Scriptural Soteriology

[bitwise]

Bitwise,


It does nothing to explain just how Christ saved only a few.
Respective of the Church, the context of the texts is speaking to the Church in particular which is the whole purpose of Christ's salvatory work. Salvation of man is the goal, not the means of Christ's work.
You need to explain your supposition that Christ only saved a few. Where and how does the Bible support that supposition?

Sojourner, it has already been explained in post #54, #55, #56. The few are the True Church of Jesus Christ for whom He died. If you cannot hear the Scripture, no cunning explanation of mine will ever help.

-bit

 

[sojourner]

bitwise,

Sojourner, it has already been explained in post #54, #55, #56. The few are the True Church of Jesus Christ for whom He died. If you cannot hear the Scripture, no cunning explanation of mine will ever help.

It explains exactly nothing. It is simply your position based on your presupposition. You need to show the 'how' of your presupposition is order for your understanding to stand. Saying so, does not make it so.

 

[A Brother In Christ]

eph 4:30 and grieve not th holy Spirit of God, where by ye are sealed unto the day of redemption

 

[emm3]

.

 

[bitwise]

bitwise,


It explains exactly nothing. It is simply your position based on your presupposition. You need to show the 'how' of your presupposition is order for your understanding to stand. Saying so, does not make it so.

Saying so doesn't prove a thing. So go ahead and believe whatever you want. Honestly, I don't need to show anything, for the Scripture speaks for itself, and the election hath obtained it, and the rest were blinded. If you want to state your position no one is stopping you.

-bit

 

[sojourner]

bitwise,

Saying so doesn't prove a thing. So go ahead and believe whatever you want. Honestly, I don't need to show anything, for the Scripture speaks for itself, and the election hath obtained it, and the rest were blinded. If you want to state your position no one is stopping you.

Explaining it theologically does give credibility to a supposition. Scripture does not speak for itself. In this case it is wholly your personal interpretation which you cannot explain.
I could just as well state that Universalist, Monotheists have just as much proof of their view as you do yours. Yet each has been shown to be heretical.
You made the statement that the quote given several posts back was unscriptural. Yet, you offer nothing to show that it could be unscriptural.
I can say yours is unscriptural and be able to back it up. Can you do the same?