• Welcome to Christian Forums
  1. Welcome to Christian Forums, a forum to discuss Christianity in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

  2. The forums in the Christian Congregations category are now open only to Christian members. Please review our current Faith Groups list for information on which faith groups are considered to be Christian faiths. Christian members please remember to read the Statement of Purpose threads for each forum within Christian Congregations before posting in the forum.
  3. Please note there is a new rule regarding the posting of videos. It reads, "Post a summary of the videos you post . An exception can be made for music videos.". Unless you are simply sharing music, please post a summary, or the gist, of the video you wish to share.
  4. There have been some changes in the Life Stages section involving the following forums: Roaring 20s, Terrific Thirties, Fabulous Forties, and Golden Eagles. They are changed to Gen Z, Millennials, Gen X, and Golden Eagles will have a slight change.
  5. CF Staff, Angels and Ambassadors; ask that you join us in praying for the world in this difficult time, asking our Holy Father to stop the spread of the virus, and for healing of all affected.
  6. We are no longer allowing posts or threads that deny the existence of Covid-19. Members have lost loved ones to this virus and are grieving. As a Christian site, we do not need to add to the pain of the loss by allowing posts that deny the existence of the virus that killed their loved one. Future post denying the Covid-19 existence, calling it a hoax, will be addressed via the warning system.
  7. There has been an addition to the announcement regarding unacceptable nick names. The phrase "Let's go Brandon" actually stands for a profanity and will be seen as a violation of the profanity rule in the future.

U/C Unconditional election vs. Conditional election

Discussion in 'Salvation (Soteriology)' started by Blackhawk, Apr 11, 2002.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Slave2SinNoMore

    Slave2SinNoMore Active Member

    477
    +15
    Christian
    Originally posted by mjwhite

    Now knowing Jesus as who He is not quite the same as hearing who He is. Knowing about Him and knowing Him are not the same. But knowing about Him means you trust those who tell you about Him. That is not the same as trusting Jesus. If Jesus is to be both the object of your faith and its foundation, you must know Him and trust Him. Therefore your salvation is based not on your own fickle will or some other man’s idea but on Jesus Himself.

    S2SNM says:

    You just contradicted yourself! First, you said:

    "you must know Him and trust Him."

    Then you said:

    "your salvation is based not on your own fickle will"

    Which is it? Is the fact that I accept salvation based on my will or not? I must trust him to accept him, right? You have said earlier that it is not "forced" upon me, so it must be will that causes me to make the decision, right? It can't be the Holy Spirit living with in me that makes the decision to accept Christ, because as a nonChristian, I didn't have the Holy Spirit within me, so I had to make that decision myself. Which leads me to my next point:

    You don't "know God" when you decide to accept him. You know "about" him and "of" him, but you don't know him. Only people with the Holy Spirit "know" God.


    Originally posted by mjwhite
    The post before you said you simply said that you knew about Jesus and now you say the Holy Spirit called you and wooed you. You are not playing fair here Slavenomore.


    S2SNM says:

    How is that "not playing fair"? I knew about Jesus because it was taught to me in Sunday School and church and other places. The wooing part was done by the Holy Spirit - He was calling me to accept him. But it's not just me He calls. He calls all. Some pay attention. Some don't.

    Originally posted by mjwhite
    Several things. Last first.

    How do you know the Spirit calls and woos your neighbor? You don’t, you simply make an assumption that He does. So we see that it just wasn’t you knowing ABOUT Jesus, but God Himself calling and wooing and convincing you of Jesus. You knew that you weren’t okay without Jesus [as your neighbor thinks he is okay ‘on his own’] Why did you think different? Because you had the witness of God in your heart telling you that as a sinner and rebel against God you were lost and damned without Jesus. How did you KNOW you were weak and He was strong? Because the Holy Spirit opened the eyes of your heart to the spiritual reality of your lost position. It is not a boast on yourself to give the glory and honor of your salvation to God. That is what you are doing in that paragraph. God wooed you. God called you. And though you do not say it explicitly, God showed you your lostness, your weakness, your need for Him, and His provision for you at the cross of Christ. You knew all these things as true and you confessed them and were saved. What I am saying is, seeing how you and I are no better, nor more spiritual, nor more righteous than your neighbor, that the reason we got saved is because God wooed us and convinced us of our need and His provision. He didn’t force us, but persuaded us by opening our eyes to the truth. Seeing our lostness we willfully chose to serve Him. Our neighbor who is no worse a person than we are, has not had what we had and so thinks he does not need Christ. To him, the gospel, the words of the cross are foolishness, but to us, they are the power of God unto salvation. 


    S2SNM says:

    Well, you asked me how do I know the Holy Spirit has been talking to (wooing) my neighbor. Well, of course, I can't say 100% that the Holy Spirit has been talking to my neighbor. It's funny, because you go on to say that our neighbor "has not had what we had", which is to say that the Holy Spirit has not been talking to my neighbor. So, I turn the table around, and ask the same question of you: How do you know he hasn't been talking to my neighbor? You don't. You can't.

    But you know what? I know that if the Holy Spirit has never talked to (wooed) my neighbor yet, he will at some point in the future. How do I know that? Because Paul tells us that at the judgment, no man will have an excuse. If a man can say "I was never told", he has an excuse. We as Christians have the Holy Spirit, and if we walk in the Spirit, the Holy Spirit talks through us. If a "walking in the Spirit" Christian tells my neighbor about Jesus, that's the Holy Spirit talking to and wooing my neighbor. If he doesn't accept, that's his fault, not the Lord's. But, he was given the opportunity, and the Holy Spirit did indeed cll to him.

    Now don't get Ben and I wrong. We are not saying that we earn our own salvation in any form or fashion. We are saying that we have to make the decision to accept it.
     
  2. Slave2SinNoMore

    Slave2SinNoMore Active Member

    477
    +15
    Christian
    mjwhite,

    To believe that only certain people are given the opportunity to accept Christ, a person has to explain away many verses using his own interpretation, not Biblically.

    The day that you can prove to me, Biblically, that the all in 1 Timothy 2:4 does not in fact, mean "all", I will be one step closer to believing what you do. However, to this point, anytime we have asked for fact on this issue, you have said "look at the context", and then when we look at the context, there is nothing there at all to suggest that "all" does not mean "all". It has been based solely on your own interpretation. But, in order for your theory to be right, that verse and others like it have got to mean something other than what it says.

    I Timothy 2:4
    "Who desires all men to be saved, and to come to the knowledge of the truth".
     
  3. mjwhite

    mjwhite Member

    210
    +0
    Dear All,

    Slavenomore wrote:

    Originally posted by mjwhite

    Now knowing Jesus as who He is not quite the same as hearing who He is. Knowing about Him and knowing Him are not the same. But knowing about Him means you trust those who tell you about Him. That is not the same as trusting Jesus. If Jesus is to be both the object of your faith and its foundation, you must know Him and trust Him. Therefore your salvation is based not on your own fickle will or some other man’s idea but on Jesus Himself.

    S2SNM says:

    You just contradicted yourself! First, you said:

    "you must know Him and trust Him."

    Then you said:

    "your salvation is based not on your own fickle will"

    Which is it? Is the fact that I accept salvation based on my will or not? I must trust him to accept him, right? You have said earlier that it is not "forced" upon me, so it must be will that causes me to make the decision, right? It can't be the Holy Spirit living with in me that makes the decision to accept Christ, because as a nonChristian, I didn't have the Holy Spirit within me, so I had to make that decision myself.



    me
    Well Slavenomore, there is no contradiction there. Your will is not the basis of your salvation. Have you missed the point? You don’t choose Christ simply because you have a will but because you have reasons to exercise your will.
    Just because you are not indwelt with the Holy Spirit, doesn’t mean He doesn’t or can’t inform you and reveal Himself to you.

    Slavenomore.
    Which leads me to my next point:
    You don't "know God" when you decide to accept him. You know "about" him and "of" him, but you don't know him. Only people with the Holy Spirit "know" God.


    Me.
    That is not true. You don’t know completely about Him, but you do know some things. Faith by definition is being sure of what you do not see and certain of what you hope for [Hebrews 11:1] Being sure and being certain is a lot deeper than knowing ‘about’ Him of just ‘of’ Him. Your trust is built on the certainty His revelation of Himself brings to you, the sure hope His promises inspire in you. You are persuaded of Him and convinced that He will fulfill His promise to you, and that is why you reach out in trust to Him, as even you confess.


    Originally posted by mjwhite
    The post before you said you simply said that you knew about Jesus and now you say the Holy Spirit called you and wooed you. You are not playing fair here Slavenomore.


    S2SNM says:

    How is that "not playing fair"? I knew about Jesus because it was taught to me in Sunday School and church and other places. The wooing part was done by the Holy Spirit - He was calling me to accept him. But it's not just me He calls. He calls all. Some pay attention. Some don't.


    me.
    How do you know it was the Holy Spirit unless He revealed Himself to you? And did He not confirm the truths you only knew as Sunday School lessons or whatever? He wooed you AKA persuaded you by revealing the trustworthiness of God

    And since you now say that the Holy Spirit wooed you, why did you say before that you had to make the decision yourself?

    How do you know He calls all? One, all don’t hear the Gospel . How does He call those? Second, the Bible plainly says that all He calls he saves [John 6, Romans 8].

    Originally posted by mjwhite
    Several things. Last first.

    How do you know the Spirit calls and woos your neighbor? You don’t, you simply make an assumption that He does. So we see that it just wasn’t you knowing ABOUT Jesus, but God Himself calling and wooing and convincing you of Jesus. You knew that you weren’t okay without Jesus [as your neighbor thinks he is okay ‘on his own’] Why did you think different? Because you had the witness of God in your heart telling you that as a sinner and rebel against God you were lost and damned without Jesus. How did you KNOW you were weak and He was strong? Because the Holy Spirit opened the eyes of your heart to the spiritual reality of your lost position. It is not a boast on yourself to give the glory and honor of your salvation to God. That is what you are doing in that paragraph. God wooed you. God called you. And though you do not say it explicitly, God showed you your lostness, your weakness, your need for Him, and His provision for you at the cross of Christ. You knew all these things as true and you confessed them and were saved. What I am saying is, seeing how you and I are no better, nor more spiritual, nor more righteous than your neighbor, that the reason we got saved is because God wooed us and convinced us of our need and His provision. He didn’t force us, but persuaded us by opening our eyes to the truth. Seeing our lostness we willfully chose to serve Him. Our neighbor who is no worse a person than we are, has not had what we had and so thinks he does not need Christ. To him, the gospel, the words of the cross are foolishness, but to us, they are the power of God unto salvation.


    S2SNM says:

    Well, you asked me how do I know the Holy Spirit has been talking to (wooing) my neighbor. Well, of course, I can't say 100% that the Holy Spirit has been talking to my neighbor. It's funny, because you go on to say that our neighbor "has not had what we had", which is to say that the Holy Spirit has not been talking to my neighbor. So, I turn the table around, and ask the same question of you: How do you know he hasn't been talking to my neighbor? You don't. You can't.


    Me.
    Yes I can. Go ask your neighbor. I have asked many people, and I am conversing just now with some who deny any revelation of God. But besides the fact that many, millions, of your neighbors have never heard the Gospel, Romans 10 tells us that faith can only come by the hearing of the Word of God. Besides that, the Word itself tells me in several places that God does not reveal Himself to all. Mat 11:25-27, Mat 13:11:-14, 1st Cor. 1:18, 1st Cor. 2:7-14, among others.

    Your neighbor thinks the Gospel foolishness. Why do you think it is not? Why, but because God has revealed to you its truthfulness giving you confidence to trust Him.

    Otherwise explain why you trust God and your neighbor doesn’t. Are you wiser? Do you love God more/ Do you love sin less? What boast will you lord over your neighbor with?


    Slavenomore.
    But you know what? I know that if the Holy Spirit has never talked to (wooed) my neighbor yet, he will at some point in the future. How do I know that? Because Paul tells us that at the judgment, no man will have an excuse. If a man can say "I was never told", he has an excuse. We as Christians have the Holy Spirit, and if we walk in the Spirit, the Holy Spirit talks through us. If a "walking in the Spirit" Christian tells my neighbor about Jesus, that's the Holy Spirit talking to and wooing my neighbor. If he doesn't accept, that's his fault, not the Lord's. But, he was given the opportunity, and the Holy Spirit did indeed cll to him.


    Me.
    You are quite mistaken my friend. Paul never says that man has to hear the gospel in order not to have an excuse. Likewise your walk alone is not the Gospel verbalized and gives off a mixed message for you are not perfect and still a sinner. That is not the call you received anyhow, you were wooed by God.

    SNM.
    Now don't get Ben and I wrong. We are not saying that we earn our own salvation in any form or fashion. We are saying that we have to make the decision to accept it.


    Me.
    But you do have me wrong. I did not say you didn’t decide to accept Jesus, I said you had a reason to accept Him that those who never hear the Gospel, or hear it and think it foolishness don’t have, the sure promise of God revealed to our hearts.

    quote:
    Originally posted by mjwhite
    Dear All,
    Where are those who dispute with me? Do they now agree, or is their truth unable to answer?
    God alone gets the glory and honor for saving each one of us, from the cross to the throne, He does it all. It is neither something we can be responsible for, nor is it due to anything we do [like love sin less] or don't do. God saves those he loves, and loves only those He saves.
    In His love,
    mike
    SNM

    To believe that only certain people are given the opportunity to accept Christ, a person has to explain away many verses using his own interpretation, not Biblically.

    The day that you can prove to me, Biblically, that the all in 1 Timothy 2:4 does not in fact, mean "all", I will be one step closer to believing what you do. However, to this point, anytime we have asked for fact on this issue, you have said "look at the context", and then when we look at the context, there is nothing there at all to suggest that "all" does not mean "all". It has been based solely on your own interpretation. But, in order for your theory to be right, that verse and others like it have got to mean something other than what it says.

    I Timothy 2:4
    "Who desires all men to be saved, and to come to the knowledge of the truth".


    Me.
    God only gives the truth of His Word to some. How many people died without ever hearing His truth, much less knowledge of it? Millions before Christ was born, and billions since. So if he desires them to have faith in Him, why did He devise a world where they never even know the gospel truth? Neither you nor Ben, nor anyone has answered that question. Simply saying they will be without excuse does nor answers the question, for Jesus came not to condemn for men are already condemned already by their willful sinful acts. They know what is right and choose to do wrong, leaving them without excuse.

    The verse is not incorrect, you add your interpretation to it. Many times, in many languages, and by many different people, the word ‘all’ doesn’t mean everyone who ever lived, is living, or will live. You read it that way not because the text demands it but because you want to.

    God who selects to whom He will reveal truth to is not consistent with a God who wishes those not selected to be saved. Take in the whole counsel of the written Word my friend, not just picking and choosing.

    In His love,
    mike
     
  4. Slave2SinNoMore

    Slave2SinNoMore Active Member

    477
    +15
    Christian
    You claim I read it that way because I want to, but actually my interpretation is the only way to take it without having to "explain it away". You are the one who is trying to make that verse fit your belief system. I have the actual words to go on "...desires that all men be saved".

    Show me another instance in the Bible in which you think "all" and "all" alone (without any qualifier) means anything other than "all".

    Don't answer "all of us" or "all Christians" or "all believers" or "all nonbelievers". Those are all qualifiers. I simply want the words "all".

    I am taking council of the entire word, mike. You have failed to show me that the context of that passage would lead me to believe anything other than "all men".

     
     
  5. mjwhite

    mjwhite Member

    210
    +0
    Dear Slavenomore,

    one instance is what you need to prove me right?

    John 8:2 He sat in the temple courts where ALL people gathered around Him.

    Do you think that all means everyone who ever lived?

    Acts 2:44 they had all things in common

    Do you think they had all the same hair styles, the same mannerismsetc, etc.

    1Cor 10:33 Itry to please ALL men in ALL ways
    Paul never even met millions, billions, many who died without knowing even if there was a people called Hebrews, much less were pleased by Paul in all ways

    1 Thes 4:10 our brethern in ALL macedonia

    not one square inch of that region didn't have a brother on it?

    1 Tim 5:20 Then that sin rebuke before ALL men

    rebuke them before everyone who ever lived, could you do that? Remember billions are dead and billions more live in China and India each. Don't rebuke them unless you take then around to them ALL.

    2nd Tim 2:10 therefore I endure all things

    He never had to endure nerve gas, so all is qualified, heh?

    2nd Tim 4:17 so that ALL the Gentiles might hear it.

    But not all the gentiles have heard it. Many were already dead and would die before the Gospel made it to their part of the world. People die every day you know.

    1Peter 2:17 honor ALL men

    even those you never meet and already are dead? How will you honor them?


    All can mean everything individually inclusive or it can be a general type of word. It has to be understood from the context that it is in, also taking in the time it was written and who it was written to.

    God knew [even discounting His foreknowledge] that not every person alive at the time of Christ would hear the Gospel. He knew the time it took to travel the distances involved around the earth and at least the rate of death in those far away countries. Therefore God knew that the sending of Jesus would be of no benefit for those people in any way.

    Like wise, He knew that many had already died in their sins, many Gentiles, who as Paul said of in Eph. 2, that they were seperate from Christ, without hope and without God in the world. [vs 11-12]. There is and was no salvation outside of the Word, whether is was revealed to the Jews, or through Jesus, the living Word and those who wrote of Him. They who never heard and still don't hear of Him today are 'without hope and without God in the world'.

    God has made no other provision of salvation for these people, for there is no other name under heaven by which a man can be saved except Jesus. Only those who call on His name professing Him as Lord can be saved. And this faith can only come by hearing the Word as someone is sent to preach it. Hence no preacher, no hearing, no faith, no salvation. Billions have died without hearing and are justly sentenced to hell because they chose to sin against God and chose to violate their own consciences.

    What way of salvation did God provide for these? Not jesus, they never heard of Him. Not the words of the OT prophets, never heard them either. Its a wishy washy God that desires their salvation but fails to provide a way for them to get saved.

    Some say he is patient, not wanting any of these to perish, but He fails to keep them alive until the Gospel got through to them. Your doctrine doesn't stand the test of reality my friend. Or your god wants what he cannot have which doesn't say much for him at all, seeing how he is supposed to be all powerful and almighty. It doesn't say much for your prayers either. Do you have confidence in a god who can't even get what he wants? A god who seeks to save everyone but fails miserably? Even in America, a supposedly Christian country, most don't believe Jesus is truly God and the only way to heaven. Your god has failed here. In Europe, more attend the Mosques weekly than go to church even though the Muslims are only 4% of the population, so your god has failed there as well.Most of the Billions in China and India are not Christians and have never even heard of Christ, and worship idols made of human hands and die doing it, so your god is failing there as well.

    If you define the goal of your god as saving all, then your god has failed miserably, and the devil is winning. Is that your god? he couldn't even save his own people, the jews!

    Now that is the kind of objective criticism those who know some reality make when they see the claims you make about God. All those things are true except what you think of God. God's not trying to save every last person in the world. Wake up and see the truth my friend.

    in His love,
    mike
     
  6. mjwhite

    mjwhite Member

    210
    +0
    Dear all,

    You do not have to believe God has any foreknowledge at all to see that He did not set up salvation by faith in Christ to benefit all men. If you believe God at least knows everything that is happening at any present time, you will see that God knew that when He sent Jesus into the world, that many would die before the Gospel ever reached them.

    In fact, millions, possibly billions have not heard the Gospel. But if God did not have foreknowledge, He couldn’t foresee that. But, what He could see, and yes did know was that in the time He sent His Son, messages traveled slowly across the earth. It is not like it is now, where one can hop a plane and be anywhere in a few hours. No trains, or cars, or steam-powered boats were there to help speed one along to his destination. Likewise there were no phones, or TV’s or telegraphs or other venues of mass communication available to the preachers of the Gospel.

    Your theory that God loves them by sending His Son, so that if they believed in Jesus, they would not perish is therefore illogical given those constraints. You must devise some other way of God saving these people outside of them as living humans accepting the Gospel, or at least having the chance to accept the Gospel. The fact God knew that these ten to hundred thousands or more would never hear and never therefore have a chance to believe means that the His sending of Jesus as His love towards them is wrong.

    Although that reality alone seems to me enough to defeat your interpretation of John 3:16, it doesn’t take into question the millions who had already died before Jesus was born.

    If salvation is by faith in the God who reveals Himself by more than just nature or man’s conscience, since no man is saved by these things, and all will be held accountable to God under the law, then salvation is by faith in God who reveals Himself through the Word. Now we have the ultimate revelation of God in the Living Word, His Son Jesus, but we have some revelation in the spoken word of His prophets. It was this word that was sent to the Jews that Paul spoke about in Romans 9. He said there that the Israelites, that theirs is the adoption as sons, theirs is the divine glory, the covenants, the receiving of the law, the temple worship and the promises.

    By this explanation, and countless places in the Old Testament, we see that to the Israelites alone did God reveal Himself in that special way. Who else had any of these things? Who else had words from God? It is through that special relationship that God saved these people. But only these people, one might ask? He did save others, but only through these people and the words of Him they revealed to others. Some say that Israel was supposed to evangelize the world, but where is that in the Bible? They cannot give any reference verse to back up their claim. But in fact, many places the words of the prophets and other writers of His Word tell the people to not associate with the other people, or even to kill them off. Look at God’s command to the Israelites before they crossed the Jordan and entered the Promised Land [Deut. 31:3-4], and the obedience required [Joshua 7:12, 8:25-29]. The Jews even into the days of our Lord and beyond were not to enter the houses of the Gentiles, or their restaurants, or to eat with them. They were to be separate from them.

    That was not to say they would not be witnesses for God, but that they were to stay away from the people, but to welcome them if they came to the Jews. Now why was this, I ask? It is because the religions of the Gentiles were false, and abominable to God. They distorted His holiness, they perverted His ways, and that they gave hope where there was no hope. Those without God revealing Himself to them [the Gentiles as a rule as opposed to the Jews] were as Paul told the Ephesians, “Therefore, remember that you who were formerly Gentiles by birth and called, ‘uncircumcised’…remember that that at one time you were separate from Christ, excluded from citizenship in Israel and foreigners to the covenants of the promise, without hope and without God in the world.” [2:11-12]

    We see that they were excluded, foreigners, separate, and without hope and without God. In other words, they were lost and damned for their sins. Every year that passed between Abraham and Jesus, more and more of these people became born and then died. How does the sending of Jesus so that those who believe on Him might be saved, be the love of God towards these people?

    But not only these people before Christ, but surely God would know that many would not hear of Christ even after His death and resurrection. How was the cross a demonstration of God’s love to these as well?


    In His love,
    Mike
     
  7. Slave2SinNoMore

    Slave2SinNoMore Active Member

    477
    +15
    Christian
    Mjwhite, I have to give credit where credit is due. You indeed show me several instances in which “all” means less than “all”. Some are suspect, but several are indeed accurate. I have to admit that you got me on that one. Good job.

    However, this does not mean I now believe the way you do about this issue, nor did I ever say that providing these instances would cause me to believe that way. What I did say was that if you could provide me with Biblical support for your allegation that the all in 1 Tim 2:4 doesn’t really mean “all”, I would be one step closer to seeing things you way. But you haven’t given me any Biblical support yet, even though I have asked you for it. You originally told me to “look at the context”, and I did, and still found nothing and asked you to point it out to me, which you were unable to do. In the verses you supplied for me in which “all” does not mean “all”, one of two things is true for each.
    (1) Context shows that “all” does not mean “all”
    (2) The “all” is an obvious exaggeration.

    Neither of those is true for 1 Tim 2:4. If you cannot provide Biblical support for your claim regarding 1 Tim 2:4, then I will hold to my belief that it means exactly what it says, that “God desires that all men be saved”.

    Also, I’d like to address some other things that you have said.

    You said:
    God only gives the truth of His Word to some. How many people died without ever hearing His truth, much less knowledge of it? Millions before Christ was born, and billions since. So if he desires them to have faith in Him, why did He devise a world where they never even know the gospel truth?

    But that’s not accurate. God did indeed devise a way for the people before Christ to be saved. I am not saying there are saved through anything other than Christ. It was indeed through Christ. In Hebrews and Romans, we learn that for the Old Testament greats like Abraham, God accounted their faith as righteousness. If these people were destined for hell, why did God bother accounting their faith as righteousness? Why would he send someone he had made righteous to hell? Also, if the people before Christ were automatically going to go to hell, why did Christ descend to Sheol (the place of the grave, not hell) to preach to them, in the days between his death and resurrection? What was the point of that? The point of this entire paragraph is to show you that just because these people lived before Christ doesn’t mean that God didn’t desire them to be saved and didn’t provide a method of being saved.

    As for people who live now without having heard the name Jesus, you can’t say that God doesn’t desire them to be saved. Paul tells us that these people have the law written upon their hearts. Why would God bother to write that law upon their hearts, if he didn’t love them, and desire them to be saved? If God didn’t give a care about them, why bother?

    Also, you said:
    If you define the goal of your god as saving all, then your god has failed miserably, and the devil is winning. Is that your god? he couldn't even save his own people, the jews!

    That is a very wrong thing to say about God! When you realize that God does indeed love all people, and that he does indeed desire that all people be saved, you will feel guilty for besmirching God’s name like that.

    But let me address that. So, you say that if it is God’s desire that all be saved, he is failing because all are not going to be saved, right? Therefore, you are saying that all God’s desires come to pass, right? And if all his desires don’t come to pass, that he has somehow failed, right?

    Okay, if you’re going to say all that, let’s take it to its ultimate conclusions:
    God desires that you don’t sin, right? Well, you sin, so do you think God has failed? God desires that people don’t rape and murder. But people rape and murder, so do you think God has failed?

    So you see, you can’t say that just because God’s desire that all men be saved doesn’t come true it means he’s a failure. You see, it all comes down to free will. God “knocks” on the door, he doesn’t force it open. He offers the gift, he doesn’t make us take it. If someone offered you a million dollars, but you refuse to take it, whose fault is that, yours or the gift giver’s? Would you say “Well, you offered me a million dollars, but I didn’t take it. Now I am poor. It is your fault, and you are a failure!”? Of course not!
     
  8. mjwhite

    mjwhite Member

    210
    +0
    Dear Slavenomore,

    Why did you fail to address my comments on Ephesians 2: 11-12?

    In reading about the Old Testament saints, you will see that God establishes a lineage from Adam unto Christ.

    With Abraham, God began the Israelites; Abraham being the father of Israel. With Abraham, God saved him by his Word [spoken but not yet written]. For God brought Abraham out from the pagan and idoltorous practices he was living with and persuaded him to follow Yahweh, the one and only God.

    Your general statement that "God did devise a way fot the peoples to be saved" is wholly innaccurate. Because only a few were saved [and that by God's gracious choice to boot] does not mean the masses of people had a 'way'.

    Where is your Scripture? Where is your proof? Why do you not deal with the Scripture I used [Eph 2:11-12]? Look also at Romans 9:1-6. See how God has limited His revelation to the small group known as the Jews. These verses mean that to the Jews only was the adoption, the divine glory, the law, the covenants, the promises.

    You cite Abraham, but he was their father. Millions lived far beyond the scope of the Middle East. They were pagans, Gentiles and as Paul tells us, 'without hope and without God'.

    Likewise, salvation in Christ came only through the given promise of God, which only was given to the Jews [Romans 9:4]. Those then that were saved were those who trusted God based on His Word, which was given to the Jews. So as Romans 3:19-31 tells us that all men are held accountable to God for all have sinned. But salvation is for those who have faith in Christ. This faith, whether it is looking ahead to Jesus or looking back to the cross and ahead to Heaven is the only the only way to salvation.

    Most people living outside of the Middle east in OT or living outside of Christendom later never heard of that Jesus and His work on the cross. Without hope they were and are for they were and are without God, and that was by God's design. He sent Christ into a widely populated world knowing that millions would never hear and therefore could not believe and be saved and He made no other way for them.

    So Slavenomore, that is the point you need to refute Scripturally for your doctrine to have any chance of being right. Or you could close your eyes to what I am saying and go on believing and preaching a lie. We all have to answer before Him for every word. And we are to be witnesses of what we know of Him. So I suggest you study the Word and find your proof and prove it to yourself as well.

    in His love,
    mike
     
  9. Slave2SinNoMore

    Slave2SinNoMore Active Member

    477
    +15
    Christian
    mjwhite,

    Ephesians 2:11-12 does say that Gentiles were not the original recipients of God's promises. They had to be grafted in. That is true. But do you think they were somehow Plan B? No, there is no "Plan B" with God. Salvation being extended to the Gentiles was not something God suddenly thought up when the Jews rejected Jesus. It was part of the plan from the beginning, because God knew the Jews would reject Jesus. Which leads me to this question: You think God doesn't offer salvation to people he knows won't accept it, right? Then why did he offer it to the Jews first? Surely he knew the Jews wouldn't accept Jesus. This passage from Ephesians says nothing that suggests God doesn't desire for all men to be saved. Neither does Romans 9:4

    Is there no one else mentioned in the Bible who rejects God or his Gospel? Sure there is. However, for your theory to be true, that means that everyone whoever heard the Gospel accepted Jesus. And that's just not true.

    Do not forget that Jesus preached to the people in Sheol. That shows you right there that people born before Christ were given an opportunity to accept him.

    You also didn't address the "law written on their hearts" issue I brought up, either.

    You've been saying all along that if God desires that everyone be saved, then he is a failure if anyone rejects him. When I showed you by example that the giver is not to blame if the intended recipient doesn't accept the gift, you don't address that, either.

    But none of these should surprise me, because you have never ever given me Biblical support for your belief on 1 Tim 2:4. You see, if I am right about 1 Tim 2:4 (and so far, you have shown me nothing that even remotely comes close to proving me wrong), and if that passage does indeed mean what it says - "ALL", then that blows your whole theory out of the water.

    There are many other verses that either say or imply "all" also. But you don't have one single verse that comes out and says "God doesn't want everyone to be saved". You have to fish around and come up with your own explanations for certain verses, to mold these verses into the framework of your belief. Seems to me like those who say that God desires all men to be saved have the Biblical support that your position lacks. You therefore don't need to worry about me "preaching a lie".

    Look, I should have stopped arguing with you about this a while ago, when I realized that you couldn't come up with any Biblical support for your claim about 1 Tim 2:4. I am through now.
     
  10. calvinist

    calvinist Daniel in the Lion's Den

    48
    +0
    Anglican
    Single
    Dear Slave2SinNoMore,

    Your name says it all! Your name proves Total Depravity, the first Point of Calvinism. Indeed we as christians were once slaves to sin. Paul said it best in Ephesians 2:2-3: Ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience....fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind; and were by nature the children of wrath.
    Indeed we were slaves to sin, Paul explains this further in Romans 3:10-11: There is none righteous, no not one: There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God.
    Jesus, who saved me from the bondage of sin, said it very well in John 5:40: Ye will not come to me, that ye might have life.
    Total Depravity or even your name Slave To Sin No More declares that lost man's only hope is in the election based on the purpose or plan of God. Only those who are "of God" hear the voice of God calling them to "come forth" (by name)! Jesus said it best to those who did not believe on Him in John 8:47: He that is of God hears God's words: ye therefore hear them not, because ye are not of God."
    Nothing is as sweet as the words of Jesus. By saying that Total Depravity is wrong, then we declare that we alone have the power to overcome sin, and that is a lie. Only God can save, and He gives us faith to answer His calling. There is no good in us, for we are evil, but God is HOLY, HOLY, HOLY, and only through His calling and His Unconditional Election are we saved. For once you were a slave to sin, but not anymore, you are a slave to Jesus! I pray that you will rejoice in that comfort.
    Delighting in God's Irresistible Grace,
    Calvinist<><
    "God is most glorified in us when we are most satisfied in Him." -John Piper
     
  11. Andrew

    Andrew Well-Known Member

    +21
    Non-Denom
    Listen,

    What is blood shed for? Sins of the sinner right? For without the shedding of blood there can be no remission of sins.

    What did Christ come into the world for? To save sinners with sin right? So who are these sinners? The whole world for all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God. There is none righteous. So, Christ died for all men not for Christians only.

    1Ti 1:15 This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief.

    Ro 3:23 For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;


    secondly, Rom 5 says the last Adams work is a much more than the first Adams. How can that be true if Jesus' work/grace affects only some whereas Adam's affects all men??

    If one wants to believe in limited atonement, then he has to also believe that not all men have sinned, but only some "elect" grp, to be consistent.
     
  12. mjwhite

    mjwhite Member

    210
    +0
    Dear Slavenomore,


    You
    Ephesians 2:11-12 does say that Gentiles were not the original recipients of God's promises. They had to be grafted in. That is true. But do you think they were somehow Plan B? No, there is no "Plan B" with God.
    Salvation being extended to the Gentiles was not something God suddenly thought up when the Jews rejected Jesus. It was part of the plan from the beginning, because God knew the Jews would reject Jesus.


    Me.
    I never said there was a plan B. But not all Jews rejected Christ: Peter, John, and all the first Christians were Jews.

    You.
    Which leads me to this question: You think God doesn't offer salvation to people he knows won't accept it, right? Then why did he offer it to the Jews first? Surely he knew the Jews wouldn't accept Jesus.


    Me.
    Wrong, I never said that or implied that. But again, some Jews did accept Jesus. It is no wonder we cannot communicate, you are reading into my word things I have not said or implied. Salvation is an open offer to all that will call upon Jesus. What I am asking you is why you called on Jesus and your unsaved neighbor has not. What I am telling you is that we call on Jesus because of God’s revelation to our hearts that He does not give to our neighbor.

    You
    This passage from Ephesians says nothing that suggests God doesn't desire for all men to be saved. Neither does Romans 9:4


    Me.
    That is right, but that was not my point. My point is that God has not provided a way for those who have not heard the gospel to be saved, and because if He desired all who ever lived, lives, or will live to be saved, He would at least provide a way. Since he didn’t, the ‘all’ in I Tim 4:1 doesn’t mean everybody who ever lived.

    You.
    Is there no one else mentioned in the Bible who rejects God or his Gospel? Sure there is. However, for your theory to be true, that means that everyone whoever heard the Gospel accepted Jesus. And that's just not true.


    Me.
    Wrong again. Have you not been reading my posts? I never said everyone who hears the Gospel gets saved. I said that there are many who hear and reject it because they don’t believe it is true, because they think it is foolishness [1 Cor 1:18]. I then asked you what reason you had to believe it as true and not foolishness. One has to hear something before they can think about it and think it foolishness, correct? So why do make this charge against me? It shows me you have not been a very careful reader. If you want truth, you must apply yourself a little more diligently.

    You[1]
    Do not forget that Jesus preached to the people in Sheol. That shows you right there that people born before Christ were given an opportunity to accept him.
    [/I]

    me.
    What did He say to them? How do you know it was the Gospel? How do you know that they could get saved? In the story of the rich man and Lazarus, Jesus said that if they didn’t obey the law and the prophets they wouldn’t believe someone even if they rose from the dead. Didn’t God know that already? Does he go back and preach to the dead who have died since then and never heard about Jesus? If so why do we send missionaries to preach the gospel, when Jesus is going to preach to them anyhow. Why tell anyone? If you want to build a doctrine of salvation from two verses that many scholars and bible teachers throughout history have not been able to agree on, go ahead. It shows how weak you basic, God-loves-everyone-earthly-philosophy is.
    Likewise, Peter only speaks of Him preaching to the sinners of Noah’s day in 2nd Peter. What evidence do you have to say He spoke to all the dead? Maybe He only spoke to the saved dead?

    You.You also didn't address the "law written on their hearts" issue I brought up, either.

    In which you said:
    As for people who live now without having heard the name Jesus, you can’t say that God doesn’t desire them to be saved. Paul tells us that these people have the law written upon their hearts. Why would God bother to write that law upon their hearts, if he didn’t love them, and desire them to be saved? If God didn’t give a care about them, why bother?


    Me.
    That is from Romans 2. I have addressed it in many posts. So please forgive me for failing to do so for you. The Law saves no one. This law in our hearts is the knowledge of right and wrong otherwise known as our conscience. It has nothing to do with saving people, the Law cannot save. It has more to do with allowing us freedom of choice, to choose between God’s way -what we know is right- and what we would rather do –sin. All men choose sin and are justly condemned. What has that got to do with God desiring to save them from their sin? Only those who sin need a savior. The law only shows we us we are sinners. But our consciousness of sin can be and is many times hardened to the point where sin not only comes easy but without thought. Such a law saves no one, nor was it intended to.

    You.
    You've been saying all along that if God desires that everyone be saved, then he is a failure if anyone rejects him. When I showed you by example that the giver is not to blame if the intended recipient doesn't accept the gift, you don't address that, either.


    Me.
    It has nothing to do with our discussion. Are we discussing whether God is to be blamed for those in Hell? No.

    What we are discussing is God’s desire and His plan.

    I said that if it was God’s plan to save everyone, then He failed.

    If His plan was to save some, then He didn’t fail.

    But if His plan was to save some, then why is His desire for all? Is your god schizophrenic? Does he desire things he knows he cannot get, and that he doesn’t plan to get?

    So wouldn’t a god who desired all, plan to save all? And if he did so, he failed. Either that or you believe all will go to heaven.

    You.
    But none of these should surprise me, because you have never ever given me Biblical support for your belief on 1 Tim 2:4. You see, if I am right about 1 Tim 2:4 (and so far, you have shown me nothing that even remotely comes close to proving me wrong), and if that passage does indeed mean what it says - "ALL", then that blows your whole theory out of the water.

    me.
    It says ‘all’, that I don’t dispute. But as you yourself agree, ‘all’ doesn’t have to mean every person who ever lived. ‘All’ isn’t always inclusive like that to include the whole set of human life. Therefore ‘all’ could mean less than everyone who ever lived. Why do you think it means that?

    I have tried to show you that a god should plan on getting what he desires and that if he desires all, his plan has failed, so he has failed. You are simply avoiding reality here.

    You.There are many other verses that either say or imply "all" also. But you don't have one single verse that comes out and says "God doesn't want everyone to be saved". You have to fish around and come up with your own explanations for certain verses, to mold these verses into the framework of your belief. Seems to me like those who say that God desires all men to be saved have the Biblical support that your position lacks. You therefore don't need to worry about me "preaching a lie".

    Me.
    Are we not saved by grace? Are we not sinners who deserve hell? Yet we claim heaven, do we not? Do you not find that wondrous, that you a sinner deserving hell believes with all your heart that God has saved you from it? But do you not also believe there will be people in hell? That there will be people there who God did not save? Why did He save you and not them? Was it something in you and of you that made you smarter or wiser than them so that you would receive the gift they rejected because they thought it foolishness? Or is salvation, your salvation wholly do to the graciousness of God your savior?

    Is the difference between heaven and hell something God has done for you, that he hasn’t done for all, or is it something you did others failed to do?

    In other words, will you give all the glory of your salvation to God, or will you boast over your hell-bound neighbor?

    What is the difference Slavenomore? What did Jesus do for you that He did not do for those in Hell? And why?

    In His love,
    mike
     
  13. mjwhite

    mjwhite Member

    210
    +0
    Dear all,

    it was said by Andrew:
    Listen,

    What is blood shed for? Sins of the sinner right? For without the shedding of blood there can be no remission of sins.

    What did Christ come into the world for? To save sinners with sin right? So who are these sinners? The whole world for all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God. There is none righteous. So, Christ died for all men not for Christians only.


    It is also said that His name will be called Jesus because he will save His people from their sins.

    It is also said that He took God's punishment for us upon Himself.
    That our iniquity is laid upon Him.

    If He has taken everyone's punishment and bore all our sin, how can God be just punishing man for sin again and sentencing him to hell?

    Likewise it is said that God demonstrated His love for whom those Jesus died for. How is it love [which covers sins] when Gos condemns them to hell? Does God's love cease? Does he still love those in Hell? How?

    It also says who will bring any charge against those God has chosen? It is God who justifies. Yet men go to hell? Who, it asks, is he that condemns? Christ jesus who died and was raised to life intercedes for us? Who is the us? Why doesn't He intercede for all he loves? It asks what shall seperate us from God's love? So I ask you, is it the sin already paid for by Jesus, or is it Jesus who died for us? Or God who sent Jesus to die for us?

    Is the us, all men, or only those who He saves? He saves those He loves.



    1Ti 1:15 This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief.

    True, but does He save all sinners or some?
    some. Those He loves.

    Ro 3:23 For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;

    True. No one deserves heaven, nor deserves to be saved. God draws those he loves to Jesus and saves them all.

    secondly, Rom 5 says the last Adams work is a much more than the first Adams. How can that be true if Jesus' work/grace affects only some whereas Adam's affects all men??

    ALL men died in Adam. Are all men saved in Christ? Yes/ No?
    Yes,
    then go to a different thread, [name it and I will debate this with you there].
    No. then you yourself show that youa analogy is misguided. For we fell in Adam without our free will involved. Why can't God save everyone in Christ without involving free will? But you don't believe He saves anyone without involving free will, do you?

    So the analogy means something other than what you are tring to force it to say.

    It means that the death caused by Adam is not as strong as the Life caused by Jesus. That in whom God saves, the first Adam is trumped by the second Adam. Likewise one sin caused our death, but Jesus by one act of righteousness overcame our many sins.
    ANDREW
    If one wants to believe in limited atonement, then he has to also believe that not all men have sinned, but only some "elect" grp, to be consistent.


    me.
    That is a illogical imagination and a poor arguement with faulty premises and a ludicrous conclusion. Did Jesus die for all of the sins of all of the people? Then if so, what sin sends men to hell?
    There is none left to condemn any man, they all have been bought and paid for by Jesus and the Father has expunged His wrath out alreadyon Jesus for every sin.

    To not believe that God limits the atonement to those He loves and saves is to go the universalist route.
     
  14. angelmuzic

    angelmuzic New Member

    56
    +0
    I am just now learning or hearing about Predestination . And a bit confused.&nbsp; I am hoping someone can help me out here.&nbsp; I have asked this before.....and kindof was taken back due to I was attacked saying I was not being sincere. And I am being.&nbsp; Just trying to understand.

    Predestination ......&nbsp; Does this mean God already knows rather I be saved or not? Say I am predestined not to be saved...... no matter how much I want to be saved ...I can't be saved?

    Always thought Jesus came to save the world, meant anyone could be saved.

    Just confused and kindof weak in the faith. I believe, but have my doubts :(&nbsp; Trying to resolve that!!!!!&nbsp;

    I would so much appreciate if someone can help me understand Predestination&nbsp; a bit...... I would be ever so grateful!&nbsp;

    email me at [email protected]&nbsp; anytime:) rather to answer the question or just to talk..... always looking for Christians to talk/chat with:)
     
  15. mjwhite

    mjwhite Member

    210
    +0
    Dear angel,

    To predestinate is to assign a destiny to. For example, look at Acts 4:27-28.

    "Indeed Herod and Pontius Pilate met together with the Gentiles and the peoples of Israel in this city to conspire against your holy servant Jesus, whom you anointed. They did what your power and will had decided beforehand should happen."

    Since what happened to Jesus was decided beforehand, it was predestined for our Lord to suffer and die. God predestined it. But in doing so, he violated no ones free will. Heros, Pilate, the gentiles, and the Jews were not forced to put Jesus to death, but they did so out of their own free will.

    They did what what they were predestined to do.

    Now there is two major doctrines of predestination in the salvation of individuals, Arminianist, and Calvinist.

    The Arminianist doctrine of predestination says that God looked into the future via His foreknowledge and saw who would choose Him, and these He predestined. He chose those He saw choosing Him. These then when they get saved are known as the elect.

    The Calvinist doctrine of predestination says that God chose to save some people [and therefore not others] and these He predestined and they are called the elect.

    have been using the Arminianist doctrine to debate Arminianists about the elect on this thread, but I am closer to the Calvinist doctrine.

    This is not a subject you need to understand completely to walk in faith, trusting the Lord. It is a controversy in the church but not one of salvation for even those [even me] who claim to be of the 'elect' may not be [though I believe God has saved me]. No one knows who is elected for some who profess Christ do so falsely. For your part, examine your heart and see what you believe. In believing in Jesus, walk in love. The predestination debate is part of a broader discussion on the nature of faith.

    I hope that answers some of your questions at least.

    In His love,
    mike
     
  16. Caedmon

    Caedmon kawaii Supporter

    +538
    Catholic
    US-Others
    angelmuzic, you have a common misconception about predestination and the elect. Don't be embarrassed. :)

    You said that if you weren't in the elect, and you wanted to be saved, you couldn't be, no matter how hard you tried. Well this is the problem. If you weren't in the elect, you would never want to be saved. No one has the desire or capability to be saved before she is regenerated by God. God does the saving, not the human. God saves you while you are "dead in sin", an enemy of God, incapable of hearing His call. You have no desire to come to Him. But, when God takes the heart of stone out of you and replaces it with a heart of flesh(Ezekiel 36:26),&nbsp;you receive the desire to love and serve God, and thus are regenerated, saved.

    Hope this helps :)
     
  17. angelmuzic

    angelmuzic New Member

    56
    +0
    (((HUGS)))
    Thanks you all......... I understand it better lol.......was a bit embarassed, but it would of drived me crazy if I didn't ask:)
    Hmmmmm yea I guess If I am wanting to be saved....God does the hand in that. I get what you all are saying.
    Thanks........and thank you for being so kind and making me not feel like a complete idiot:)
     
  18. mjwhite

    mjwhite Member

    210
    +0
    Dear all,

    Good answer humblejoe!
     
  19. Andrew

    Andrew Well-Known Member

    +21
    Non-Denom
    "If He has taken everyone's punishment and bore all our sin, how can God be just punishing man for sin again and sentencing him to hell?"

    That's easy. Cos you still have to accept it. As on the night of the Passover, the lamb was killed, the blood shed, but you still have to apply it to the doorpost. A prisoner on death row will still hang if he rejects the presidential pardon.

    Limited atonement limits God's grace, makes the last Adam's work less powerful than the first Adam's, says God's blood discriminates and that God did not die for sinners but only the elect bunch Ñ pts that clearly contradict scripture!!!
     
  20. Caedmon

    Caedmon kawaii Supporter

    +538
    Catholic
    US-Others
    How does it limit God's grace?

    If limited atonement causes God's blood to discriminate, then tell me which criteria the discrimination is based upon.

    Hmmm... every one of the Elect is conceived a sinner. :scratch:

    Have you read this entire thread and others related to it? Many Scripture references with the proper interpretations have been given by limited atonement advocates.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Loading...