are sure opining a lot of things without having read either of the conversations.

It’s not though. I am confident that a thread on here did not overturn the dozens of books I’ve read and the studying I’ve done under elders by people I believe to be Christians in trith and righteousness. There are tons of things in here that people believe is true as the majority that I still believe in completely false and so destructive that I’ve stopped directing people here. A group of people who all agree something is true can claim we are true.

I can take you to forums on other sites and groups where 99.99% will agree that we are right and that those that believe OSAS is wrong and that it has been debated again snd again. Anyways. I’m withdrawing because it’s useless. I don’t have the time to respond with dozens and dozens of verses at this moment. I’m to busy to actually debate it. I should have left it at my original comment.

OSAS is not a belief that must be accepted to accept the various choices , such as it being a group effort between man and god. Since I believe in one of the views for the most part and do so without belief in OSAS.