Eternal Justification !

moonbeam said:

Your response does not negate my enquiry...not at all...not in the slightest degree.
In fact the scripture below defeats you.

"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." (2 Peter 3:9)

That underlined section indicates that the Holy Spirit, the author of scripture, would have us (the elect) know and understand, that we (the elect) were also fully exposed to the righteous judgement and condemnation of God for our sins, even as others...that is an inescapable deduction...a logical necessity.

Click to expand...

moonbeam said:

You have responded... that does not necessarily equate to an answer to an enquiry.
And I do know what you believe...and I know that that is not in accordance with the scripture...hence my contention.

I am sure that you would agree that the Holy Spirit the author of all scripture is not know for including superfluous and redundant phrase in the scripture... because God is not the author of confusion.

Why is the phrase "not willing that any should perish" applied in the immediate context to the elect?

Click to expand...

moonbeam said:

You keep saying it is in accordance... If it is (in accordance) then why are you incapable of answering this simple enquiry below?

Why is the phrase "not willing that any should perish" applied in the immediate context to the elect?

Click to expand...

moonbeam said:

Brightfame52 - It is apparent that you have either no intention or no personal ability to respond to my enquires regards 2 Peter 3:9... which were really quite simple questions, and I would have thought, substantive enough to warrant a fair hearing (exchange of ideas) more commonly known as a conversation... but it seems for reasons best known to yourself you have chosen otherwise (so be it).
I will follow with some thoughts of my own regarding the notion of eternal justification and why I regard it as a false doctrine in my following post...but in the interim.

I will post John Gill's comments regards 2 Peter 3:9 below to make the reader familiar with his thought regards this particular scripture... John Gill the revered Baptist theologian is a formidable biblical scholar and rightly held in high esteem by all in the Calvinist or Reformed tradition (Protestant) and his thoughts are definitely not to be discounted lightly.


2 Peter 3:9
The Lord is not slack concerning his promise
The Syriac version reads in the plural, "his promises", any of his promises; though the words seem rather to regard the particular promise of Christ's coming, either to take vengeance on the Jewish nation, of which coming there was a promise made, and is often referred to by Christ, and his apostles; see ( Mark 9:1 ) ( John 21:22 ) ( Hebrews 10:37 ) ; and it now being upwards of thirty years since it was given out, some men began to charge God with slackness and dilatoriness; whereas the true reason of the delay of it was, that there might be time for the gathering in of his elect among them by his angels, or apostles and ministers, sent into the several parts of Judea, that so none of them might perish, but be brought to faith and repentance; and thus as the time of Christ's coming was prolonged more than was thought it would, so when the days of afflictions were come, they were shortened also for these elect's sake: or this promise regards the second coming of Christ, to judge the quick and dead at the last day, of which the former was a prelude, presage, and pledge; that Christ would come again, and appear a second time in person, was promised by himself, and often spoken of by his apostles; and many of the primitive Christians thought it would be very soon, and which might be occasioned by the hints that were given of his coming in the other sense. Now this being deferred longer than was expected, the scoffers or mockers take upon them to charge the Lord with slackness in the fulfilment of his promise:

as some men count slackness;
as if he had either changed his purpose, or had prolonged it beyond the appointed time, or was unmindful of his promise, and would never fulfil it; whereas he is in one mind, and none can turn him, nor will he delay the fulfilment of his promise beyond the set time; he has fixed a day for his coming, in which he will judge the world in righteousness, and he will keep it: he is not dilatory,

but is longsuffering to us-ward:
not to all the individuals of human nature, for the persons intended by us are manifestly distinguished from "some men" in the text, and from scoffers, mocking at the promise of Christ's coming, in the context, ( 2 Peter 3:3 2 Peter 3:4 ) ; and are expressly called beloved, ( 2 Peter 3:1 2 Peter 3:8 2 Peter 3:14 2 Peter 3:17 ) ; and God's longsuffering towards them is their salvation, ( 2 Peter 3:15 ) , nor is it true of all men, that God is not willing that any of them should perish, and that everyone of them should come to repentance, since many of them do perish in their sins, and do not come to repentance, which would not be the case, if his determining will was otherwise; besides, a society or company of men are designed, to which the apostle himself belonged, and of which he was a part; and who are described, in his epistles, as the elect of God, called out of darkness, into marvellous light, and having obtained like precious faith with the apostles; and must be understood either of God's elect among the Jews, for Peter was a Jew, and they were Jews he wrote to; and then the sense is, that the delay of Christ's coming is not owing to any slackness in him, but to his longsuffering to his elect among the Jews, being unwilling that any of that number among them should perish, but that all of them repent of their sins, and believe in him; and therefore he waits till their conversion is over, when a nation shall be born at once, and they that have pierced him look on him and mourn, and so all Israel shall be saved; or rather of the elect in general, whether among Jews or Gentiles, upon whom the Lord waits to be gracious, and whose longsuffering issues in their conversion and salvation. And upon account of these the Lord stays his coming till their number is complete in the effectual calling; and for their sakes he is longsuffering to others, and bears with a wicked world, with the idolatry, superstition, heresy, profaneness, and impiety, with which it abounds; but when the last man that belongs to that number is called, he will quickly descend in flames of fire, and burn the world, and the wicked in it, and take his chosen ones to himself. The Alexandrian copy reads, "for you", or your sakes; and so the Vulgate Latin, Syriac, and Ethiopic versions. A passage somewhat like to this is met with in a book of the Jews F6, esteemed by them very ancient.



And it is an observation of theirs F7, that when God is said to be "longsuffering", it is not written (Pa Kra) , but (Mypa Kra) , intimating, that he is longsuffering both to the righteous and the wicked; but then he bears with the latter, for the sake of the former: compare with this passage ( Revelation 6:9-11 ) ;

not willing that any should perish;
not any of the us, whom he has loved with an everlasting love, whom he has chosen in his Son, and given to him, and for whom he has died, and who are brought to believe in him. These, though they were lost in Adam, did not perish; and though in their own apprehensions, when awakened and convinced, are ready to perish; and though their peace, joy, and comfort, may perish for a while, and they may fear a final and total perishing; yet they shall never perish as others do, or be punished with everlasting destruction: and that this is the will of God, appears by his choice of them to salvation; by the provisions of grace for them in an everlasting covenant; by the security of their persons in the hands of Christ; by sending his Son to obtain salvation for them, and his Spirit to apply it to them; and by his keeping them by his power, through faith, unto salvation.

But that all should come to repentance;
not legal, but evangelical, without which all must perish; and which all God's elect stand in need of, as well as others, being equally sinners; and which they cannot come to of themselves, and therefore he not only calls them to it, in his word, and by his spirit and grace, but bestows it upon them; he has exalted Christ at his own right hand, to give it to them; and repentance is a grant from him, a free gift of his grace; and the Spirit is sent down into their hearts to work it in them, to take away the stony heart, and give an heart of flesh; without which, whatever time and space may be given, or means afforded, even the most awful judgments, the greatest mercies, and the most powerful ministry, will be of no avail.

---

FOOTNOTES:

F6 Zohar in Gen. fol. 83. 3.
F7 T. Hieros, Taanioth, fol. 65. 2. T. Bab. Bava Kama, fol. 50. 2.

Click to expand...

moonbeam said:

As you are possibly aware, as you post in the Semper Reformanda forum, I affirm a supralapsarian soteriological perspective. That being the case I can affirm, and I believe I would have your agreement in this matter, that the decrees of God are exhaustively comprehensive in the minutest detail, and that everything that has occurred, and does occur, and could possibly occur, in this temporal domain, has been unalterably determined prior to creation, and that we, as individuals and collectively, can only experience, that which the LORD, in his wisdom, has determined each individual to experience… for so it seemed good in His sight.

The primary reason I reject the notion of eternal justification is because it detracts, in the sense of diminishes, the logical necessity, of the Second Person of the Triune God, being actualized in the flesh, in this temporal domain, wherein He is contemporaneously experiencing the exact identical life in all it’s diversity and complexities as the sinful men and woman and children and infants, for whom He will suffer and die, as the propitiatory Lamb of God, by, and through, His blood… for without the shedding of blood there is no remission, or forgiveness of sin.

This logical necessity… of the Second Person of the Triune God… being ACTUALIZED in the flesh... to be the propitiatory Lamb of God… is the absolute centre piece of the entire Creation narrative from beginning to end… and our eyes, as redeemed sinners, are to be firmly fixed, as unique individuals, on what Jesus of Nazareth (Christ Jesus) has accomplished, through His voluntary suffering and death on our behalf, as a unique individual.

Recognising that it is MY sin, and mine alone (to make it personal in the extreme as we ought to understand) that caused Him to suffer and die… is the very wellspring from which our praise and worship emanates… to the praise of His glorious grace.

Now… to shift our intense focus from the cross of Calvary to aforesaid unalterable decrees of God from before the foundation of the world (prior to creation)… which I do not deny… is to diminish His radiant glory… and that is NOT the will or purpose of God Almighty.

It is NOT the will or purpose of The Father of Lights… that we focus on the abstraction (decrees) at the expense of The Event (the actualisation of God in the flesh)

I am not contending that the notion of eternal justification is another gospel… no I am not saying that at all… but I am saying that it is a misapprehension of the gospel of God.
.

Click to expand...

moonbeam said:

Could the second person of the Triune God die in the Domain wherein He and the Father and the Holy Spirit exist?
.

Click to expand...

moonbeam said:

Could the second person of the Triune God die in the Domain wherein He and the Father and the Holy Spirit exist?
.

Click to expand...

moonbeam said:

Yes God did lay their charge agains the elect... they where found guilty of there sins by God and deserved to die like all sinners.

Yes it is both... through Adam all are condemned including the elect... a universal condemnation that is all inclusive without any exceptions.

That universal condemnation, applicable to all the elect, had to be paid by blood (Death)

When did Jesus shed his blood?

In what domain did He shed his blood the uncreated or the created


I don't think so... a purpose is an intent... yet to be fulfilled?
In what domain was that intent fulfilled, the uncreated or the created?
.

Click to expand...