Justification from Eternity

[moonbeam]

Moon, is it safe to say that the elect are never in danger of hell?

No.

Were we translated from the kingdom of darkness…………………………into the Light ?

.

 

[Hammster]

No.

Were we translated from the kingdom of darkness…………………………into the Light ?

.

Then you must contend that it's possible for one of God's elect to end up in hell. I'm not sure that's a reformed position.

 

[moonbeam]

Then you must contend that it's possible for one of God's elect to end up in hell. I'm not sure that's a reformed position.

No.

God's elect are "in danger of hell"…..that is the default position of every sinner without exception.

God's elect do not "end up in hell".

And that is the reformed [Biblical] position.


Can you answer my question below please.

Were we translated from the kingdom of darkness…………………………into the Light ?

.

 

[twin1954]

No.

God's elect are "in danger of hell"…..that is the default position of every sinner without exception.

God's elect do not "end up in hell".

And that is the reformed [Biblical] position.


Can you answer my question below please.

Were we translated from the kingdom of darkness…………………………into the Light ?

.

So your contention is that God is angry with the elect and hates them according to Psa. 7:11 and Psa. 5:5

If that is your contention then God must change and He can't be trusted if that is true.

 

[moonbeam]

So your contention is that God is angry with the elect and hates them according to Psa. 7:11 and Psa. 5:5

If that is your contention then God must change and He can't be trusted if that is true.

I am onsite at work [5.00am] and putting my boots on ready for action and heading out the door….can't respond right now [with your distraction from Rom 8:1 and 8:9]


Perhaps you can answer the question Hammster has yet to respond to [below]

Were we translated from the kingdom of darkness…………………………into the Light ?

.

 

[JM]

Eph 2:1 And you were dead in the trespasses and sins
2 in which you once walked, following the course of this world, following the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that is now at work in the sons of disobedience-
3 among whom we all once lived in the passions of our flesh, carrying out the desires of the body and the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, like the rest of mankind.
4 But God, being rich in mercy, because of the great love with which he loved us,
5 even when we were dead in our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ-by grace you have been saved-
6 and raised us up with him and seated us with him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus,

Whenever this comes up I am always drawn to this passage. Basically I think it's saying that yes, we were dead in a temporal sense (after all, we are sinners). It's also says that by nature we were children of wrath. But it doesn't say that we were actually children of wrath.

It's possible that I'm reading too much into this, but if we were children of wrath and then when we were justified temporally this changed, then God's wrath fell upon/was planned for someone whom Christ died for.

However, if we were by nature children of wrath, but not actually children of wrath, this problem is averted.

That probably wasn't nearly as structure as it was in my head, but there you go.

Boom!

 

[moonbeam]

Boom!

No boom………………..just a fizzle……and then nothing.



Answer this question.

Were we translated from the kingdom of darkness…………………………into the Light ?

.

 

[Hammster]

No boom………………..just a fizzle……and then nothing.



Answer this question.

Were we translated from the kingdom of darkness…………………………into the Light ?

.

Of course. If we were never under condemnation, why would He leave us there?

 

[moonbeam]

If we were never under condemnation, why would He leave us there?

Why were we there [in the Kingdom of Darkness] ?

.

 

[Hammster]

Why were we there [in the Kingdom of Darkness] ?

.

Because of sin. But that doesn't mean we were ever under condemnation.

I think there's two aspects of this. The eternal and temporal. Eternally we are never condemned. Temporally we pass from darkness to light.

 

[moonbeam]

But that doesn't mean we were ever under condemnation.

There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.

The Kingdom of Darkness is that domain, or sphere of influence, wherein all the entities inhabiting it are in a state of condemnation…by default.

Being in that domain of condemnation does not mean that you are condemned…it means that you fulfil the conditions required to be condemned.

Being under condemnation is an existent state every elect person necessarily experiences…and passes through.

The elect person passes through, solely, because our God is an interventionist God.

I think there's two aspects of this. The eternal and temporal. Eternally we are never condemned. Temporally we pass from darkness to light.

There is only one aspect…not two.

The temporal domain is subsumed within the eternal….For in him we live, and move, and have our being; [Acts 17:28]

The logical inference of this profound philosophical statement means that the sequential moments/events of the temporal/time domain are necessarily the eternal decrees of God…BEING…actualised in that order known in the mind of God.

Dr Gill and the other advocates for justification in, and from eternity, failed to appreciate the depth of this profound philosophical statement in Acts 17:28.

They think there is a hierarchy of decrees…rather than an order of decrees.

And so, they elevate the decree to justify a particular person [in Christ] to the front of the cue…because that is where Christ is [before the foundation of the world]

But when you understand that the temporal is subsumed within the eternal being of God [though distinct from Him] then you understand that the sequential order of temporal events IS the orderly eternal mind actualising itself [Himself]

But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.

.

 

[Hammster]

The elect are never in danger of condemnation. I'm not sure how anyone who's reformed could think so.

 

[stenerson]

nonaeroterraqueous and stenerson,

The scripture, which is truth, as the Word of God is Truth…."can not be broken".

You are invited to make a reply to post #140….as it is patently obvious that the advocates of justification in, and from eternity, are to fearful to respond.

Perhaps you two can demonstrate the courage of a Christian man…and examine the scripture...to see if what they claim is truth or untruth.

Our God does not suffer from schizophrenia.

.

I've never happened upon the justification from eternity doctrine till I've seen it here recently, and heard some of Don Fortners sermons.
I don't hold the view, but better, smarter and more theologically learned people than I do.
I have trouble wrapping my mind around some of the language regarding election, such as "Who hath saved us, and, called us with a holy calling, not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began." and other texts that uses similar language.
So scripture makes it plain that God's intent towards His elect was always benevolent, that we were chosen and loved in Christ in eternity, and He has decreed and worked all things to that end.
I believe the classical Protestant view of the word justification is more biblically accurate.
But the golden chain of redemption in Romans 8 all being used in the past tense does make me scratch my head, thinking, hmmm? they may be on to something.

 

[moonbeam]

The elect are never in danger of condemnation. I'm not sure how anyone who's reformed could think so.

That it was logically necessary that Jesus Christ be the propitiatory sacrifice, establishes that all the elect individual persons [without exception] have been rescued from the Kingdom of Darkness and the domain, and dominion, of Satan.

Of course….it was decreed to be so for them [the elect]

But not so, for them [the reprobate], with whom, they [the elect] shared that common estate in the domain, and dominion of Satan…from whence they [the elect] were translated into the Kingdom of Light, the domain, and dominion of the LORD Jesus Christ.

.

 

[nonaeroterraqueous]

I think there's two aspects of this. The eternal and temporal. Eternally we are never condemned. Temporally we pass from darkness to light.

There is only one aspect…not two.

The temporal domain is subsumed within the eternal….For in him we live, and move, and have our being; [Acts 17:28]

I think Hammster's post, above makes sense, but I don't think you quite understand it. The fact that the temporal domain is subsumed within the eternal doesn't change the fact that the eternal perspective is different than the temporal one. All finite numbers are subsumed within the infinite number line, but all finite numbers are nothing relative to infinity.

This hits at the question regarding whether animal sacrifices ever really had the power to save people from their sins, or whether it was all really a symbol of the coming atonement. If it was only a symbol, then the atonement that hadn't even happened yet was what saved them. If that's the case, then there really is a sort of timelessness with regard to our justification.

I do think there's an eternal and a temporal aspect to this, like Hammster said. I know you've made your point in proving the temporal aspect, but it doesn't negate the eternal aspect. It's not a contradiction, but a paradox that arises from the differences between finite versus infinite perspective.

 

[moonbeam]

I have trouble wrapping my mind around some of the language regarding election, such as "Who hath saved us, and, called us with a holy calling, not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began." and other texts that uses similar language.

“Who hath saved us” - The epistles to the early Church are being read by those who’s minds have been enlivened by the Spirit of God...the personal relationship between the redeemed sinner [the elect] and God has been established and engaged.

From the subjective perspective that event of the relational engagement [union of Spirit with spirit] will always be in the past tense [Rom 8:1 and 8:9]

The phrasings primary field of intent is the individual relational dynamic between the redeemed elect sinner and his Creator, in the moment of reading and comprehending.

So scripture makes it plain that God's intent towards His elect was always benevolent, that we were chosen and loved in Christ in eternity, and He has decreed and worked all things to that end.

That the glorification of the redeemed sinner is the final outcome and full intent of God [made manifest] is not disputed....and it should be understood, that being under condemnation for sin [prior to being begotten of the Spirit with resultant glorification].....does not impugn upon that “benevolent intent”.

.

 

[moonbeam]

The fact that the temporal domain is subsumed within the eternal doesn't change the fact that the eternal perspective is different than the temporal one. All finite numbers are subsumed within the infinite number line, but all finite numbers are nothing relative to infinity.

The eternal perspective IS the temporal sequential revealing and actualizing of the Fathers thought...which He spoke into BEING...through the Logos [the thought manifest]

Nothing can happen except that decreeded in logical order by the Father's eternal mind.

This hits at the question regarding whether animal sacrifices ever really had the power to save people from their sins, or whether it was all really a symbol of the coming atonement. If it was only a symbol, then the atonement that hadn't even happened yet was what saved them. If that's the case, then there really is a sort of timelessness with regard to our justification.

The Second person of the Trinity, the Logos of God, within whom “we live and move and have our being” transcends, penetrates and upholds the entire temporal created order...sustaining it moment by moment.

Thereby the efficacy of His blood sacrifice as the propitiatory Lamb of God permeates the fabric of the created order from it’s inception [as it was decreed to do]...therefore the revealing of the individual son’s of God in logical order, in a timely manner in the sequential temporal domain...is a derivative, of the intent of the Father, in speaking the creation into being - That His immanence may be demonstrated. His active presence and engagement in the personal affairs of the individual redeemed sinner.

I do think there's an eternal and a temporal aspect to this, like Hammster said. I know you've made your point in proving the temporal aspect, but it doesn't negate the eternal aspect. It's not a contradiction, but a paradox that arises from the differences between finite versus infinite perspective.

The temporal aspect...IS the eternal aspect.

The temporal reflects the eternal like a mirror.

What is...IS what was intended...and so the eternal perspective, of the eternal mind of God.

Being begotten of the Spirit [justified] can only occur in the temporal realm...as intended.

But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.…[Rom 8:9]

.

 

[Hammster]

The eternal perspective IS the temporal sequential revealing and actualizing of the Fathers thought...which He spoke into BEING...through the Logos [the thought manifest]

Nothing can happen except that decreeded in logical order by the Father's eternal mind.





The Second person of the Trinity, the Logos of God, within whom “we live and move and have our being” transcends, penetrates and upholds the entire temporal created order...sustaining it moment by moment.

Thereby the efficacy of His blood sacrifice as the propitiatory Lamb of God permeates the fabric of the created order from it’s inception [as it was decreed to do]...therefore the revealing of the individual son’s of God in logical order, in a timely manner in the sequential temporal domain...is a derivative, of the intent of the Father, in speaking the creation into being - That His immanence may be demonstrated. His active presence and engagement in the personal affairs of the individual redeemed sinner.





The temporal aspect...IS the eternal aspect.

The temporal reflects the eternal like a mirror.

What is...IS what was intended...and so the eternal perspective, of the eternal mind of God.

Being begotten of the Spirit [justified] can only occur in the temporal realm...as intended.

But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.…[Rom 8:9]

.

No. Tempera land eternal are separate.

 

[moonbeam]

No. Tempera land eternal are separate.

How would you define their separateness ?

.

 

[Hammster]

How would you define their separateness ?

.

Dictionary.com | Find the Meanings and Definitions of Words at Dictionary.com