I submit that the brothers on the panel who object to God being sovereign over salvation testify against themselves TO GOD whenever they pray TO GOD for the salvation of their family and friends. EVERYONE is a Calvinist when praying for the salvation of others. IF God doesn't determine who is and who is not saved and who will and who will not believe, THEN why pray to Him for the faith and salvation of anyone? IF humans are only saved by their own free-will self-determination to trust Christ, THEN why pray to God for their salvation? In that case, to be consistent we should only pray to the people we want to be saved for their own salvation, and NOT to God. But we don't do this. While we urge our family and friends to trust Christ, yet we also pray to God for their salvation, proving WE KNOW He, NOT they, is sovereign over their salvation. I believe this glaring inconsistency is an example of Romans 1 truth suppression wherein even Christian brothers can't help but reveal their true knowledge of the sovereignty of God over salvation. Yes, I believe Christians can and do suppress the truth on particular issues just like unbelievers, because until our death or resurrection, we are all partially unbelievers in the flesh, though we're all also believers in the Spirit. [Jon. 2:9 NKJV] "9 ... Salvation [is] of the LORD."" While, [Jer. 17:5 NKJV] "5 Thus says the LORD: "Cursed [is] the man who trusts in man And makes flesh his strength ..."" Those who trust in their own free-will ability to repent and believe as a "natural man" (1 Cor. 2:14) with a "carnal (i.e., fleshy) mind" (Rom. 8:7) are "trusting in man." With this the Lord agrees: [John 6:63 NKJV] "63 "It is the Spirit who gives life; THE FLESH PROFITS NOTHING. The words that I speak to you are spirit, and [they] are life." Yet, IF Synergists are right about salvation, THEN "the flesh profits" EVERYTHING! - Since, on their view, everyone repents and trusts Christ while still being ONLY in the flesh and NOT in the Spirit, NOT having been regenerated before believing! The hinge-pin of Monergism is regeneration prior to repentance and faith. IF the Reformed Monergistic Order of Salvation (Ordo Salutis) is biblical, THEN Reformed Monergistic soteriology is true. IF the Synergist Ordo Salutis (Faith, then regeneration) is biblical, THEN Synergism is true. (1) The Bible says we enter the Kingdom of God through faith (Heb. 2:19). (2) Jesus in the Bible said we can't enter or even perceive the Kingdom of God until we are "born again"/"born from above" and "born of the Spirit" (John 3). (3) Therefore, regeneration precedes faith in the Order of Salvation. (4) Therefore, Reformed Monergistic soteriology is true. TL/DR
2:46 - "God predetermined the way we would be saved." That is true in more than one sense, brother. But God in Scripture also says that God predestines WHO will be saved as well (Rom. 8:29-30 + Eph. 1:5, 11). And by predestining and predetermining who WILL be saved, God is also predestining and predetermining who WON'T be saved. 3:02 - "God knew who would choose Him, and based on God knowing who would choose Him He elected them." (1) That is not God electing (choosing) ANYONE. Rather, it is HUMANS electing (choosing) God! The dear brother has stood the biblical doctrine of divine election on its head. To avoid the biblical truth, he has transformed DIVINE election (of Humans) into its exact opposite - HUMAN ELECTION (of God). Yes, humans DO elect God to be their Savior, but only AFTER He has elected to save them: [1John 4:19 NASB95] "19 We love, because He FIRST loved us." (2) The brother's statement also means God knew who would not elect God, therefore, their destiny is also settled. There is no escape from God determining who will be saved and who will not be saved except through the heresy of Open Theism. IF classical divine omniscience is true and God foreknew before He created who would be saved and who wouldn't, then there is nothing these people could do to falsify God's infallible omniscient knowledge of who will or won't be saved. Now, IF God knew before he created anything who would and wouldn't be saved, AND God was the only thing that existed WHEN God knew who would and wouldn't be saved, THEN God ALONE could have DETERMINED who would and wouldn't be saved. The creatures could not determine whether or not they would be saved because they existed ONLY in God's mind at that logical moment. They could do nothing other than what God IMAGINED they would do in His mind before creating anything at all. (3) The Simple Foreknowledge View has a theological problem. In the SFV, God LEARNS who will or will not be saved, violating the doctrine of divine omniscience. Worse than that, God doesn't learn from himself who will or will not be saved, He learns FROM HIS CREATURES who will or will not be saved, making His infallible omniscient foreknowledge contingent upon contingent creatures. And, STILL worse than that, God contingently learns from AS YET NON-EXISTENT contingent creatures who will or will not be saved. Therefore, the Simple Foreknowledge View *JUST IS* Open Theism in disguise. "The only consistent (Synergist) is an Open Theist." ~Dr. James White. 3:55 - (1) Synergists often seem to believe John 3:16 mitigates against Monergism, but Calvinists believe John 3:16 is literally true. "Whosoever believes" "shall have eternal life." Do Synergists imagine that Calvinists believe UNBELIEVERS shall have eternal life? The question regarding John 3:16 is "WHO shall believe" and "WHY will they believe." Monergists answer these questions with, "Those chosen (elected) by God will believe," and "God is how and why they will believe." John 3:16 does not even address the issue of Monergism vs. Synergism. Brothers who cite this verse against Calvinism show a lack of understanding OF Calvinism AND, frankly, OF John 3:16. (2) "The (entire) world" "God so loved" consists of ONLY two groups, Jews AND GENTILES. The big controversy in the first century HEBREW New Testament Church was, "How, if at all, are Gentiles saved?" If Gentiles must be circumcised, BECOMING JEWS, in order to be saved by Jesus, THEN Jesus is the Savior of ONLY the Jews. However, IF Gentiles don't need to become Jews through circumcision in order to be saved by Jesus, THEN Jesus is indeed the Savior of the world (i.e., the Savior of Jews and Gentiles) and not just the Savior of the Jews. Most of the universal salvific language of the New Testament is addressing this heresy on the part of SOME Jewish Christians and ALL non-Christian first century Jews. More than 2 entire chapters of Acts and the entire book of Galatians addresses this heresy. The Gospels and many other epistles at least touch on the issue as does even the Old Testament, especially the Psalms. First century Judea is not twenty-first century America and the West. We are well past this issue. First-century Jewish Christians were not. It was inconceivable to many of them that Jesus should save Gentiles AS GENTILES. (3) God DOES desire the salvation of "ALL" people in the sense the brother thinks, but He does not desire the salvation of "ALL" people equally. He desired the salvation of Peter more than the salvation of Judas, the AntiChrist, and the False Prophet, for instance. Jesus prayed for Peter, but we have no record of Him praying for Judas, that HIS faith might not fail. He desires the salvation of some enough to "grant" them repentance and faith (2 Tim. 2:25 & Phil. 1:29), but therefore obviously declines to do so for others - otherwise his "grants" of repentance and faith are meaningless. God desires the salvation of some enough to regenerate them (cause them to be born again or born from above) so that they can first perceive and then enter the kingdom of God (John 3:3, 5-6), but quite obviously declines to regenerate others so that they may see and then enter the Kingdom of God. (4) God desires the salvation of everyone in the sense that He has commanded everyone to repent and believe the Gospel (Mark 1:15). However, His Prescriptive Will is often at odds with His Decretive Will. Example: God "determined before" (i.e., predetermined) that Pilate, Herod, Israel, and Romans would murder the Lord Jesus (Acts 4:27-28), but He also forbade murder in His Law (Exodus 20:12). People may not like this, but it is a biblical fact. God predetermined Pilate, et al would murder of His Son, AND He forbade murder in His law. When God predetermines that a human will commit murder, that is not God committing murder. It's God determining that someone other than Himself would be morally responsible for committing murder. God cannot commit murder. (5) IF humans enter the Kingdom of God through FAITH, THEN regeneration precedes repentance and faith according to Jesus in John 3:3, 5-6. IF we enter the Kingdom of God through REGENERATION, THEN there are believers who are not in the Kingdom of God! However, the language of John 3 indicates that one must ALREADY be "born again/from above" BEFORE entering the Kingdom of God (through faith). Regeneration does not appear TO BE "entering the Kingdom of God." (6) Some of the universal salvific language of the New Testament would result in Universalism being true if interpreted consistently. Yet, we know Universalism ISN'T true. CONTINUED BELOW:
CONTINUED: 4:09 - "I believe every human being at one time or another has the opportunity to come to know Jesus Christ as his Lord and Savior." Let's examine that idea. Did Judas, whom the Lord Jesus named "the son of perdition (destruction)" have the opportunity to know Jesus salvifically? How about the AntiChrist and the False Prophet? Do children who die in utero before they have the ability to know anything, have the opportunity to know Jesus (I believe all children who die as children are saved by Jesus, but that's another story)? What about people who lived at Abraham's time in South America, did they have the opportunity to know Jesus? The dear brother's belief is obviously not true. It's wishful thinking. By determining when and where all human beings are born, the LORD is often also determining whether they will not be saved. 4:22 - "...I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but that the wicked turn from his way and live." This is StrawCalvinism. No Calvinist says God takes pleasure in the death of the wicked. No Calvinist denies that God DOES take pleasure when the wicked turns from their wicked way. This passage in Ezekiel does not even address the debate over Monergism and Synergism. Monergists don't deny that people make decisions. We deny their decisions were not determined by God. Again, the fact that the dear brother DOES believe it is germane to the issue shows that the he either doesn't understand Calvinism or the passage in Ezekiel, or both. 4:33 - "I just don't believe that God says, "Hey you're going to the smoking section" and "Hey, you're coming to the Garden of Eden." The dear brother's belief is irrelevant. It's what God through Scripture teaches that matters. Did God not say to Judas, in effect, "Hey, you're going to the smoking section" when Jesus named him "the son of perdition (destruction)?" Did God not, in effect, say to Saul of Tarsus on the road to Damascus, "Hey, you're coming to the Garden of Eden?" Did not Jesus, in effect, say to Peter "Hey, you're coming to the Garden of Eden," when He said to Peter, "I have prayed for you, that your faith may not fail, and WHEN YOU HAVE TURNED," etc.? God in Scripture teaches salvific predestination and election. Even on the Simple Foreknowledge Non-Open Theism View, God knew before He created who would and wouldn't be saved and His foreknowledge of the same cannot be falsified. He was literally the only thing that existed "when" He knew who would and wouldn't be saved, so He is the only one who COULD HAVE predetermined/predestined who would or wouldn't be saved. The fact that some people are uncomfortable with His teachings about predestination and election does not change those teachings. We are all obliged to submit to God THROUGH submitting to His Word, whether we like it or not. 4:55 - "... the Augustinian view, where God says, "I picked you, I'm going to give you faith"" and "You, you ain't coming." That is not the Augustinian view - it is the BIBLICAL view, hence: [Phil. 1:29 NASB95] "29 FOR TO YOU IT HAS BEEN GRANTED for Christ's sake, not only TO BELIEVE IN HIM, but also to suffer for His sake," Quite obviously, God DOES, in essence, SAY, "I picked you, I'm going to give you faith," and conversely, in essence, says to others, "You ain't coming (since I didn't grant you faith)." More properly, He says to them, "I'm not obliged to regenerate you or grant you repentance and faith. You are responsible for your own unregeneracy and lack of repentance and faith." This is why everyone is not saved and only God's elect are saved. God's elect are no more regenerate before faith than the reprobate and are no less unrepentant or unbelieving than they. The difference between them is that God has chosen to regenerate and grant them repentance and faith, but has elected to do nothing to change the hearts of the rest. If the reprobate could believe on their own, God would absolutely save them as He has promised. But they can't believe because they're evil and won't believe, and that's not God's fault but their own fault and Adam's. When we find ourselves agreeing with Paul's interlocuter in Romans by, in effect, saying to God, "Why have you made me (us) like this," that means our soteriology is not Paulene and, therefore, not biblical. But ALL of the objections to Monergism reduce down to, (1) "Why does God still find fault, for who has resisted His will?" (Rom. 9:19), (2) "Is God unjust?" (Rom. 9:14), and (3) "Why have you made me (us) like this?" (Rom. 9:20). Don't agree with Paul's interlocuter in Romans! If you do, your soteriology is unbiblical and therefore wrong! Repent and adopt Paul's inspired soteriology! 5:13 - "...it would violate the Scripture ... which is the foreknowledge view we read about in Romans 8." "I do not think that word, ("foreknow") means what you think it means," 😉dear brother: [Gen 4:1 NKJV] '1 Now Adam KNEW Eve his wife, and she conceived and bore Cain, and said, "I have acquired a man from the LORD."' What? Adam didn't know anyone but Eve? He didn't know his sons, Cain, Abel, and Seth? He didn't know His daughters? [Amo 3:2 NKJV] "2 "You (Israel) only have I KNOWN of all the families of the earth; Therefore I will punish you for all your iniquities."" What? God doesn't know any of the families of the earth but Israel? So much for divine omniscience if the Synergist understanding of "foreknow" and "foreknowledge" are correct! Knowledge in this sense is an intimate personal relationship. No one would say "yes" to God unless God acts to free up their only-evil continually (Gen. 6:5) wills: [1Co 2:14 NKJV] "14 But the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; nor can he know [them], because they are spiritually discerned." We are all born natural men, and remain so until God causes us to be "born again" (see John 3). "The natural man" is the antithesis of the Spiritual man (i.e., the regenerate man). Until God regenerates us, we are not interested in God or His Gospel. [Rom 8:7 NKJV] "7 Because the carnal mind [is] enmity against God; for it is NOT SUBJECT to the law of God, NOR indeed CAN BE." "The carnal mind" = the natural mind of "the natural man," above. 18:04 - "I can't even conceive of a salvation where I didn't choose..." Neither can Calvinists, brother. No Calvinists deny we make choices. That's StrawCalvinism. We deny our choices weren't determined by God. We Choose God because He FIRST chose us; [1Jo 4:19 NKJV] "19 We love Him because He first loved us." CONTINUED:
CONTINUED: 19:06 - "Satan made an offer, man responded, and man's nature changed. God makes an offer, man responded, his nature changes." Not quite brother. You must reverse the order of the second half of your statement to form a chiasm: > Satan made a promise to man > > Man believed > > Man's nature changed > < Man's nature changes < < Man believes < < The promise made by God < The structure is CHIASTIC, not repetitious or recapitulistic. You must remember that before the Fall man's moral nature was good but MUTABLY (changeably) so. But after the Fall, man's moral nature is evil but **UN**MUTABLY so. There is a lack of symmetry here. The purpose of the Probation Garden and God's command was to irrevocably fix man's moral nature as only good or only evil. Adam's decision to believe Satan and disbelieve God fixed his and our natures as unchangeably evil. Because of this, man could good or evil before the Fall, but after the Fall man can only do evil and cannot do good. Had Adam obeyed, his and our natures would have been irrevocably fixed as righteous, making us incapable of doing evil. The same with the angels. Those who chose to remain faithful to God have had their natures irrevocably fixed as righteous because of their decision to obey. Likewise, the angels who rebelled against God have had their natures irrevocably fixed as evil as a result of their decision to rebel. Fallen angels (demons) and fallen men cannot do good. Holy angels and holy (justified) men (after their death or resurrection) cannot do evil. [Rom 3:10-12 NKJV] "10 As it is written: "There is NONE RIGHTEOUS, NO, NOT ONE; 11 There is NONE who understands; There is NONE who seeks after God. 12 They have ALL turned aside; They have TOGETHER become unprofitable; There is **NONE WHO DOES GOOD**, NO, NOT ONE." KEEP READING to v. 18. It doesn't get any better. Thanks for addressing these issues, brothers. I hope I wasn't too hard on any of you. And thanks to "Hard Questions" and Cornerstone Television Network for facilitating this discussion! Grace and Peace to You All, Amen, TL/DR
I submit that the brothers on the panel who object to God being sovereign over salvation testify against themselves TO GOD whenever they pray TO GOD for the salvation of their family and friends.
EVERYONE is a Calvinist when praying for the salvation of others. IF God doesn't determine who is and who is not saved and who will and who will not believe, THEN why pray to Him for the faith and salvation of anyone? IF humans are only saved by their own free-will self-determination to trust Christ, THEN why pray to God for their salvation? In that case, to be consistent we should only pray to the people we want to be saved for their own salvation, and NOT to God. But we don't do this. While we urge our family and friends to trust Christ, yet we also pray to God for their salvation, proving WE KNOW He, NOT they, is sovereign over their salvation.
I believe this glaring inconsistency is an example of Romans 1 truth suppression wherein even Christian brothers can't help but reveal their true knowledge of the sovereignty of God over salvation. Yes, I believe Christians can and do suppress the truth on particular issues just like unbelievers, because until our death or resurrection, we are all partially unbelievers in the flesh, though we're all also believers in the Spirit.
[Jon. 2:9 NKJV] "9 ... Salvation [is] of the LORD.""
While,
[Jer. 17:5 NKJV] "5 Thus says the LORD: "Cursed [is] the man who trusts in man And makes flesh his strength ...""
Those who trust in their own free-will ability to repent and believe as a "natural man" (1 Cor. 2:14) with a "carnal (i.e., fleshy) mind" (Rom. 8:7) are "trusting in man." With this the Lord agrees:
[John 6:63 NKJV] "63 "It is the Spirit who gives life; THE FLESH PROFITS NOTHING. The words that I speak to you are spirit, and [they] are life."
Yet, IF Synergists are right about salvation, THEN "the flesh profits" EVERYTHING! - Since, on their view, everyone repents and trusts Christ while still being ONLY in the flesh and NOT in the Spirit, NOT having been regenerated before believing!
The hinge-pin of Monergism is regeneration prior to repentance and faith. IF the Reformed Monergistic Order of Salvation (Ordo Salutis) is biblical, THEN Reformed Monergistic soteriology is true. IF the Synergist Ordo Salutis (Faith, then regeneration) is biblical, THEN Synergism is true.
(1) The Bible says we enter the Kingdom of God through faith (Heb. 2:19).
(2) Jesus in the Bible said we can't enter or even perceive the Kingdom of God until we are "born again"/"born from above" and "born of the Spirit" (John 3).
(3) Therefore, regeneration precedes faith in the Order of Salvation.
(4) Therefore, Reformed Monergistic soteriology is true.
TL/DR
2:46 - "God predetermined the way we would be saved." That is true in more than one sense, brother. But God in Scripture also says that God predestines WHO will be saved as well (Rom. 8:29-30 + Eph. 1:5, 11). And by predestining and predetermining who WILL be saved, God is also predestining and predetermining who WON'T be saved.
3:02 - "God knew who would choose Him, and based on God knowing who would choose Him He elected them." (1) That is not God electing (choosing) ANYONE. Rather, it is HUMANS electing (choosing) God! The dear brother has stood the biblical doctrine of divine election on its head. To avoid the biblical truth, he has transformed DIVINE election (of Humans) into its exact opposite - HUMAN ELECTION (of God). Yes, humans DO elect God to be their Savior, but only AFTER He has elected to save them:
[1John 4:19 NASB95] "19 We love, because He FIRST loved us."
(2) The brother's statement also means God knew who would not elect God, therefore, their destiny is also settled. There is no escape from God determining who will be saved and who will not be saved except through the heresy of Open Theism. IF classical divine omniscience is true and God foreknew before He created who would be saved and who wouldn't, then there is nothing these people could do to falsify God's infallible omniscient knowledge of who will or won't be saved. Now, IF God knew before he created anything who would and wouldn't be saved, AND God was the only thing that existed WHEN God knew who would and wouldn't be saved, THEN God ALONE could have DETERMINED who would and wouldn't be saved. The creatures could not determine whether or not they would be saved because they existed ONLY in God's mind at that logical moment. They could do nothing other than what God IMAGINED they would do in His mind before creating anything at all.
(3) The Simple Foreknowledge View has a theological problem. In the SFV, God LEARNS who will or will not be saved, violating the doctrine of divine omniscience. Worse than that, God doesn't learn from himself who will or will not be saved, He learns FROM HIS CREATURES who will or will not be saved, making His infallible omniscient foreknowledge contingent upon contingent creatures. And, STILL worse than that, God contingently learns from AS YET NON-EXISTENT contingent creatures who will or will not be saved. Therefore, the Simple Foreknowledge View *JUST IS* Open Theism in disguise.
"The only consistent (Synergist) is an Open Theist." ~Dr. James White.
3:55 - (1) Synergists often seem to believe John 3:16 mitigates against Monergism, but Calvinists believe John 3:16 is literally true. "Whosoever believes" "shall have eternal life." Do Synergists imagine that Calvinists believe UNBELIEVERS shall have eternal life? The question regarding John 3:16 is "WHO shall believe" and "WHY will they believe." Monergists answer these questions with, "Those chosen (elected) by God will believe," and "God is how and why they will believe." John 3:16 does not even address the issue of Monergism vs. Synergism. Brothers who cite this verse against Calvinism show a lack of understanding OF Calvinism AND, frankly, OF John 3:16.
(2) "The (entire) world" "God so loved" consists of ONLY two groups, Jews AND GENTILES. The big controversy in the first century HEBREW New Testament Church was, "How, if at all, are Gentiles saved?" If Gentiles must be circumcised, BECOMING JEWS, in order to be saved by Jesus, THEN Jesus is the Savior of ONLY the Jews. However, IF Gentiles don't need to become Jews through circumcision in order to be saved by Jesus, THEN Jesus is indeed the Savior of the world (i.e., the Savior of Jews and Gentiles) and not just the Savior of the Jews. Most of the universal salvific language of the New Testament is addressing this heresy on the part of SOME Jewish Christians and ALL non-Christian first century Jews. More than 2 entire chapters of Acts and the entire book of Galatians addresses this heresy. The Gospels and many other epistles at least touch on the issue as does even the Old Testament, especially the Psalms. First century Judea is not twenty-first century America and the West. We are well past this issue. First-century Jewish Christians were not. It was inconceivable to many of them that Jesus should save Gentiles AS GENTILES.
(3) God DOES desire the salvation of "ALL" people in the sense the brother thinks, but He does not desire the salvation of "ALL" people equally. He desired the salvation of Peter more than the salvation of Judas, the AntiChrist, and the False Prophet, for instance. Jesus prayed for Peter, but we have no record of Him praying for Judas, that HIS faith might not fail. He desires the salvation of some enough to "grant" them repentance and faith (2 Tim. 2:25 & Phil. 1:29), but therefore obviously declines to do so for others - otherwise his "grants" of repentance and faith are meaningless. God desires the salvation of some enough to regenerate them (cause them to be born again or born from above) so that they can first perceive and then enter the kingdom of God (John 3:3, 5-6), but quite obviously declines to regenerate others so that they may see and then enter the Kingdom of God.
(4) God desires the salvation of everyone in the sense that He has commanded everyone to repent and believe the Gospel (Mark 1:15). However, His Prescriptive Will is often at odds with His Decretive Will. Example: God "determined before" (i.e., predetermined) that Pilate, Herod, Israel, and Romans would murder the Lord Jesus (Acts 4:27-28), but He also forbade murder in His Law (Exodus 20:12). People may not like this, but it is a biblical fact. God predetermined Pilate, et al would murder of His Son, AND He forbade murder in His law. When God predetermines that a human will commit murder, that is not God committing murder. It's God determining that someone other than Himself would be morally responsible for committing murder. God cannot commit murder.
(5) IF humans enter the Kingdom of God through FAITH, THEN regeneration precedes repentance and faith according to Jesus in John 3:3, 5-6. IF we enter the Kingdom of God through REGENERATION, THEN there are believers who are not in the Kingdom of God! However, the language of John 3 indicates that one must ALREADY be "born again/from above" BEFORE entering the Kingdom of God (through faith). Regeneration does not appear TO BE "entering the Kingdom of God."
(6) Some of the universal salvific language of the New Testament would result in Universalism being true if interpreted consistently. Yet, we know Universalism ISN'T true.
CONTINUED BELOW:
CONTINUED:
4:09 - "I believe every human being at one time or another has the opportunity to come to know Jesus Christ as his Lord and Savior." Let's examine that idea. Did Judas, whom the Lord Jesus named "the son of perdition (destruction)" have the opportunity to know Jesus salvifically? How about the AntiChrist and the False Prophet? Do children who die in utero before they have the ability to know anything, have the opportunity to know Jesus (I believe all children who die as children are saved by Jesus, but that's another story)? What about people who lived at Abraham's time in South America, did they have the opportunity to know Jesus? The dear brother's belief is obviously not true. It's wishful thinking. By determining when and where all human beings are born, the LORD is often also determining whether they will not be saved.
4:22 - "...I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but that the wicked turn from his way and live." This is StrawCalvinism. No Calvinist says God takes pleasure in the death of the wicked. No Calvinist denies that God DOES take pleasure when the wicked turns from their wicked way. This passage in Ezekiel does not even address the debate over Monergism and Synergism. Monergists don't deny that people make decisions. We deny their decisions were not determined by God. Again, the fact that the dear brother DOES believe it is germane to the issue shows that the he either doesn't understand Calvinism or the passage in Ezekiel, or both.
4:33 - "I just don't believe that God says, "Hey you're going to the smoking section" and "Hey, you're coming to the Garden of Eden." The dear brother's belief is irrelevant. It's what God through Scripture teaches that matters. Did God not say to Judas, in effect, "Hey, you're going to the smoking section" when Jesus named him "the son of perdition (destruction)?" Did God not, in effect, say to Saul of Tarsus on the road to Damascus, "Hey, you're coming to the Garden of Eden?" Did not Jesus, in effect, say to Peter "Hey, you're coming to the Garden of Eden," when He said to Peter, "I have prayed for you, that your faith may not fail, and WHEN YOU HAVE TURNED," etc.? God in Scripture teaches salvific predestination and election. Even on the Simple Foreknowledge Non-Open Theism View, God knew before He created who would and wouldn't be saved and His foreknowledge of the same cannot be falsified. He was literally the only thing that existed "when" He knew who would and wouldn't be saved, so He is the only one who COULD HAVE predetermined/predestined who would or wouldn't be saved. The fact that some people are uncomfortable with His teachings about predestination and election does not change those teachings. We are all obliged to submit to God THROUGH submitting to His Word, whether we like it or not.
4:55 - "... the Augustinian view, where God says, "I picked you, I'm going to give you faith"" and "You, you ain't coming." That is not the Augustinian view - it is the BIBLICAL view, hence:
[Phil. 1:29 NASB95] "29 FOR TO YOU IT HAS BEEN GRANTED for Christ's sake, not only TO BELIEVE IN HIM, but also to suffer for His sake,"
Quite obviously, God DOES, in essence, SAY, "I picked you, I'm going to give you faith," and conversely, in essence, says to others, "You ain't coming (since I didn't grant you faith)." More properly, He says to them, "I'm not obliged to regenerate you or grant you repentance and faith. You are responsible for your own unregeneracy and lack of repentance and faith." This is why everyone is not saved and only God's elect are saved. God's elect are no more regenerate before faith than the reprobate and are no less unrepentant or unbelieving than they. The difference between them is that God has chosen to regenerate and grant them repentance and faith, but has elected to do nothing to change the hearts of the rest. If the reprobate could believe on their own, God would absolutely save them as He has promised. But they can't believe because they're evil and won't believe, and that's not God's fault but their own fault and Adam's.
When we find ourselves agreeing with Paul's interlocuter in Romans by, in effect, saying to God, "Why have you made me (us) like this," that means our soteriology is not Paulene and, therefore, not biblical. But ALL of the objections to Monergism reduce down to, (1) "Why does God still find fault, for who has resisted His will?" (Rom. 9:19), (2) "Is God unjust?" (Rom. 9:14), and (3) "Why have you made me (us) like this?" (Rom. 9:20). Don't agree with Paul's interlocuter in Romans! If you do, your soteriology is unbiblical and therefore wrong! Repent and adopt Paul's inspired soteriology!
5:13 - "...it would violate the Scripture ... which is the foreknowledge view we read about in Romans 8." "I do not think that word, ("foreknow") means what you think it means," 😉dear brother:
[Gen 4:1 NKJV] '1 Now Adam KNEW Eve his wife, and she conceived and bore Cain, and said, "I have acquired a man from the LORD."'
What? Adam didn't know anyone but Eve? He didn't know his sons, Cain, Abel, and Seth? He didn't know His daughters?
[Amo 3:2 NKJV] "2 "You (Israel) only have I KNOWN of all the families of the earth; Therefore I will punish you for all your iniquities.""
What? God doesn't know any of the families of the earth but Israel? So much for divine omniscience if the Synergist understanding of "foreknow" and "foreknowledge" are correct! Knowledge in this sense is an intimate personal relationship.
No one would say "yes" to God unless God acts to free up their only-evil continually (Gen. 6:5) wills:
[1Co 2:14 NKJV] "14 But the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; nor can he know [them], because they are spiritually discerned."
We are all born natural men, and remain so until God causes us to be "born again" (see John 3). "The natural man" is the antithesis of the Spiritual man (i.e., the regenerate man). Until God regenerates us, we are not interested in God or His Gospel.
[Rom 8:7 NKJV] "7 Because the carnal mind [is] enmity against God; for it is NOT SUBJECT to the law of God, NOR indeed CAN BE."
"The carnal mind" = the natural mind of "the natural man," above.
18:04 - "I can't even conceive of a salvation where I didn't choose..." Neither can Calvinists, brother. No Calvinists deny we make choices. That's StrawCalvinism. We deny our choices weren't determined by God. We Choose God because He FIRST chose us;
[1Jo 4:19 NKJV] "19 We love Him because He first loved us."
CONTINUED:
CONTINUED:
19:06 - "Satan made an offer, man responded, and man's nature changed. God makes an offer, man responded, his nature changes." Not quite brother. You must reverse the order of the second half of your statement to form a chiasm:
> Satan made a promise to man >
> Man believed >
> Man's nature changed >
< Man's nature changes <
< Man believes <
< The promise made by God <
The structure is CHIASTIC, not repetitious or recapitulistic. You must remember that before the Fall man's moral nature was good but MUTABLY (changeably) so. But after the Fall, man's moral nature is evil but **UN**MUTABLY so. There is a lack of symmetry here. The purpose of the Probation Garden and God's command was to irrevocably fix man's moral nature as only good or only evil. Adam's decision to believe Satan and disbelieve God fixed his and our natures as unchangeably evil. Because of this, man could good or evil before the Fall, but after the Fall man can only do evil and cannot do good. Had Adam obeyed, his and our natures would have been irrevocably fixed as righteous, making us incapable of doing evil. The same with the angels. Those who chose to remain faithful to God have had their natures irrevocably fixed as righteous because of their decision to obey. Likewise, the angels who rebelled against God have had their natures irrevocably fixed as evil as a result of their decision to rebel. Fallen angels (demons) and fallen men cannot do good. Holy angels and holy (justified) men (after their death or resurrection) cannot do evil.
[Rom 3:10-12 NKJV]
"10 As it is written: "There is NONE RIGHTEOUS, NO, NOT ONE;
11 There is NONE who understands; There is NONE who seeks after God.
12 They have ALL turned aside; They have TOGETHER become unprofitable; There is **NONE WHO DOES GOOD**, NO, NOT ONE."
KEEP READING to v. 18. It doesn't get any better.
Thanks for addressing these issues, brothers. I hope I wasn't too hard on any of you. And thanks to "Hard Questions" and Cornerstone Television Network for facilitating this discussion!
Grace and Peace to You All, Amen,
TL/DR