The plan of creation: Did God create humans to prove a point?

[Mark Quayle]

The age of restoration isn't about salvation. That was already dealt with on the cross.

Romans 5:18-19 NIV
Consequently, just as one trespass resulted in condemnation for all people,
so also one righteous act resulted in justification and life for all people.
19 For just as through the disobedience of the one man the many were made sinners,
so also through the obedience of the one man the many will be made righteous.

We've already been through the hermeneutics of Romans 5.

And I need to see scripture, not just reasoning to your notion of God's love, that the remainder, the lost, will be restored after death, who were not regenerated and 'in Christ', before death.

 

[Saint Steven]

We've already been through the hermeneutics of Romans 5.

Sure, but that doesn't nullify what this clearly says.

Romans 5:18-19 NIV
Consequently, just as one trespass resulted in condemnation for all people,
so also one righteous act resulted in justification and life for all people.
19 For just as through the disobedience of the one man the many were made sinners,
so also through the obedience of the one man the many will be made righteous.

And I need to see scripture, not just reasoning to your notion of God's love, that the remainder, the lost, will be restored after death, who were not regenerated and 'in Christ', before death.

The Harrowing of Hell already happened once. What's to prevent it again?

I would also suggest that the idea that everyone needs to be "regenerated and 'in Christ', before death" isn't air-tight either.
For instance, what is the means of "salvation" in Matthew 25:34-36 ?

That's a tall order.
Very little that I could offer to that point. The best I can do is point to the end product that infers the process you want clarified.

Pardon the illustration, but if we have a pig at the beginning of our continuum and sausage on the other end, we can conclude that there is a meat grinder somewhere in between. - LOL (and nearer the end product than what we began with)

Concerning the end product.

Acts 3:21 NIV
Heaven must receive him until the time comes for God to restore everything, as he promised long ago through his holy prophets.

1 John 2:2 NIV
He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world.

Romans 11:32
For God has bound everyone over to disobedience so that he may have mercy on them all.

Titus 2:11 ESV
For the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation for all people,

1 Timothy 4:10
That is why we labor and strive, because we have put our hope in the living God, who is the Savior of all people, and especially of those who believe.

 

[Mark Quayle]

Sure, but that doesn't nullify what this clearly says.

Romans 5:18-19 NIV
Consequently, just as one trespass resulted in condemnation for all people,
so also one righteous act resulted in justification and life for all people.
19 For just as through the disobedience of the one man the many were made sinners,
so also through the obedience of the one man the many will be made righteous.

Romans 5:18-19 doesn't say anything —that is, you render it meaningless— separately derived from its context.

—"No, that's not what I said!"; "But those were your very words!"; "But they are not what I was saying!"; "You take it out of context, to mean what I did not mean!"; "But, you SAID it!"

The Harrowing of Hell already happened once. What's to prevent it again?

You seem to think the principle necessarily refers to the salvation of those who were not saved before passing. Even the creeds don't say that. It doesn't even mean that salvation is offered to them. The Bible doesn't say it either.

I would also suggest that the idea that everyone needs to be "regenerated and 'in Christ', before death" isn't air-tight either.
For instance, what is the means of "salvation" in Matthew 25:34-36 ?

That doesn't mention the means of salvation. It mentions the characteristics of the saved. The implication there, at best (toward your direction of thinking) is that the Gospel of Christ is not the black-and-white set of words that some claim it is.

That's a tall order.
Very little that I could offer to that point. The best I can do is point to the end product that infers the process you want clarified.

Pardon the illustration, but if we have a pig at the beginning of our continuum and sausage on the other end, we can conclude that there is a meat grinder somewhere in between. - LOL (and nearer the end product than what we began with)

Concerning the end product.

Acts 3:21 NIV
Heaven must receive him until the time comes for God to restore everything, as he promised long ago through his holy prophets.

1 John 2:2 NIV
He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world.

Romans 11:32
For God has bound everyone over to disobedience so that he may have mercy on them all.

Titus 2:11 ESV
For the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation for all people,

1 Timothy 4:10
That is why we labor and strive, because we have put our hope in the living God, who is the Savior of all people, and especially of those who believe.

With every one of these, I suppose you know, I differ from you as to their use and meaning in context. I concede that they are helpful to you, but they are not helpful to your thesis. I think we've already been through all of them; no use in repeating the process.

 

[Saint Steven]

With every one of these, I suppose you know, I differ from you as to their use and meaning in context. I concede that they are helpful to you, but they are not helpful to your thesis. I think we've already been through all of them; no use in repeating the process.

Fair enough. This has been a good discussion. I appreciate you and your willingness to explore the subject. Take care.

 

[Wayne Gabler]

Are you just moving from thread to thread to argue against Christianity while labeling yourself as a Christian? Every single one of your comments in your history is tearing at God and here you do it again. Is that what you're here to do?

Any chance of you pointing out the time the best points are presented?

 

[Tranquil Bondservant]

Any chance of you pointing out the time the best points are presented?

I would say watching the whole video is worth it as it's only 18 minutes long but if you're hurting for time then 4:30 is a good place to start and at 4:50 is the definition. The following rest of the video is exposition to that latter point at 4:50.

 

[Wayne Gabler]

I would say watching the whole video is worth it as it's only 18 minutes long but if you're hurting for time then 4:30 is a good place to start and at 4:50 is the definition. The following rest of the video is exposition to that latter point at 4:50.

I have lots of time, I wanted you to show me what you saw as the most important parts. Including the 'why' is optional, of course. When I watch a vid, I usually leave my comments in their comment section, like I would do with your vid that is referenced.
If I can pay attention all through Jordan Maxwell's Admiralty Law vids, I could certainly watch your vid and not 'doze off'

 

[Tranquil Bondservant]

I could certainly watch your vid and not 'doze off'

I wasn't suggesting otherwise mate. Sorry if I caused offense.

 

[Wayne Gabler]

I wasn't suggesting otherwise mate. Sorry if I caused offense.

NP, I have other irons in the fire at the moment, when I do watch it I will start at your timestamp before I watch it from the beginning, and then copy the comments I make there and post them here.

 

[sparow]

Just as one trespass resulted in condemnation for all those born of (the first) Adam,
so also one righteousness act resulted in justification for all those born of (the second Adam) Christ.

Yes, "all people" needs to qualified

 

[Saint Steven]

Yes, "all people" needs to qualified

Does this shed any light on the "all people"?

1 John 2:2 NIV
He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world.

 

[JulieB67]

Interesting discussion!

Why does the bible indicates God knew us before we were born? (The spirits in man were in heaven before.)
Why does Paul describe some as being predestined before the foundations of the Earth?

Good points. My thoughts are very similiar.

These verses specifically come to mind.

Ecclesiastes 12:7 "Then shall the dust return to the earth as it was: and the spirit shall return unto God Who gave it."

Which leads me to Christ's teachings to Nicodemus,

John 3:3 "Jesus answered and said unto him, "Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God."

The Greek word for again is anothen which means born from "above", the first.

He then tells Nicodemus that if he can't believe earthly things how well he then believe Heavenly things and states

John 3:13 "And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but He That came down from heaven, even the Son of man Which is in heaven."

Most people think this very only refers to Christ but it states "even" the Son of man. He is basically restating verse 3 but in a different manner. Not everyone will believe that but that's fine, not looking for a debate either just stating my thoughts.

And these verses,

Job 38:4 "Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding."

Job 38:7 "When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for Joy?"

Job 40:15 "Behold now behemoth, which I made with thee; he eateth grass as an ox."

I'm not of the belief that all the spirits are fallen though becaue we have verses like these,

Jeremiah 1:5 "Before I formed thee in the belly I know thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee, and I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations."

Ephesians 1:4 "According as He hath chosen us in Him before the foundation of the world,

But I know we don't have the complete picture but there are things sprinkled throughout the Bible.

That human life on Earth is our trial.

I believe so as well.

To me, this is about God vs Satan. And our Father wanting to be very thorough on who will spend the eternity with him.

It also explains why we are still here, etc.

 

[Jeff Saunders]

Interesting discussion!


Good points. My thoughts are very similiar.

These verses specifically come to mind.

Ecclesiastes 12:7 "Then shall the dust return to the earth as it was: and the spirit shall return unto God Who gave it."

Which leads me to Christ's teachings to Nicodemus,

John 3:3 "Jesus answered and said unto him, "Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God."

The Greek word for again is anothen which means born from "above", the first.

He then tells Nicodemus that if he can't believe earthly things how well he then believe Heavenly things and states

John 3:13 "And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but He That came down from heaven, even the Son of man Which is in heaven."

Most people think this very only refers to Christ but it states "even" the Son of man. He is basically restating verse 3 but in a different manner. Not everyone will believe that but that's fine, not looking for a debate either just stating my thoughts.

And these verses,

Job 38:4 "Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding."

Job 38:7 "When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for Joy?"

Job 40:15 "Behold now behemoth, which I made with thee; he eateth grass as an ox."

I'm not of the belief that all the spirits are fallen though becaue we have verses like these,

Jeremiah 1:5 "Before I formed thee in the belly I know thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee, and I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations."

Ephesians 1:4 "According as He hath chosen us in Him before the foundation of the world,

But I know we don't have the complete picture but there are things sprinkled throughout the Bible.




I believe so as well.

To me, this is about God vs Satan. And our Father wanting to be very thorough on who will spend the eternity with him.

It also explains why we are still here, etc.

All good points.

But what point would God be trying to prove and to whom _ the one we call Satan?

I have always wondered why we are here the Bible says God created us for his pleasure I feel it's more than that.

These are questions I've asked myself
What happened to the 1/3 of angels that was cast down to the Earth with Satan? (They are never talked about but apparently they are on Earth.)
Why did Jesus said hell was created for Satan and the angels? (Yet the spirits in man can be/is destined for hell.)
Why does the Bible say choose this day who you will serve?
Why did God curse the Earth at the fall of flesh man?
Why does the Bible say the Earth is under judgment because the prince of this world is judged? (Satan is judged but none of the other angels are and the human flesh inhabitors of the Earth.)
Why does the bible indicates God knew us before we were born? (The spirits in man were in heaven before.)
Why does Paul describe some as being predestined before the foundations of the Earth? (Already chosen)
Why is the word redeemed used? (Redeemed from the fall of Adam or redeemed from the fall with Satan.)
Why is the devil in his anger and seemingly hatred determined to take as many of the spirits within man with him as he possibly can? (Could it be because he has been judged and condemned but God is showing Mercy and giving the other fallen a chance at redemption.)

Me, I personally think that there is a strong possibility that God created man strictly for the purpose of housing our fallen spirits to be judged. That human life on Earth is our trial. He has told us how to live and who to believe and have faith in - that our choices here determines our fate _ whether we end up with the same fate as the one we were cast down to earth with or redemption from the one who is showing us Mercy.
(This is food for thought!!!)

And I add I have spoken to some who say they were of the Jewish faith and said that Satan works for God and is not evil. (I question that)

The Jewish View of Satan

What is the Jewish view of Satan? Was he a fallen angel? Let's find out in this interesting post on this topic. Read on to find out.

jewsforjudaism.org

Plus the name Satan is derived Satanail written of in The book of Enoch but the book of Enoch is not considered Canon.

[PDF] The Watchers Of Satanail: The Fallen Angels Traditions In 2 (Slavonic) Enoch | Semantic Scholar

The early Enochic booklet unveils the misdeeds of the two hundred Watchers led by their leaders Shemihazah and Asael. What is striking, however, in the description given in the Slavonic apocalypse, is that in contrast to the classic Enochic account, the leadership over the fallen Watchers is...

www.semanticscholar.org

The Forgotten Books of Eden: The Book of the Secrets of Enoch: Chapter XVIII

The Forgotten Books of Eden, by Rutherford H. Platt, Jr., [1926], full text etext at sacred-texts.com

www.sacred-texts.com

Why does scripture say that God knew us before we were born ? Let me give you a thought, this makes my head spin trying to understand this with a finite mind. I thin tot goes like this if God is omniscient that means there is nothing he does not know and nothing he has not always known, so even billions of years ago God knew us. This does not mean that we were actually there we had not been created but in the mind of God ,because he is outside of time , he knew us. There could never be a time that he didn’t know us because then there would be something he didn’t know and that is not possible. But we were not created till the sperm and egg were united and then we were not just a thought but a physical reality. God gave us a spirit at that very point and our journey in his creation began. Gods thoughts and actions all came together and we were created.

 

[Mark Quayle]

Why does scripture say that God knew us before we were born ? Let me give you a thought, this makes my head spin trying to understand this with a finite mind. I thin tot goes like this if God is omniscient that means there is nothing he does not know and nothing he has not always known, so even billions of years ago God knew us. This does not mean that we were actually there we had not been created but in the mind of God ,because he is outside of time , he knew us. There could never be a time that he didn’t know us because then there would be something he didn’t know and that is not possible. But we were not created till the sperm and egg were united and then we were not just a thought but a physical reality. God gave us a spirit at that very point and our journey in his creation began. Gods thoughts and actions all came together and we were created.

Consider this timeless God, then, speaking his final product, his Dwelling Place, and The Bride of Christ, into existence with just a word, and this whole temporal reality of thousands or billions of years 'immediately' (to use one of our temporal words) into being.

We consider our years of suffering to be of substance, but God calls this temporal (which in fact includes the real Gospel of fall and redemption and the suffering of Christ in our place) but a vapor compared to the solid substance which is to come.

 

[sparow]

Does this shed any light on the "all people"?

1 John 2:2 NIV
He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world.

Are you suggesting that I take a verse out of the context of the rest of scripture and derive meaning that way. As I recall you implied all people are saved. The truth is: His atoning sacrifice makes it possible for each and every person to be saved, if they follow the established procedures, rephrased, if they wear the garments Christ provides.

 

[Saint Steven]

1 John 2:2 NIV
He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world.

Are you suggesting that I take a verse out of the context of the rest of scripture and derive meaning that way. As I recall you implied all people are saved. The truth is: His atoning sacrifice makes it possible for each and every person to be saved, if they follow the established procedures, rephrased, if they wear the garments Christ provides.

The "out-of-context" argument is wearing pretty thin.
Are you suggesting that this scripture does not mean what it plainly says?

There is no consensus on what "the rest of scripture" means. So why pretend that there is?

Are you saying that the atonement was insufficient in some way? That it is conditional? (only for ours, or NOT only for ours?)

 

[sparow]

1 John 2:2 NIV
He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world.


The "out-of-context" argument is wearing pretty thin.
Are you suggesting that this scripture does not mean what it plainly says?

There is no consensus on what "the rest of scripture" means. So why pretend that there is?

Are you saying that the atonement was insufficient in some way? That it is conditional? (only for ours, or NOT only for ours?)

OK Steve, I probably am not an expert on one verse theology, but I'll give it my best shot.

"He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world."

What you do is take these words without regard to who spoke and without regard for what else they have said. Because of that it is no longer John speaking, instead you have the words speaking, which is silly, words cannot talk, they are unintelligent.

If it is John speaking then it is said in the context of the blood covenant; John specifies conditions, that we confess our sins, that we keep His commandments, that we walk as he walked, that we confess He is the Christ.

One person tried to enter without meeting the conditions; Matt 22:11-14, and he is thrown out into darkness where he grinds his teeth. How do you reconcile 1 John 2.2 with Matt 22:11-14. You maybe a Dispensationalist who separates atonement from salvation

 

[Tranquil Bondservant]

1 John 2:2 NIV
He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world.


The "out-of-context" argument is wearing pretty thin.
Are you suggesting that this scripture does not mean what it plainly says?

There is no consensus on what "the rest of scripture" means. So why pretend that there is?

Are you saying that the atonement was insufficient in some way? That it is conditional? (only for ours, or NOT only for ours?)

John 3:36, John 3:18, Mark 16:16, Acts 4:12. 1 Peter 4:17, Revelation 20:15, Romans 6:23, 2 Peter 2:12-14 . 1 John 2:2 is saying that He is sufficient for the sins of the whole world. A principle rule of hermeneutics is to interpret the unclear text by the clear.

 

[Saint Steven]

Saint Steven said:
1 John 2:2 NIV
He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world.

OK Steve, I probably am not an expert on one verse theology, but I'll give it my best shot.

"He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world."

Wow.
It's no wonder no one wants to be a Christian. Look at how we treat even those we love.
I'm not singling you out, we see this everywhere on the forum. Like this...

If I dumped a whole wall of scripture with every bit of context imaginable, I would be criticized.
If post a whole passage, what I am trying to say is swimming in context, thus buried.
Post one verse that sums up my point nicely, I'm accused of cherry-picking an out-of-context idea.
As if the verse can't possibly mean what it plainly says. (sigh)

One verse theology? If you want a deluge, I can give it to you. But to what end. TLDR

What you do is take these words without regard to who spoke and without regard for what else they have said. Because of that it is no longer John speaking, instead you have the words speaking, which is silly, words cannot talk, they are unintelligent.

The Bible can't talk? News to me. Bad news, frankly.

So, was John being misleading in these "unintelligent" (but otherwise inspired) words that he wrote?
Did someone have a gun to his head to force him to add the words, "not only for ours"? Doubtful.

The atonement paid the death penalty for the sin of the WHOLE world. Paid in full.
Is this difficult to understand? Or just doctrinally impossible?
Seems the problem is with the doctrine that says "No!", not with the scripture.

If it is John speaking then it is said in the context of the blood covenant; John specifies conditions, that we confess our sins, that we keep His commandments, that we walk as he walked, that we confess He is the Christ.

Conditional grace?
That's quite a list. Will anyone be saved?
Frankly, none of that can be qualified as the only "means of salvation".
As if we could save ourselves. (nope)

One person tried to enter without meeting the conditions; Matt 22:11-14, and he is thrown out into darkness where he grinds his teeth. How do you reconcile 1 John 2.2 with Matt 22:11-14. You maybe a Dispensationalist who separates atonement from salvation

The gates of the New Jerusalem are always open for a reason.
The ones thrown out into darkness will do whatever is required to get back in.
What we call Universal restoration, or Ultimate Redemption.

I have a theory that in the afterlife, everyone will be surprised at where they end up.
And with the list of conditions you supplied, we better hope for redemption.

No, I don't separate atonement from salvation. That seems to be what you are doing.
The atonement is salvation for the whole world. And it took place on the cross.
Not sure how they could be any more combined than that.

 

[Saint Steven]

John 3:36, John 3:18, Mark 16:16, Acts 4:12. 1 Peter 4:17, Revelation 20:15, Romans 6:23, 2 Peter 2:12-14 . 1 John 2:2 is saying that He is sufficient for the sins of the whole world. A principle rule of hermeneutics is to interpret the unclear text by the clear.

Thanks.
The principle rule of apologetics is to cherry-pick the "proof-texts" that support YOUR own doctrine.
Good work.