- Apr 5, 2007
- 144,404
- 27,056
- 56
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Reformed
- Marital Status
- Married
And why do you think “all” means every person who has ever lived and will ever live?
Upvote
0
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.
And why do you think “all” means every person who has ever lived and will ever live?But the belief that God wills some and not others to regenerate does not align with 1 Tim 2:3-6.
King James Version
3 For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour;
4 Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.
5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;
6 Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time.
Revised Standard Version Catholic Edition (RSVCE)
3 This is good, and it is acceptable in the sight of God our Savior,
4 who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.
5 For there is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus,
6 who gave himself as a ransom for all, the testimony to which was borne at the proper time.
It can mean all types. In other words, it can be used hyperbolically, like it is elsewhere in scripture.What else could "all" mean in terms of soteriology?
I wouldn't worry about it too much. Very great minds have failed to grasp the full nature of the faith.I’m sorry I’m so stupid.
If you've read my posts you should begin to understand that the only way we can keep the commandments, authentically, to God's satisfaction, is if we're united to Jesus.Your argument, then, is if we keep the commandments, we don’t need Jesus.
You've assumed wrong-just the opposite is true, in fact-and there's a reason that verse is included... in the bible. Again, its all about grace first, and our cooperation with it second. Both/and.I’ll have to assume that you believe we make ourselves holy. Otherwise I don’t see why this was included.
What is positive righteousness? It's not a Biblical term.But being clean doesn’t make one righteous. It just means that there’s no basis for hell. We need positive righteousness to be worthy of glory.
Yes, we can know we are His. What we can’t do is do anything to make ourselves His, or keep ourselves His.I wouldn't worry about it too much. Very great minds have failed to grasp the full nature of the faith.
If you've read my posts you should begin to understand that the only way we can keep the commandments, authentically, to God's satisfaction, is if we're united to Jesus.
You've assumed wrong-just the opposite is true, in fact-and there's a reason that verse is included... in the bible. Again, its all about grace first, and our cooperation with it second. Both/and.
The error is in presuming that man cannot resist grace. And in presuming that we're numbered among the elect. You're only stating the obvious with the rest of your post, that the elect will go to heaven-no one disagrees with that. The question has to do with the basis of election, and who, exactly, is saved. If I insist that the elect will go to heaven, that's one thing. If I insist that this necessarily applies to me, that's another. Or that I will necessarily produce the fruit associated with the elect, with God's children, and continue to do so. We cannot predict our own perseverance! Meanwhile the best course of action is to assume that we're not among the elect-but may well be depending on how we live our lives with the help of God's grace.
The single best way to know if we're His children is by the extent to which we love, born witness to with good works, for the good of neighbor, for His glory, and for the advancement of His kingdom. So the church can rightly and wisely teach, "At the evening of life we shall be judged on our love."
It’s Christ’s righteousness. It’s why we must be in Him. It’s His righteousness imputed to us.What is positive righteousness? It's not a Biblical term.
And yet I thought you agreed that he, alone, knows with perfect certainty. We'll only know with that kind of certainty at the endYes, we can know we are His. What we can’t do is do anything to make ourselves His, or keep ourselves His.
I never agreed to that.And yet I thought you agreed that he, alone, knows with perfect certainty. We'll only know what that kind of certainty at the end
You mean we (the elect) are forgiven everything at the cross, even the things we haven't done we should have done? But that is not enough. We also need Christ's perfect living imputed to us? Why that is necessary I can't tell since we are forgiven for not living perfectly. It sounds like God demands us to somehow still do something He has forgiven us for not having done. If He has forgiven us it why does He demands us to still do it (by having it imputed to us through Christ) to be saved?It’s Christ’s righteousness. It’s why we must be in Him. It’s His righteousness imputed to us.
To please a perfectly holy God, a sinner needs not only to have their sins forgiven; they also need a perfect righteousness. This is provided and imputed to them by Jesus Christ. That's why Paul wrote:You mean we (the elect) are forgiven everything at the cross, even the things we haven't done we should have done? But that is not enough. We also need Christ's perfect living imputed to us? Why that is necessary I can't tell since we are forgiven for not living perfectly. It sounds like God demands us to somehow still do something He has forgiven us for not having done. If He has forgiven us it why does He demands us to still do it (by having it imputed to us through Christ) to be saved?
Ok, but that is not really an answer to my question "why?".To please a perfectly holy God, a sinner needs not only to have their sins forgiven; they also need a perfect righteousness. This is provided and imputed to them by Jesus Christ. That's why Paul wrote:
“8 Yet indeed I also count all things loss for the excellence of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord, for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and count them as rubbish, that I may gain Christ 9 ¶ and be found in Him, not having my own righteousness, which [is] from the law, but that which [is] through faith in Christ, the righteousness which is from God by faith;” (Php 3:8-9 NKJV)
I thought I had answered that. To be saved, a person needs not only to be forgiven sins, but also to have a perfect righteousness. Why is a perfect righteousness necessary? Because God is perfectly holy. We can never produce a righteousness which even approaches perfection ourselves. We need Christ's.Ok, but that is not really an answer to my question "why?".
I thought I had answered that. To be saved, a person needs not only to be forgiven sins, but also to have a perfect righteousness. Why is a perfect righteousness necessary? Because God is perfectly holy. We can never produce a righteousness which even approaches perfection ourselves. We need Christ's.
I think it's because righteousness is not merely an absence of sin, but the presence of the good instead. It's clear from those words I quoted from Philippians 3 that the apostle Paul realised he needed Christ's perfect righteousness. He didn't say, "God has forgiven all my sins so I don't need Christ's righteousness, did he?Why do we need perfect righteousness to be saved when we are forgiven at the cross for not being perfectly righteous?
If God has really forgiven us for not being perfectly righteous, how can He then demand us to be perfectly righteous to be saved? Then He demands something of us He has forgiven us for not being. If God has forgiven us sonething He can not at the same time demand it. It would be a contradiction.
Is not "all types" synonymous with simply "all"?It can mean all types. In other words, it can be used hyperbolically, like it is elsewhere in scripture.
How does the context of 1 Tim 2 allow an interpretation that "all" means only "some"?In other words, it [all] can be used hyperbolically, like it is elsewhere in scripture.
Yes. Everything we’ve done was future at the time of the crucifixionYou mean we (the elect) are forgiven everything at the cross, even the things we haven't done we should have done?
Yes.But that is not enough. We also need Christ's perfect living imputed to us?
Why that is necessary I can't tell since we are forgiven for not living perfectly.
Here’s the best example that I’ve heard. Let’s say that you take a class, and you are failing. The teacher says if you get a 100% on the final test, you pass the class. The day of the test comes, and you fail.It sounds like God demands us to somehow still do something He has forgiven us for not having done. If He has forgiven us it why does He demands us to still do it (by having it imputed to us through Christ) to be saved?
I suppose I could hit my head.Well, there's still time.
All means either all of something without exception, or all types of a thing.Is not "all types" synonymous with simply "all"?
First of all, then, I urge that entreaties and prayers, petitions and thanksgivings, be made on behalf of all men, for kings and all who are in authority, so that we may lead a tranquil and quiet life in all godliness and dignity. This is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior, who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth. For there is one God, and one mediator also between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, who gave Himself as a ransom for all, the testimony given at the proper time.How does the context of 1 Tim 2 allow an interpretation that "all" means only "some"?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?