Consider these verses...

[theseed]

I think that's a wonderful idea. But, hey, don't you think you should find a mirror and repeat this statement?

Your right, and that's why I've quit debating with you becasue I get caught up in returning the ball you throw, naturally, I would want to stick you with the same jibes you give me, but I know this is wrong and so I've quit.

You asked me what I thought, and I told you. Then you preceded to pick at my arguments. I never asked for a debate, nor was I looking for one. I noticed that you called this a debate forum earlier. It's my understanding that PRE is not intended to be a debate forum but a congrational forum.

 

[Reformationist]

Actually biased does not imply intent. There are many research studies that have been found to be biased in that by design of the study itself and how the questions are asked, the researchers were directing the results. Intention is not necessarily there at all. The propblem was in the design.

So the researchers were accidentally directing the result but didn't mean to be? Okay. If my poll was biased how about you just tell me who you think the sheep are in John 10 and how you understand John 10:15 with regards to the extent of Christ's purpose in dying.

Jhn 3:16 For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life. Jhn 3:17 "For God did not send the Son into the world to judge the world, but that the world might be saved through Him.

Umm...That verse says that God gave His Son so that whoever believes in Him does not perish. His goal is clearly not that they would merely have the possibility not to perish. God's desire is that His children absolutely do not perish. Do you disagree? Either way, John 3:16,17 actually supports a limited atonement. Even if you ascribe to the belief that man is fully capable to make a decision to come to Christ apart from the regenerative grace of God, you still must acknowledge that God was, at least, limiting the benefit of Christ's saving work to those that believe. He was not espousing an universal atonement, right?

1Ti 2:3 This is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior, 1Ti 2:4 who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth. 1Ti 2:5 For there is one God, {and} one mediator also between God and men, {the} man Christ Jesus, 1Ti 2:6 who gave Himself as a ransom for all, the testimony {given} at the proper time.

Again, I must ask, how does this imply the possibility of salvation. That's what you said Christ's purpose in dying was in post #54. I would say His goal was the actual salvation of believers. IOW, their salvation is assured because Christ is able subdue all things to Himself and accomplish that which He purposes and none can stay His hand. You, however, seem to be purporting the notion that Christ came, fullfilled the Law at every point, died a righteous, sinless death all for the purpose of providing the possibility[/b] of salvation? Does that sound like good news to you? If the possibility of salvation is all that Christ died to provide, pray tell, what makes that possibility become and actuality?

2Pe 3:9 The Lord is not slow about His promise, as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing for any to perish but for all to come to repentance.

Umm...this doesn't have anything to do with the atonement. Why are you using this verse as a prooftext to support your idea of the possibility of salvation?

And it is a gift one receives through faith:

FIC, I'm not debating how one receives salvation. I'm debating whether the omnipotent Lord of the universe died to provide the possibility or the actuality.

I like what that one article pointed out - the one that the seed posted:

John Calvin says of this verse: "He uses the word sin in the singular number for any kind of iniquity; as if he had said that every kind of unrighteousness which alienates men from God is taken away by Christ. And when he says the sin of the world, he extends this favor indiscriminately to the whole human race."

Wow. That was really great. One problem though. The implication you make is that Calvin was saying that Christ takes away the sins of all minkind and reconciles them to God. That's not at all what Calvin taught or was implying in that article. You see, his explanation actually does not end there. It doesn't say "...the whole human race." It says, "...the whole human race; that the Jews might not think that he had been sent to them alone." All Calvin was saying was that we all, without exception, need the favor of the Lord. And God is not discriminatory as to who He gives it to, meaning that He does not isolate His favor upon one nation or tribe, like the Jews. The Lord bestows His blessings upon people from every nation and tribe, but not every nation and tribe as a whole.

I have asked many Calvinists for a quote from John Calvin that shows he taught limited atonement. I 've never seen one. Only quotes like above that show he believed in unlimited atonement.

FIC, I'll be happy to give you some quotes from Calvin that support limited (in effect, not capability) atonement, but it begs the question "why?" I am not aware that any Christian denomination supports an unlimited atonement. Granted, there are varied beliefs on the reasons a person's sins are atoned for but, as far as I know, all Christian denominations ascribe to some limit. Either they say, as do Calvinists, that the Lord foreordained who would come to salvation and it is for those that the Lord laid down His life, or, they say that God, being omniscient, was able to see/know who would make their own free volitional move to accept Him and it is by their freely willed action that He chose them. Even if you fall into the latter arena you still ascribe to a limited atonement because you'd still say the benefits of Christ's death are applied only to those who freely will to believe.

Now, if you are a universalist, well, that's a whole different ballgame.

 

[Reformationist]

Your right, and that's why I've quit debating with you becasue I get caught up in returning the ball you throw, naturally, I would want to stick you with the same jibes you give me, but I know this is wrong and so I've quit.

Aren't we fallen humans the most creative and self-justifying of creatures? Not only do I get the blame for my sinfulness, I'm, at least partially, to blame for yours. Look seed, I do "throw the ball" to you. However, I'm not the only one in these discussions throwing that ball. You should really think about taking as much blame for your actions as you wish to shuffle off on someone else.

You asked me what I thought, and I told you. Then you preceded to pick at my arguments.

I know, I know. It was poor innocent little seed getting attacked by big, bad Reformationist. Sure. That's how it was.

I never asked for a debate, nor was I looking for one.

Well then, as I said, a DEBATE FORUM is probably not the best place to engage your time.

I noticed that you called this a debate forum earlier. It's my understanding that PRE is not intended to be a debate forum but a congrational forum.

Well, you'd be wrong:

"Non-Denominational Protestant Forum Rules

2) Protestant, Evangelical and Reformed members, as well as Non-Denominational Christian members can post fellowship threads here as well as debate threads to discuss various doctrines to do with their own denomination and other denominations (including the Catholic church), as long as they are within our rules."

That help? That means that ANY thread in this forum is a potential debate thread.

But, if you feel that you cannot control yourself in the face of my unbridled evilness then you are more than free to move on. No one can make you continue posting.

 

[FreeinChrist]

So the researchers were accidentally directing the result but didn't mean to be? Okay. If my poll was biased how about you just tell me who you think the sheep are in John 10 and how you understand John 10:15 with regards to the extent of Christ's purpose in dying.

John 10 includes this:
Jhn 10:7 So Jesus said to them again, "Truly, truly, I say to you, I am the door of the sheep.Jhn 10:8 "All who came before Me are thieves and robbers, but the sheep did not hear them.Jhn 10:9 "I am the door; if anyone enters through Me, he will be saved, and will go in and out and find pasture.

Umm...That verse says that God gave His Son so that whoever believes in Him does not perish. His goal is clearly not that they would merely have the possibility not to perish.

Jhn 3:16 "For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life.Jhn 3:17 "For God did not send the Son into the world to judge the world, but that the world might be saved through Him.
I said that the gift is available but only those who believe receive the gift. Whoever believes does not perish. YOU are playing word games by implying I believe the verse says differently. Shame on you.
And then there is this just above it:
Jhn 3:14 "As Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of Man be lifted up;Jhn 3:15 so that whoever believes will in Him have eternal life.

Either way, John 3:16,17 actually supports a limited atonement.

Actually, it contradicts the concept of limited atonement. Rather blatantly.
I quoted:
1Ti 2:3 This is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior, 1Ti 2:4 who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth. 1Ti 2:5 For there is one God, {and} one mediator also between God and men, {the} man Christ Jesus, 1Ti 2:6 who gave Himself as a ransom for all, the testimony {given} at the proper time.
You wrote:

"Again, I must ask, how does this imply the possibility of salvation. That's what you said Christ's purpose in dying was in post #54. I would say His goal was the actual salvation of believers. IOW, their salvation is assured because Christ is able subdue all things to Himself and accomplish that which He purposes and none can stay His hand. You, however, seem to be purporting the notion that Christ came, fullfilled the Law at every point, died a righteous, sinless death all for the purpose of providing the possibility[/b] of salvation? Does that sound like good news to you? If the possibility of salvation is all that Christ died to provide, pray tell, what makes that possibility become and actuality?"

The Bible says what it says, Reformationist.
Jesus died for the whole world (John 3 and elsewhere) and salvation is available to all who believe. Salvation is a gift of God which we receive through faith in Jesus Christ (Ephesians 2). God desires that all men would come to salvation (I tim. 2 and II Peter 3). These are simple truths. I think you are arguing wih God.

It is very clear to me that God does not force the gift on people, they must believe and follow.
Mat 16:24 Then Jesus said to His disciples, "If anyone wishes to come after Me, he must deny himself, and take up his cross and follow Me.Mat 16:25 "For whoever wishes to save his life will lose it; but whoever loses his life for My sake will find it.
I quoted: 2Pe 3:9 The Lord is not slow about His promise, as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing for any to perish but for all to come to repentance.

Umm...this doesn't have anything to do with the atonement. Why are you using this verse as a prooftext to support your idea of the possibility of salvation?

Because repentence is big part of believing in Christ and those that are unrepentent of their sin are not going to be saved.

This is a very BASIC concept in regards to salvation, Reformationist. Look up the word repent in the Bible.

FIC, I'm not debating how one receives salvation. I'm debating whether the omnipotent Lord of the universe died to provide the possibility or the actuality.

then you are creating your own problems. The Lord died for the whole world. Salvation is a gift available to those who believe. apparently a huge part of 'beleiving' requires that it is the repentent persons sincere desire for salvation and to follow. It's the heart....

Wow. That was really great. One problem though. The implication you make is that Calvin was saying that Christ takes away the sins of all minkind and reconciles them to God. That's not at all what Calvin taught or was implying in that article.

No, just that He died for the world.

FIC, I'll be happy to give you some quotes from Calvin that support limited (in effect, not capability) atonement, but it begs the question "why?" I am not aware that any Christian denomination supports an unlimited atonement.

I have asked you before.
And there are many in the church who believe that Christ died for the whole world, that salvation is a gift that is available to all who believe. That God desires all to come to salvation - just like the Bible says. It is only the Calvinist churches that truly buy into limited atonement - and to be clear, as defined as 'Christ died only for those that were predestined to be saved, only for His elect.".

Maybe you should broaden your horizons and not keep reading books pushing the Calvinist view.

Now, if you are a universalist, well, that's a whole different ballgame.

We've debated before. You should be aware of my position. And i made it clear in this post and the ones before.

 

[Bulldog]

John 10 includes this:
Jhn 10:7 So Jesus said to them again, "Truly, truly, I say to you, I am the door of the sheep.Jhn 10:8 "All who came before Me are thieves and robbers, but the sheep did not hear them.Jhn 10:9 "I am the door; if anyone enters through Me, he will be saved, and will go in and out and find pasture.
Jhn 3:16 "For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life.Jhn 3:17 "For God did not send the Son into the world to judge the world, but that the world might be saved through Him.
I said that the gift is available but only those who believe receive the gift. Whoever believes does not perish. YOU are playing word games by implying I believe the verse says differently. Shame on you.
And then there is this just above it:
Jhn 3:14 "As Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of Man be lifted up;Jhn 3:15 so that whoever believes will in Him have eternal life.


Actually, it contradicts the concept of limited atonement. Rather blatantly.
I quoted:
1Ti 2:3 This is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior, 1Ti 2:4 who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth. 1Ti 2:5 For there is one God, {and} one mediator also between God and men, {the} man Christ Jesus, 1Ti 2:6 who gave Himself as a ransom for all, the testimony {given} at the proper time.
You wrote:

"Again, I must ask, how does this imply the possibility of salvation. That's what you said Christ's purpose in dying was in post #54. I would say His goal was the actual salvation of believers. IOW, their salvation is assured because Christ is able subdue all things to Himself and accomplish that which He purposes and none can stay His hand. You, however, seem to be purporting the notion that Christ came, fullfilled the Law at every point, died a righteous, sinless death all for the purpose of providing the possibility[/b] of salvation? Does that sound like good news to you? If the possibility of salvation is all that Christ died to provide, pray tell, what makes that possibility become and actuality?"

The Bible says what it says, Reformationist.
Jesus died for the whole world (John 3 and elsewhere) and salvation is available to all who believe. Salvation is a gift of God which we receive through faith in Jesus Christ (Ephesians 2). God desires that all men would come to salvation (I tim. 2 and II Peter 3). These are simple truths. I think you are arguing wih God.

It is very clear to me that God does not force the gift on people, they must believe and follow.
Mat 16:24 Then Jesus said to His disciples, "If anyone wishes to come after Me, he must deny himself, and take up his cross and follow Me.Mat 16:25 "For whoever wishes to save his life will lose it; but whoever loses his life for My sake will find it.
I quoted: 2Pe 3:9 The Lord is not slow about His promise, as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing for any to perish but for all to come to repentance.

Because repentence is big part of believing in Christ and those that are unrepentent of their sin are not going to be saved.

This is a very BASIC concept in regards to salvation, Reformationist. Look up the word repent in the Bible.

then you are creating your own problems. The Lord died for the whole world. Salvation is a gift available to those who believe. apparently a huge part of 'beleiving' requires that it is the repentent persons sincere desire for salvation and to follow. It's the heart....

No, just that He died for the world.


I have asked you before.
And there are many in the church who believe that Christ died for the whole world, that salvation is a gift that is available to all who believe. That God desires all to come to salvation - just like the Bible says. It is only the Calvinist churches that truly buy into limited atonement - and to be clear, as defined as 'Christ died only for those that were predestined to be saved, only for His elect.".

Maybe you should broaden your horizons and not keep reading books pushing the Calvinist view.

We've debated before. You should be aware of my position. And i made it clear in this post and the ones before.

We Calvinists do not dispute that whoever believes will be given salvation. What we dispute is who will come to Christ.

John 6:37-40


Jhn 6:37 All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out.


John 6:38. For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me.


John 6:39. And this is the Father's will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day.


John 6:40. And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day.

 

[theseed]

But, if you feel that you cannot control yourself in the face of my unbridled evilness then you are more than free to move on. No one can make you continue posting.

Your rigth, they can only influence me and compel me. And so I will move on. I see that FreeinChrist is doing a good job.

If you know that you are not bridling your tounge then why are you expressing no wish to stop? Since I have brought this up, you have continued to jibe people saying, "oh, your not a universialists are you" or "oh, poor little seed" and sometime I excect you to say, "oh, you earn your salvation" when these people have already told you thier position, you still make jibes.

 

[FreeinChrist]

We Calvinists do not dispute that whoever believes will be given salvation. What we dispute is who will come to Christ.

Do you believe that Christ died and made salvation available to all but that it is only those who believe that receive the gift?

In other words, does 'world' mean world in this verse:
Jhn 3:16 "For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life.
or does 'world' just mean the elect?

Does 'all' mean all in this passage:
1Ti 2:3 This is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior,1Ti 2:4 who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.
or does all just mean those preselected to be saved?

 

[Reformationist]

FIC, I really appreciate your involvement. Just one piece of advice, if I may. Posting in so many different colors and fonts and sizes doesn't, IMO, help to make your point. When I reply to you I have to spend quite a bit of time removing all of the color tags. You can just as easily highlight what you wish to emphasize with bolding and italics. Just a thought.

John 10 includes this:
Jhn 10:7 So Jesus said to them again, "Truly, truly, I say to you, I am the door of the sheep. Jhn 10:8 "All who came before Me are thieves and robbers, but the sheep did not hear them. Jhn 10:9 "I am the door; if anyone enters through Me, he will be saved, and will go in and out and find pasture.

FiC, I'm not denying that Christ's sacrifice is sufficient and efficient in saving all who come to Him. However, the Bible makes no claims that it was either purposed or efficient in saving those who do not come to Him. This, of course, will lead us in to other areas of theology that may get this thread off track but let me, once again, assure you that I am not limiting the value of Christ's atonement or Christ's ability to save every person ever created. I'm just limiting His intent. The question, IMO, is not whether God is able to save all people. Of course He is. The heart of this issue is whether God intended to save all people.

So, we are left with a choice. We can either believe that God intended to save all people but for some reason (whatever the reason) was unable to bring that to pass, or, we can believe that God's intent in sending His Son was to procure the actual salvation of all who are saved. You, unfortunately seem to be purporting neither of those views. You seem to be saying that God's intent in sending His Son was not to accomplish anyone's actual salvation, but rather, to accomplish the possibility[/b] of salvation for all people. That, to me, turns Christ into the potential Savior of all and the actual Savior of none. It seems that your view is that Christ's death alone saved no one until we add to that infinite sacrifice the merit of our own belief and acceptance. Is that what you think? I must ask, do you think Christ's death, by itself, actually accomplished anyone's salvation?

Jhn 3:16 "For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life. Jhn 3:17 "For God did not send the Son into the world to judge the world, but that the world might be saved through Him.

Again, I'm not sure what you think this verse implies. Verse 16 clearly states that God gave His Son to die so that "whoever believes in Him shall not perish." That, IMO, is clearly limited. Neither that verse nor any other states that God gave Christ to die so that no one shall not perish. Think about it in reverse:

• Who "shall not perish" but have "eternal life?"
  
  Who is it that will believe, according to Scripture?
  
  Who, then, is included in the word "world?"

You and I both will agree that the answer to the first question is "whoever believes in Him." To the second I imagine you will answer "Whoever, of his own free will, chooses to trust in Christ." I, OTOH, would answer, "Those whom the Father chose in Christ of His own free will."

At this point, if I have stated your views accurately, we are both in agreement that this is a limited purpose for Christ's atonement. Regardless of whether you view God's election as being conditional or unconditional, you must at least agree that although the blood of Christ is sufficient in value, and His death is of infinite worth in the eyes of God, it is efficient or effectual only so far as the believers are concerned.

I said that the gift is available but only those who believe receive the gift. Whoever believes does not perish. YOU are playing word games by implying I believe the verse says differently. Shame on you.

Why shame on me? I implied no such thing. You said it:

Christ died to make salvation available for the whole world.

You, in your own words, have claimed that Christ's death was purposed to make salvation a possibility in the lives of everyone but an actuality in the lives of no one. If you disagree then tell me that you believe that Christ's death was purposed to ensure the eternal life of all who will be saved.

And then there is this just above it: Jhn 3:14 "As Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of Man be lifted up; Jhn 3:15 so that whoever believes will in Him have eternal life.

Again, I do not deny that "whoever believes will in Him have eternal life." I just disagree that our fallen nature allows for the proclivity to make a morally volitional move to accepting Christ unless Christ overcomes that and creates in us a new nature that desires to submit to the Lord. Now, you may agree with that, I don't know. However, I will go further by stating that in every instance where Christ subdues our fallen nature and creates in us a desire to submit to Him we actually do. You see FiC, the issue is not whether Christ will save all who come to Him. The issue is who will come and why they will come. So, I ask you, "Who will come and why will they come?" Is every single person equally morally inclined to submit to Christ?" And, "Why do those that come actually come?" Were they smarter? Were they less prideful? What caused them to submit to the Lordship of Christ?

Actually, it contradicts the concept of limited atonement. Rather blatantly.

Let me ask you something. Did Christ actually atone for anyone's sins by obeying God unto death? Be careful about your answer because if you say "yes" then you are acknowledging that Christ's death, and only His death, atoned for a person's sins. If, however, you believe that His death actually and completely atoned for no one's sins until they add to that their belief and submittance then you make the salvation of those who end up saved a cooperative effort between God and man. If that be the case then salvation is no longer by grace alone. Man has, at least in a limited way, aquired his own salvation.

The Bible says what it says, Reformationist.

I agree. It does not, however, say what you think it says. You see, the issue here is that you do not submit to the view I purport because you do not submit to those who espouse this view. I could not expect you to submit to my understanding. You don't know me. I must ask, however, do you believe that Dr. Strong, of the famous Strong's Concordance knows more than you? If so, I encourage you to take note of his entry of the use of the word "world" [kosmos] in John 3:16:

8) any aggregate or general collection of particulars of any sort

a) the Gentiles as contrasted to the Jews (Rom. 11:12 etc)

b) of believers only, John 1:29; 3:16; 3:17; 6:33; 12:47 1 Cor. 4:9; 2 Cor. 5:19

If you do not submit to Dr. Strong's view then I must ask how you understand how the words "world" and "all" are intended when you come across them in Scripture. Do you just automatically assume that it means "every single person ever created?" Do you ever limit the sense in which those words are used?

Jesus died for the whole world (John 3 and elsewhere) and salvation is available to all who believe. Salvation is a gift of God which we receive through faith in Jesus Christ (Ephesians 2). God desires that all men would come to salvation (I tim. 2 and II Peter 3). These are simple truths. I think you are arguing wih God.

Wow. That's presumptuous. I'm "arguing with God." Well hello God. I wasn't aware you posted on a MB. I apologize for arguing with you. I humbly submit to you. By the way, that's a strange screen name for you to take. Were you also freed by Christ?

It is very clear to me that God does not force the gift on people, they must believe and follow.

I agree completely. What's your point?

Mat 16:24 Then Jesus said to His disciples, "If anyone wishes to come after Me, he must deny himself, and take up his cross and follow Me. Mat 16:25 "For whoever wishes to save his life will lose it; but whoever loses his life for My sake will find it.

Again, I've never denied any of this. The variance in our beliefs on this stems from our difference in views as to who will come and why. So again, I ask you, who will come, and why do they come?

I quoted: 2Pe 3:9 The Lord is not slow about His promise, as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing for any to perish but for all to come to repentance.

I bet you think this clenches it for you, don't you. Couple of things to note. Your quote from 2 Peter 3:9 states "...patient toward you..." Just for the record, the version I use, the NKJV, says, "...longsuffering toward us..." Either way, who is the "you/us" that's being referred to here? Is it every single person ever created?

Well, let's look at the context:

2 Peter 1:1
Simon Peter, a bondservant and apostle of Jesus Christ,

To those who have obtained like precious faith with us by the righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ:

Well, that's clearly not addressed to everyone. Let's get closer to verse 3:9:

2 Peter 1:12
For this reason I will not be negligent to remind you always of these things, though you know and are established in the present truth.

Is everyone "established in the present truth?" Of course not. Here, at least, "you" clearly does not mean every person ever created. Let's move on:

Chapter two is entirely about false teachers. It is important to note this because of the clearly different subject of Peter's epistle in chapter 3. As I said, chapter 2 was about false teachers and false teaching. Chapter 3, then, is an encouragement to whom? Yes, believers:

2 Peter 3:1
Beloved, I now write to you this second epistle (in both of which I stir up your pure minds by way of reminder)

Whose mind was Peter stirring up? Is "you" a reference here to all people ever created? Clearly not. Not only does Peter address them as "beloved," he also refers to their pure mind. Now, I doubt that an Apostle of God would use that terminology when speaking of the mind of the non-believer.

Let's move on, we're almost there:

So, verses 3:3-7 warn of false prophets and encourage the believers to be stirred in their minds against these false teachings.

Let's look at verse 8:

BUT, beloved, do not forget this one thing, that with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.

This verse is in direct response to the false teachers claims that the Lord is not really coming. Peter is telling believers not to despair because the Lord has not come. He will come. Peter is reminding his beloved brethren that, to the Lord, "one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day."

So, we have arrived at your beloved verse 9. Let's look at it:

2 Peter 3:9
The Lord is not slack concerning His promise, as some count slackness, but is LONGSUFFERING TOWARD US, not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance.

God isn't confused as to whom He elected unto salvation before the foundations of the world. God is not confused about who will come to faith. Those who come to faith are those to whom the Father has given the Son and they, and only they, can come to Him:

John 6:44
No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I will raise him up at the last day.

Why would Jesus make that statement if everyone can come?

FiC, the "us," or in your case the "you," in 2 Peter 3:9 is a reference to the beloved brethren of Peter, believers. Not all men are Peter's, or our, brethren. All men are our neighbors but not all are our brethren. Our brethren are our fellow believers.

If you can't see the error in your use of 2 Peter 3:9 from this lengthy explanation then nothing I can say will help and I will not take any more of your time discussing it.

Because repentence is big part of believing in Christ and those that are unrepentent of their sin are not going to be saved.

I agree, in a sense. I don't believe we repent "to be saved." I think we repent because we are saved and the new nature, the new heart, that the Lord has given us creates in us an abhorrance of our fallen nature in light of God's gloriousness. The unregenerate do not see their actions as sinful because the things of God are foolishness to them.

This is a very BASIC concept in regards to salvation, Reformationist. Look up the word repent in the Bible.

FiC, chill with the condescension. I just disagree with you. I'm not so stupid that I just don't get it. I get it just fine. And, I agree. I have never claimed that Christians don't need to repent. Again I'm confused about why you point this out to me. I've never claimed otherwise.

The Lord died for the whole world.

Okay. What did His death accomplish for the whole world?

Salvation is a gift available to those who believe. apparently a huge part of 'beleiving' requires that it is the repentent persons sincere desire for salvation and to follow. It's the heart....

Okay, where do we get "the heart" to repent and believe? It is our natural desire to do such things? Or must God first take out our fallen heart and give us a new heart? Why do we get this heart? Does everyone get this new heart? If so, why does the new heart cause some people to be obedient but is completely ineffectual in causing others to obey?

No, just that He died for the world.

Died to provide what?

I have asked you before.

Asked me what, to provide you with quotes from Calvin in support of limited atonement? If you have I am unaware of it.

And there are many in the church who believe that Christ died for the whole world, that salvation is a gift that is available to all who believe. That God desires all to come to salvation - just like the Bible says. It is only the Calvinist churches that truly buy into limited atonement - and to be clear, as defined as 'Christ died only for those that were predestined to be saved, only for His elect.".

Wow, are you always this condescending? "There are many in the church...," "It is only the Calvinist churches..." That's a bit of a weird thing to say because the minute a church espouses the doctrine of limited atonement you label them Calvinistic. That's the same as saying to you, "FiC, it's only the non-Calvinist churches that disagree with limited atonement."

Maybe you should broaden your horizons and not keep reading books pushing the Calvinist view.

Um...I read a lot of books. I'm a Calvinist. What would you have me do? Read a book by Benny Hinn? How about Kenneth Copeland? Maybe Jesse Duplantis? I'm curious about something. When, and if, you read a book that disputes what you already believe, do you take it to heart? You see, I was an Arminian, as most Calvinists were, prior to becoming a supporter of the doctrines of the reformers. I read quite a few books that "pushed the Arminian view." I have since been shown the heretical nature of those books. They elevate and glorify man and degrade God. No thanks. I'll leave all those books for you. It seems they appeal to your beliefs. I'll stick with the books that reveal a biblically accurate view of man's depravity and place the focus on the glory and mercy and omnipotence and sovereignty of God in setting apart a people unto His Son and working in them the desire and ability to do for His good pleasure. The cool thing is that I can read a book by a reformed author and then see the truths of these doctrines on every page of the Gospel. I needn't twist the words of Scripture when It says I am dead in my trespasses and sins. I needn't attempt to deny God's grace and power in His sovereign plan just to acknowledge His benevolence. In short, I am able to submit to Him who is the Ruler of all things and Savior of His people rather than an impotent, incapable, thwarted version of Him whose very righteousness is determined by what I think is righteous.

God bless

 

[Reformationist]

And so I will move on.

Bye.

If you know that you are not bridling your tounge then why are you expressing no wish to stop?

Because I'm sinful and you've aggravated me. Hey, how about a little compassion? How about some concern for your brother? How about recognizing that you also struggle with godliness and let that recognition help you deal with others in a spirit of love and gentleness instead of with a desire to continue insulting them?

Since I have brought this up, you have continued to jibe people saying, "oh, your not a universialists are you" or "oh, poor little seed" and sometime I excect you to say, "oh, you earn your salvation" when these people have already told you thier position, you still make jibes. [/font]

Here, tell me how you'd view this:

Jesus' intent in dying was to save every, single person ever created. Unfortunately He was unable to make sure that came to pass. God has decided that it's more important to Him that we get some credit for coming to Him than it is that all these people He so desparately desires to be saved be actually saved, even if that means He must agree to be impotent in His attempts to save some people. However, in my case, because I was smart enough and humble enough to recognize my need for salvation, well, I came willingly.

How humble does that sound to you? How much does it sound like the person who would say such a thing depend solely on the grace of God for the salvation?

That is just an unvarnished version of what you and FiC are saying. You can dress that up and use words like "grace" and "mercy" but the way you speak of God shows that, deep down, you believe you are sovereign, not Him.

If it offends you to hear that, well good. It's offensive. However, it's not untrue. My goal is not to hurt or anger you. My goal is to open your eyes to the fact that God's plan was eternally decreed and is being manifested in reality. None can stay His hand. His council shall stand.

God bless

 

[eldermike]

Let's tone this down.

 

[Reformationist]

Let's tone this down.

Aye, aye. Sorry about my tone.

I'll "tone it down."

God bless

 

[FreeinChrist]

FIC, I really appreciate your involvement. Just one piece of advice, if I may. Posting in so many different colors and fonts and sizes doesn't, IMO, help to make your point. When I reply to you I have to spend quite a bit of time removing all of the color tags. You can just as easily highlight what you wish to emphasize with bolding and italics. Just a thought.

I do it for my eyesight and I have problems with my eyesight as a result of looking at too much gray and brt green on the computer/monitors over the years, and reading black print on white.

FiC, I'm not denying that Christ's sacrifice is sufficient and efficient in saving all who come to Him. However, the Bible makes no claims that it was either purposed or efficient in saving those who do not come to Him. This, of course, will lead us in to other areas of theology that may get this thread off track but let me, once again, assure you that I am not limiting the value of Christ's atonement or Christ's ability to save every person ever created. I'm just limiting His intent. The question, IMO, is not whether God is able to save all people. Of course He is. The heart of this issue is whether God intended to save all people.

Why are you limiting His intent?
Do you believe scripture is inspired? If so, why do you dispute I Tim. 2 ?

So, we are left with a choice. We can either believe that God intended to save all people but for some reason (whatever the reason) was unable to bring that to pass, or, we can believe that God's intent in sending His Son was to procure the actual salvation of all who are saved.

No, we aren't left with this choice. You are creating this limit in choice by placing limitations on God.
I believe that God desires that all come to salvation - like a Father who wants His creation to be in fellowship with Him. But...if it is forced, then it isn't true fellowship.

God loves the world. Paul wrote "God is love'. That He gives mankind a choice in no way limits His power or makes Him impotent as you have written before. It does not make Him less.

God sent His Son to the world. That desires the world come to salvation does not mean He had to make the world convert.

These issues you have with intent, possiblility and actuality are of your own creation.

It seems that your view is that Christ's death alone saved no one until we add to that infinite sacrifice the merit of our own belief and acceptance. Is that what you think? I must ask, do you think Christ's death, by itself, actually accomplished anyone's salvation?

So we were saved before we even believed in Christ? He died for us while we were sinners...but show me a verse that says we can be saved without faith.

Again, I'm not sure what you think this verse implies. Verse 16 clearly states that God gave His Son to die so that "whoever believes in Him shall not perish." That, IMO, is clearly limited.

You are ignoring the "For God so loved the world..." It does not say, 'for God so loved those who would eventually come to Him..."

Neither that verse nor any other states that God gave Christ to die so that no one shall not perish. Think about it in reverse:

• Who "shall not perish" but have "eternal life?"
  
  Who is it that will believe, according to Scripture?
  
  Who, then, is included in the word "world?"

The verse was written as it was for a purpose. You are changing the meaning of a beautiful verse with this reasoning. 'World', kosmos in this verse means sum total of all material existence. It includes all humanity. Why is it so hard to see that God loves mankind, and grieves over their sin? This is so aptly expressed in Genesis.
Gen 6:5 And GOD saw that the wickedness of man [was] great in the earth, and [that] every imagination of the thoughts of his heart [was] only evil continually.Gen 6:6 And it repented the LORD that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart.
That God desires for all men to be saved - I have already given you that scripture.

Why shame on me? I implied no such thing. You said it:

I do not deny in any way that I said Christ died to make savation avail to all who would believe. The gift has to be accepted - faith and repentence are real important. However, you, with your limitations on what God's intent is, are not seeing what I am saying at all. If fact, Ii have found in the past that you assume much when a person does not agree with you.

It is one reason why we will not come to any agreement, just go round in circles.

Let me ask you something. Did Christ actually atone for anyone's sins by obeying God unto death? Be careful about your answer because if you say "yes" then you are acknowledging that Christ's death, and only His death, atoned for a person's sins.

Yes. And yes - only His death made atonement for their sin. But you seem to be assuming that if I say yes, then the only reason they received the gift of salvation was through His death. That is wrong. His death was the perfect atoning sacriice required of God. But to receive forgiveness (atonement) one had to believe. Have faith.

(Your question above is the example of a biased question that is aimed to get a particular response - not find out fact.)

When Christ died for our sins, He atoned for the sin of those who had already died, too. That included Adam, Noah, Joseph, Sarah, etc, including Abraham... Jesus said, "Abraham rejoiced to see My day..." Faith on the part of those people was necessary to receive the atonement - the gift of salvation. Read Hebrews 11.

Can you show me a verse that says that faith (aka sincere belief) is not required for salvation?

I must ask, however, do you believe that Dr. Strong, of the famous Strong's Concordance knows more than you? If so, I encourage you to take note of his entry of the use of the word "world" [kosmos] in John 3:16:

8) any aggregate or general collection of particulars of any sort

a) the Gentiles as contrasted to the Jews (Rom. 11:12 etc)

b) of believers only, John 1:29; 3:16; 3:17; 6:33; 12:47 1 Cor. 4:9; 2 Cor. 5:19

I have Strong's Concordance and I find it an okay tool, but that is all. And the edition of Strong's that I have does not limit the word kosmos as you have it above , nor even write it out as above. It basically just says "kosmos...probably from base of 2865; orderly arangement, i.e. dcoration; by impl. the world (in a wide or narrow sense, includ. its inhab., lit. or fig. [mor.]): - adorning, world."

Now I do have other lexicon's available and other resources - and I stated the the explanation for the word 'kosmos' above - the sum total of the material world, including humanity. Taken in context of scripture and the book of John in particular, I'll stick with the definition as the sum total of the material world, including humanity.

We have gone round and round on this before - from what I see, you change the meaning of the words 'world' and 'al' to fit your viewpoint. You would have to.

Wow. That's presumptuous. I'm "arguing with God." Well hello God. I wasn't aware you posted on a MB. I apologize for arguing with you. I humbly submit to you. By the way, that's a strange screen name for you to take. Were you also freed by Christ?

So you aren't above being sarcastic and bit nasty, huh? hmmm, I think you just proved the seed right.

You are arguing with the word of God, Reformationist. You have limited God's intent - defined it by your understanding, and are changing the meaning of words. IMHO

Now I have work to do...have a deadline, in fact...so I will just drop on down to a few points below...

Asked me what, to provide you with quotes from Calvin in support of limited atonement? If you have I am unaware of it.

Last time we...debated.

Wow, are you always this condescending? "There are many in the church...," "It is only the Calvinist churches..." That's a bit of a weird thing to say because the minute a church espouses the doctrine of limited atonement you label them Calvinistic. That's the same as saying to you, "FiC, it's only the non-Calvinist churches that disagree with limited atonement."

ROFLOL - I'm condescending? Reread what I was responding to. And I defined limited atonement - nice of you to leave that out.

ahh, reformationist...you are rather funny in your own way!


BTW - I read the posts that were added while I was typing the above. I think it is a good thing that this gets toned down. thanks!

 

[FreeinChrist]

That is just an unvarnished version of what you and FiC are saying. You can dress that up and use words like "grace" and "mercy" but the way you speak of God shows that, deep down, you believe you are sovereign, not Him.

However - that is just one of the biggest, most blatants lies I have seen written.


I won't say anthing more in the interest of this messageboard and toning things down.

However, unless there is an apology and this remark removed, from now on I will regard your posts as worthless!

 

[theseed]

Because I'm sinful and you've aggravated me. Hey, how about a little compassion? How about some concern for your brother? How about recognizing that you also struggle with godliness and let that recognition help you deal with others in a spirit of love and gentleness instead of with a desire to continue insulting them?

My first reaction was to tell you off, but instead I thought I could ask for you to be more tactful. But we began debating about that too, and so I decided to be blunt and explicit, which was insulting and disrespectul. And I apologize

Arminianism sounds no more humble than calvinism. One theology seems to say I earn my salvation, while the other says I'm chosen. If somone is not chosen, then why would they not try to earn thier salvation if they have no other chance since they are not elected? But Calvinist say, that we would not even care, unless we are chosen to begin with.

Some would say that God could have decreed for us to freely chose him, and so we are elect this way. According to the Baptist Faith and Message, "election to grace" is "consistant with the free agency of man". Others would say that we freely chose him because of his Holy Spirit working to bring us to him.


Here are my thoughts for currently. . .


Do you believe that the Gospel is universal in that it is to be offered to all people? Is the good news for everbody? If so, then Christ would have to have died for everbody. As some Calvinist have point out, in Romans 9, God gets glory through justice as well as mercy. If a large part of the world fails to accept Christ, God is glorified still, even though he had desired for them to repent and be saved. God sent his Son to save the those who believe (all of us are part of this world until we are born from above). Our faith (in Christ) brings us into grace, and grace is what saves us (Eph. 2.8-10; Rom. 5.2), Calvinists would say that we recieve grace, and then have faith, through the Holy Spirit. So the argument goes, do we have grace becasue we believe or do we believe because we have grace? I say that our faith in Christ (keywords "in Christ") only saves us because God says so.

And it is clear to me after reading the text, that "world" in John does mean all people without exception. John's Gospel has alot of symbolism in it, no surprise, so does Revelation. But he symbolism is John is clear, because it is used litterally and figurately. The world is sinful, dark, and blind. All people without Christ are dark, sinful, and blind, just like the world.

If it offends you to hear that, well good. It's offensive. However, it's not untrue. My goal is not to hurt or anger you. My goal is to open your eyes to the fact that God's plan was eternally decreed and is being manifested in reality. None can stay His hand. His council shall stand.

It's seems that most of your threads involve God's soveriegnty and salvation. Your motiviaiton is blameless. It's just it upsets me to get into bitter and unfruitful arguments and to be in the middle of insulting replies at the same time.

 

[Reformationist]

seed and FiC, it is very clear to me that you both are very comfortable with being derrogatory about my beliefs every chance you get but if that same behavior is directed at you it's "Ref, you're so rude and condescending. I'm sooooo innocent and you're such a mean person." Get real. You two are both being just as sinful as I am.

In the interest of keeping this thread open, if that's still possible, I will put you both on ignore, if that feature is still available. If not, I'll just ignore you myself.

 

[theseed]

seed and FiC, it is very clear to me that you both are very comfortable with being derrogatory about my beliefs every chance you get but if that same behavior is directed at you it's "Ref, you're so rude and condescending. I'm sooooo innocent and you're such a mean person." Get real. You two are both being just as sinful as I am.

In the interest of keeping this thread open, if that's still possible, I will put you both on ignore, if that feature is still available. If not, I'll just ignore you myself.

Did I not apologize?

 

[Heartman]

I think the problem with the difference between Arminianism and Calvinism is that neither Aminius or Calvin would even recognize the errors that are being named after them. Depending how you look at it, both say nearly the same thing, as outlined by the authors. Read John Calvin's commentary on Titus.

 

[theseed]

Reply to Some Criticisms Made By Proponents of Limited Atonement

The charge that unlimited atonement leads to universalism is special pleading. "Just because one believes that Christ died for all does not mean all are saved. One must believe in Christ to be saved, so the fact that Christ died for the world apparently does not secure the salvation of all. Those who assert this are simply wrong."

God makes the provision of salvation for all men, but it is conditioned by faith. Thus, salvation becomes actual only for the elect, although it is potential and available to all. "Our inheriting eternal life involves two separate factors: an objective factor (Christ's provision of salvation) and a subjective factor (our acceptance of that salvation)."

Moderate Calvinists distinguish between the provisional benefits of Christ's death and the appropriation of those benefits by the elect.

Although the provision of atonement is unlimited, yet the application of it is limited.

In his book The Death Christ Died, Robert Lightner explains: "[Moderate Calvinists] believe the cross does not apply its own benefits but that God has conditioned His full and free salvation upon personal faith in order to appropriate its accomplishments to the individual. This faith which men must exercise is not a work whereby man contributes his part to his salvation, nor does faith, in the moderate Calvinist view, improve in any way the final and complete sacrifice of Calvary. It is simply the method of applying Calvary's benefits which the sovereign God has deigned to use in His all-wise plan of salvation." ​

​

 

[theseed]

Here's the site I quoted from.

http://home.earthlink.net/~ronrhodes/Atonement.html

 

[frost]

I just got through reading this entire thread, thanks to all who contributed (esp. Ref, FIC, and Seed,) as I have learned a great deal. Sorry it had to end rather bitterly but you all made some excellent points. I personally, tend to agree with the Calvanists on limited atonement though I attend a dispensational church, go figure. Anyway, thanks again for sharing your knowledge on this.

God bless...