I’m not interested in arguing what Ray thinks. It is, frankly, not that important to me.

But how you get “babies are sinners” from “babies are not sinners,” is beyond me. I’m not sure how you can interact with anyone about how to properly interpret the Bible if that is what you do with mere man’s words.

I should remind you, in any case, that that wasn’t an isolated instance. There’s that thread of 164 comments, and two others that reached over 200 comments. So you won’t be surprised if I’m not fully engaging his every comment.

The question should be “Why pray if God is NOT sovereign?”… exactly my point in the last post. It’s a stupid question to ask why pray if God IS sovereign. If anybody is truly struggling with that then their problem is not with prayer, but with understanding properly God’s sovereignty.

(Note: “Effectual call” here is being used synonymously with the term “Regeneration”.)

1._____ Those whom God hath predestinated unto life, he is pleased in his appointed, and accepted time, effectually to call, by his Word and Spirit, out of that state of sin and death in which they are by nature, to grace and salvation by Jesus Christ; enlightening their minds spiritually and savingly to understand the things of God; taking away their heart of stone, and giving unto them a heart of flesh; renewing their wills, and by his almighty power determining them to that which is good, and effectually drawing them to Jesus Christ; yet so as they come most freely, being made willing by his grace.
( Romans 8:30; Romans 11:7; Ephesians 1:10, 11; 2 Thessalonians 2:13, 14; Ephesians 2:1-6; Acts 26:18; Ephesians 1:17, 18; Ezekiel 36:26; Deuteronomy 30:6; Ezekiel 36:27; Ephesians 1:19; Psalm 110:3; Song of Solomon 1:4 )

2._____ This effectual call is of God’s free and special grace alone, not from anything at all foreseen in man, nor from any power or agency in the creature, being wholly passive therein, being dead in sins and trespasses, until being quickened and renewed by the Holy Spirit; he is thereby enabled to answer this call, and to embrace the grace offered and conveyed in it, and that by no less power than that which raised up Christ from the dead.
( 2 Timothy 1:9; Ephesians 2:8; 1 Corinthians 2:14; Ephesians 2:5; John 5:25; Ephesians 1:19, 20 )

No. First he’s reborn, is given eyes to see, given ears to hear, a mind to understand. Then he sees, hears, and understands. Then he believes what he can only now see, hear, and understand properly. He’s not reborn again after that.

The logical order (a historically orthodox ordo salutis) is: Regeneration –> Faith. Not Faith –> Regeneration. You can’t believe before you’re alive. You can’t do anything before you’re alive. See Ac 16:14; John 6:44, 65; John 1:12-13; James 1:18; Eph 2:5; Col 2:13; Ezek 36:25-27, 37:1-14.

The important thing not to misunderstand, though, is that this is not a temporal order. Temporally, regeneration and faith are simultaneous. What I mean is, there are no regenerated people walking around who haven’t believed yet. There’s no time in between.

But logically, regeneration precedes faith. Again, you must be given eyes before you see. You must be given ears before you hear. You must be given a heart of flesh before you can incline it toward God.

In terms of Ray B., here’s what he said on a post about Infant Baptism over a year ago:

Ray B.: Christ died for sinners. Yet babies are not sinners. Jesus said they belong to the kingdom of heaven. They are innocent until they have particiapted in sin. All have sinned is written to those who could comprehend sin. They are the ones who have sinned , they are those included in all have sinned. Not the sinless babies who have not sinned.

There you have it. The doctrine of original sin denied. Adam’s sin did not corrupt our will. It didn’t even weaken it, as the semi-Pelagians say. It was Adam’s sin and his alone. Babies are born with a clean slate, and aren’t sinners until they “participate” in sin actively from their own wills.

Here’s the link to that thread. And there are others. That error was exposed not right away, but after much digging about thoughts about baptism, Calvinism, etc. It’s at the root of his heretical theology, and it’s at the root of your own theology about these things, David M. Yours isn’t heretical, simply because of your inconsistency.

said: But at the same time, Calvinists don’t deny that people have to choose to put their faith in Christ alone, and utterly rely upon Him for their righteousness. There is a choice. One must exercise their will.>

If the will is in TOTAL bondage to sin, then it cannot be exercised. Hyper-sovereignty (a new phrase I just coined) does not sort with scripture wherein people do things (many) that God did not make them do

Jer 32:35 ‘And they built the high places of Baal which are in the Valley of the Son of Hinnom, to cause their sons and their daughters to pass through the fire to Molech, which I did not command them, nor did it come into My mind that they should do this abomination, to cause Judah to sin.’

God doesn’t even TEMPT man to sin (though He tests)

Jas 1:13 Let no one say when he is tempted, “I am tempted by God”; for God cannot be tempted by evil, nor does He Himself tempt anyone.

It has often been called God’s permissive will that allows man to do abominations. If those things too were God’s will then God’s ‘Law’ is a sham, an excuse to torment mankind.

BTW, I’ve never heard Ray B. say anything that would lead me to believe he was a Pelagian, did I miss something or is he just a good-ol’ Semi-Pelagian like me?