Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
You are giving me your Calvinistic presuppositions with that kind of question.Why did God send Christ to die for those He foreknew would not believe?
Why can't you just answer the question? Consistent Arminians are Open Theists. Open Theists deny that God is omniscient. Therefore, they escape the question.You are giving me your Calvinistic presuppositions with that kind of question.
I could ask you: Why did God send Christ to die only for the elect who he coerced into the kingdom by irresistible grace and damned the rest? Why did he bother to create them when he knew they would be damned eternally?
So what's your question?
To give them the opportunity, through unlimited atonement, prevenient grace and free will, to say yea or nay to the Gospel offer. Isn't that simple enough to understand?Why did God send Christ to die for those He foreknew would not believe?
Consistent Arminians are Reformed/Classical Arminians who maintain the integrity of Scripture and that includes the omniscience of God, unlimited atonement, prevenient grace and free will in relation to salvation.Why can't you just answer the question? Consistent Arminians are Open Theists. Open Theists deny that God is omniscient. Therefore, they escape the question.
But you cannot escape the question because you believe that God foreknows all things. So, if God foreknows who will not believe, then the only reason for Christ's dying for them would be to provide a basis for their judgment, not to provide an opportunity for salvation.
Do you believe what the Scriptures state or not?Why can't they be saved after judgement? Can't God pardon them if they cry out to him for mercy?
First, the scripture no where says that Christ died to give men the "opportunity" to be saved. It consistently says that He died "TO SAVE" men.You have misjudged the 'only reason for Christ's dying'. He died for them to provide the opportunity for salvation through prevenient grace and free will. God in his wisdom and omniscience knows that salvation should be offered to all and that ALL have the opportunity to say yea or nay to salvation.
No thanks.I refer you to my articles
Mine is the logical position for these reasons:First, the scripture no where says that Christ died to give men the "opportunity" to be saved. It consistently says that He died "TO SAVE" men.
Second, your position is totally illogical. If God foreknows who will not believe, then there can be no "opportunity" for them to be saved. Christ's dath is nothing more than the basis of their judgment.
No thanks.
Do you believe what the Scriptures state or not?
A few others have joined with me in telling you that the only opportunity for salvation is in this life and that after death is judgement (Heb 9:27). Don't you believe this doctrine?
Easy question. To demonstrate His unlimited LOVE for His creatures.Why did God send Christ to die for those He foreknew would not believe?
Easy question. To demonstrate His unlimited LOVE for His creatures.
Why is it that Calvinists just cannot accept this answer?
Another way to look at this is to ask if God is capable of loving those He knows will reject Him.
Or, is God capable of loving the entire human race?
From the kinds of responses that are seen from Calvinists, it appears that they do not view God as capable of loving those He knows will reject Him, which basically lowers God to the level of mankind.
And that they don't believe that God is capable of loving the entire human race.
Now, if there are Calvinists who will answer "yes" to both questions, then why can't they accept my answer to the question posed by the boxer?
I've answered your question. You don't like my answer so you come up with this kind of non-answer.You still are not answering my question. It hard to have a conversation when you won't engage in the actual conversation.
When Jesus said this the belief was that the Jews were the "world" in view. Furthermore, God sent Jesus only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.God's injustice is exposed. He does not love the whole world (contrary to John 3:16) and does not offer ALL people the opportunity to respond to the Gospel.
I've answered your question. You don't like my answer so you come up with this kind of non-answer.
Bye
There is not a word in the context to demonstrate that 'world' in John 3:16 meant only the Jews. This is what Calvinists like yourself do to twist Scripture to make it mean what it does not say.When Jesus said this the belief was that the Jews were the "world" in view. Furthermore, God sent Jesus only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.
Do you have proof that the term "world" meant to the ancients what it means to you?
You have NOT escaped the problem. If God foreknew who would not believe, then the death of Christ does not provide "opportunity" for them to be saved. It provides only the basis for their condemnation.
You're wrong. Jesus spoke those words during His Galilean ministry which was exclusively to the Jews. He said, "For God so loved the world" to Jews.There is not a word in the context to demonstrate that 'world' in John 3:16 meant only the Jews. This is what Calvinists like yourself do to twist Scripture to make it mean what it does not say.
Calvinist commentator, William Hendricksen, agrees with me and disagrees with you. What does 'world' mean in John 3:16? Hendriksen states:You're wrong. Jesus spoke those words during His Galilean ministry which was exclusively to the Jews. He said, "For God so loved the world" to Jews.
Furthermore, there is not one instance in John's gospel where the term "world" means every human being. Example: The Pharisees said, "The world has gone after Him" (John 12:19). The Vulgate Latin, Syriac, Arabic, and Ethiopic versions read, "the whole world." Yet verse 12 says that it was it was a "great multitude."
They were a great multitude of Jews, not every human being. They were identified as "the Daughter of Zion" (verse 15). They were Jews.
These are excellent observations and questions. But I think we are banging our heads on a theological brick wall.Easy question. To demonstrate His unlimited LOVE for His creatures.
Why is it that Calvinists just cannot accept this answer?
Another way to look at this is to ask if God is capable of loving those He knows will reject Him.
Or, is God capable of loving the entire human race?
From the kinds of responses that are seen from Calvinists, it appears that they do not view God as capable of loving those He knows will reject Him, which basically lowers God to the level of mankind.
And that they don't believe that God is capable of loving the entire human race.
Now, if there are Calvinists who will answer "yes" to both questions, then why can't they accept my answer to the question posed by the boxer?