Quote:
Originally Posted by unlearnedlearner  1. The Holy Spirit is the source of regeneration, not faith, and faith flows from regeneration.
2. I don't accept that a "rational approach to unbelief is irrational", because unbelief is at its root rebellion. Why is reason with a rebel irrational? His definition of faith, "rational", and "unbelief" are all unbiblical, so his critique doesn't apply to a Biblical worldview. |
Well all already know that the Holy Spirit is the source of regeneration, that is not even in question here.
With regards to your second statement you might want to sound up your argument as it is at first glance pelagic. You are hopefully not suggesting that mankind can choose to cease his rebellion before the gift of regeneration and faith are you? I find your argumentation to be completely inapplicable since we are dealing with someone who does not have a biblical world view.
Now continuing on...
If the reformed position is correct (and I only phrase it that way for purposes of the argument) then man cannot ascend to faith. There is the issue of original sin and rebellion. It is only after regeneration that one may receive faith.
Logically it works something like this:
regeneration is a necessary condition for faith
in predicate logic we would say:
1) (F=>R) Faith [F] implies Regeneration [R]
2) (R=>Whs) Regeneration [R] implies a Work of the Holy Spirit [Whs]
3) (F=>Whs) 1,2 hypothetical syllogism
4) (~Whs=>~F) 3 transposition
Given this model the application of a positive apologetic (classical apologetics in this case) is irrational if the reason for the apologetic is to use reason to ascend to faith.
Further if Sproul and Gerstner are correct, presupositionalism is contrary to scriptural mandate.