Poll: For whom did Christ die?

[Rippon]

Spurgeon v. Hyper-Calvinism: The Battle for Gospel Preaching
~ Iain H. Murray

This is pretty good book that explains his opposition

I know Mr. Murray personally. We had a number of talks in South Korea, although I first met him in America in the mid-90's.

Well, the Down-Grade Movement was of a much more serious nature.

This book by Murray is indeed a good one. David Cloud, in a video, attacked Calvinists. He held up Murray's book quickly without even mentioning the title. He wanted viewers to think that Calvinists were against Spurgeon -- when in reality those of the hyper-variety especially James Wells opposed him.

 

[rbell]

Foolishness indeed -

"All" is not universal.

With the extraneous material removed, here's the gist of your post.

"All doesn't really mean 'all.' "

" 'The world' doesn't really mean 'the world.' "

What else is there to say? We've tied a theological Gordian knot with those statements.




(rbell <-- immensely proud that he figured out how to use 'Gordian knot' in a post )

 

[olegig]

I have a question for my learned fellows.

I am new at this, pretty much just starting out. Tell me I pray...
How do I recognize the elect so that I don't waste my time on the others?

John 3:16-18 (King James Version)

16For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

17For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.

18He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

Whosoever believeth becomes the elect, he that believeth not is condemned.

 

[psalms109:31]

Mercy

I can care less about cals and non-calls, I want to talk about the scripture not a man's idea. If it changes the scripture to fit their doctrine, that tells me from the beginning it is wrong. Religion will bring death to men, but Christ brings life my brother. He will harden men, I believe that. He has hidden the truth from the wise and learned, but He will remove his veil when anyone turns to Christ.

Here that wasn't address


What does the scripture say. That He will keep those who are meek and humble who trust in the name of the Lord, and this also

John 6:

45It is written in the Prophets: 'They will all be taught by God.'[Isaiah 54:13] Everyone who listens to the Father and learns from him comes to me.

He choose those who are in Christ so from the foundation it is Jesus and those who are in Him.

2 Chronicles 16:9
For the eyes of the LORD range throughout the earth to strengthen those whose hearts are fully committed to him. You have done a foolish thing, and from now on you will be at war."

This war against brother and brother. We should believe in the elect and also those who God included those who heard the Gospel of their salvation having believed. If you continue you will have to fight every new believer who enters through God loved the world, or convince the church to change the scripture to fit your doctrine that will never happen.

2 Timothy 2:
14Keep reminding them of these things. Warn them before God against quarreling about words; it is of no value, and only ruins those who listen. 15Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a workman who does not need to be ashamed and who correctly handles the word of truth. 16Avoid godless chatter, because those who indulge in it will become more and more ungodly.

 

[RAdam]

With the extraneous material removed, here's the gist of your post.

"All doesn't really mean 'all.' "

" 'The world' doesn't really mean 'the world.' "

What else is there to say? We've tied a theological Gordian knot with those statements.




(rbell <-- immensely proud that he figured out how to use 'Gordian knot' in a post )

What does "world" mean here?

"And we know that we are of God, and the whole world lieth in wickedness."

What is the world spoken of there? How about another?

"If the world hate you, ye know that it hated me before it hated you. If ye were of the world, the world would love his own: but because ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you."

What world is that?

In John 17 the word "world" is used in many senses.

Many words in scripture have one clear meaning. Others are dependant on how they are used and the context. These are words and phrases like "all", "all men", "salvation/saved/save", "world", "whole world". If one tries to apply one absolute meaning to these words and carry that throughout the entirety of scripture you are going to run into major problems.

 

[RAdam]

John 3:16-18 (King James Version)

16For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

17For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.

18He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

Whosoever believeth becomes the elect, he that believeth not is condemned.

I see you highlighted the phrase "believeth not is condemned" and failed to highlight the next word, which happens to be "already". Those who believe not were already in a state of condemnation.

As far as the belief making one an elect, I think you have cause and effect backwards. Man is naturally under a state of condmenation. It is when you find believers that you've found those who aren't condemned. Why? Because the law of the Spirit of life in Christ has made them free from the law of sin and death. Their belief displays this glorious fact. He that believeth is not condemned. If you don't like that explanation, then consider what Jesus said in John 5:24: "he that hearteth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life." The belief is not the cause, but rather the evidence of one being an elect and having been freed from the penalty and dominion of sin by Jesus Christ.

 

[Winman]

I see you highlighted the phrase "believeth not is condemned" and failed to highlight the next word, which happens to be "already". Those who believe not were already in a state of condemnation.

As far as the belief making one an elect, I think you have cause and effect backwards. Man is naturally under a state of condmenation.

No, you have it backwards. Man is not born under condemnation. A man comes under condemnation when he knowingly and willingly sins.

Rom 5:12 Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:

Many falsely teach that this verse says because of Adam sin passed upon all men, but that is not what it says, it says "death" passed upon all men "for (because) that all have sinned".

It is when you knowingly and willingly sin that the death sentence Adam introduced into the world passes upon you, not until.

It is true that all men mature and sin at some point, and therefore all come under condemnation. But little children are not condemned, not being able to understand sin and it's consequences.

Matt 19:14 But Jesus said, Suffer little children, and forbid them not, to come unto me: for of such is the kingdom of heaven.

If children were wicked sinners as you teach, then heaven must be full of wicked sinners, for Jesus said of such is the kingdom of heaven.

Paul said he was alive without the law once. If he was born a sinner under condemnation, when could he have ever been "alive"?

Rom 7:9 For I was alive without the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died.

If your doctrine is true, Paul could have never said he was ever alive. No, Paul was not born a condemned sinner and neither are you or I, but when we mature enough to understand right from wrong and willingly and knowingly commit sin, it is then that death passes upon us.

 

[Winman]

"he that hearteth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life." The belief is not the cause, but rather the evidence of one being an elect and having been freed from the penalty and dominion of sin by Jesus Christ.

Give me a break, you are turning this verse around to say exactly the opposite of what it truly says. It indeed shows that those who hear and believe on Jesus have passed from life to death. Hearing and believing is absolutely the cause shown.

Jesus could have said, "he that hath everlasting life heareth my word and believeth on him that sent me." That is the order that should have been shown if your doctrine is correct (which it isn't). Jesus said it in the proper order showing that hearing and believing are the cause of those that have everlasting life.

Once again, Calvinists understand scripture in the exact reverse of what it truly says. I see that over and over again.

 

[RAdam]

In Romans 7 Paul is talking about the knowledge of sin, the perception of it not the reality of it. Paul, a few verses later, states this: "Was then that which is good made death unto me? (sidenote: by your position his answer would have to be yes, after all you say he was sinless until the commandment came) God forbid. But sin, that is might appear sin, working death in me by that which is good; that sin by the commandment might become exceeding sinful." You see, he is talking about the perception of sin. This goes hand in hand with what he earlier stated in Romans 4, that by the law is the knowledge of sin. Earlier in this chapter, he says I had not known sin but by the law. The law wasn't given to make men sinners, which is your position. Under your position it would have been better for man if God would have never given the law, because without that law we would have been able to remain sinless. Under your view God is really to blame.

But this is not what the bible teaches. God didn't give the law to make men sinners, but rather to make sin appear to be sin. He gave the law that sin would be easily perceived. Man likes to delude himself with the idea that he really isn't as bad as he is. Many are currently under this denial right now. God gave the law to show us just how bad we are and just how much we need the savior, that no flesh would glory in His sight. The law shines a spotlight on my sinfulness, while the gospel shines a spotilght on the perfection of Jesus Christ.

 

[olegig]

I see you highlighted the phrase "believeth not is condemned" and failed to highlight the next word, which happens to be "already". Those who believe not were already in a state of condemnation.

As far as the belief making one an elect, I think you have cause and effect backwards. Man is naturally under a state of condmenation. It is when you find believers that you've found those who aren't condemned. Why? Because the law of the Spirit of life in Christ has made them free from the law of sin and death. Their belief displays this glorious fact. He that believeth is not condemned. If you don't like that explanation, then consider what Jesus said in John 5:24: "he that hearteth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life." The belief is not the cause, but rather the evidence of one being an elect and having been freed from the penalty and dominion of sin by Jesus Christ.

Please feel free to also highlight 'already' because every human on the face of the earth is 'already' condemned as soon as they realize their sin is against God.
Everyone is born 'in Adam' and the only way out is to get 'in Christ'.

John 5:24 (King James Version)

24Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.

The verse has this order:
heareth, believeth, everlasting life, no condemnation, death unto life.

The only way to get election into the verse is to read it into the verse.

 

[RAdam]

Give me a break, you are turning this verse around to say exactly the opposite of what it truly says. It indeed shows that those who hear and believe on Jesus have passed from life to death. Hearing and believing is absolutely the cause shown.

Jesus could have said, "he that hath everlasting life heareth my word and believeth on him that sent me." That is the order that should have been shown if your doctrine is correct (which it isn't). Jesus said it in the proper order showing that hearing and believing are the cause of those that have everlasting life.

Once again, Calvinists understand scripture in the exact reverse of what it truly says. I see that over and over again.

Well actually He did say nearly that same phrase that you so cleverly came up with to try to prove my doctrine false in John 8, "he that is of God heareth God's words." Again in John 18, "Everyone that is of the truth heareth my voice."

Jesus did not say, in John 5:24, "he that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, did receive everlasting life." Neither did He say, "he that will hear by word, and will believe on him that sent me, will receive everlasting life." He said the one who presently hears and presently believes presently possesses everlasting life. If the hearing and believeing are the cause, He would not have worded it this way. There would be a logical order followed. There isn't. Jesus does not give a first this, then that, and finally this order. Jesus makes a simple statement of fact. If you find someone who is able to hear the word of God, and believe it, you have found someone already in possession of everlasting life, someone who has been born of God, someone who is free from codmenation. The belief is the evidence of, not the cause of, having everlasting life.

I could say, "he that hath a Mississippi license plate lives in Mississippi." Nobody on earth would say that having the license plate is the cause of him living in Mississippi. Everybody would understand that it is merely the evidence, the way by which I perceive that fact. If his car had not license plate he would still be a Mississippi resident, although I would be unaware of it.

 

[Winman]

Blah, blah, blah.

Paul said he was alive once without the law. When was Paul ever without the law? The law was introduced 1500 years before he was born. If he was born a condemned sinner as you teach, he could not say he was ever alive.

But, if you understand "but when the commandment came" to mean when he was old enough and mature enough to understand the law, the verse makes perfect sense.

You see, he is talking about the perception of sin.

Exactly. Does a two year old child understand sin? Does a two year old child understand he will be condemned to an eternity in the lake of fire if he hits his sister? Of course not. And the scriptures show God does not hold little children accountable for what they cannot possibly understand.

Jon 4:11 And should not I spare Nineveh, that great city, wherein are more than sixscore thousand persons that cannot discern between their right hand and their left hand; and also much cattle?

Many people do not know that the reason Jonah fled from the Lord is because he wanted the city of Ninevah to perish. But here God explains that one of the reasons he sent Jonah to preach there was because there were over 120,000 innocent children who could not discern between their right hand and their left hand.

Deut 1:39 Moreover your little ones, which ye said should be a prey, and your children, which in that day had no knowledge between good and evil, they shall go in thither, and unto them will I give it, and they shall possess it.

God did not punish the children of those Jews who rebelled against God in the wilderness because he said they had no knowledge between good and evil in that day, and so therefore are not accountable.

Original sin is a false doctrine, God does not hold little children accountable for sin. There must be knowledge and understanding of the law before a person can be accounted a sinner.

 

[RAdam]

Please feel free to also highlight 'already' because every human on the face of the earth is 'already' condemned as soon as they realize their sin is against God.
Everyone is born 'in Adam' and the only way out is to get 'in Christ'.

John 5:24 (King James Version)

24Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.

The verse has this order:
heareth, believeth, everlasting life, no condemnation, death unto life.

The only way to get election into the verse is to read it into the verse.

Well, the verse is not in a logical order format, but I'll play along for a minute. According your view, you have someone in possession of everlasting life before being free from condemnation and before being born again. That's nutty. An unregenerate in possession of everlasting life? Come on.

 

[Onlybygrace]

Um Paul3144 what is "foreseen faith"?

 

[RAdam]

Thanks for the intelligent response. "Blah, blah, blah." Wow. How very kind of you.

If you actually look at the apostle Paul's life, what do you see? Well we should see a man who was a murderer, a persecutor of the church, and one who thought he was righteous by the law of Moses. What changed him? Well, when He met Jesus on the road to Damascus. This is beyond debate. You say "when the commandment came" in this verse refers to when he was old enough to understand the law. Baloney. He still saw himself as righteous by the Pharisee standard, meaning my his own works. He didn't see himself as dead in sins, needing salvation, as a wretched sinner. He saw himself as righteous. It wasn't until he was born again on the Damascus Road that this all changed.

 

[Winman]

I said blah, blah, blah, because whenever you present scripture to a Calvinist, they go into some long convoluted explanation to try to explain it away. Then you have the nerve to say non-Cals do not understand your doctrine.

I do not know that Paul considered himself sinless. Do you believe Paul gave sin offerings? Of course he did, he said he was blameless as to the righteousness that comes through following the law. That does not mean a person believes themselves sinless, on the contrary, it confesses sin. But he believed himself righteous by following the laws God had given in offering a sacrifice for sin. He believed by offering those sacrifices and obeying all the other laws of Moses he was righteous.

So, I think you misunderstand what Paul was saying in Philippians. If he was absolutely sinless he would not need to offer sin offerings. But if he did not offer sin offerings he could not be blameless concerning the law.

Do you understand that?

 

[RAdam]

You see, this is why I tire of having a conversation with you. Not only are you rude and uncharitable, but you also twist everything I say.

I never said Paul saw himself as sinless. I said Paul saw himself as righteous by his own works, as the other Pharisees did.

 

[Winman]

You see, this is why I tire of having a conversation with you. Not only are you rude and uncharitable, but you also twist everything I say.

I never said Paul saw himself as sinless. I said Paul saw himself as righteous by his own works, as the other Pharisees did.

Well, that doesn't help your argument, because if Paul did indeed believe he sinned at times, then it was at that point that he understood the law and broke it that he "died" as I showed in Romans 7:9.

This is all getting away from the subject we were discussing. What I am saying is that if Paul believed he was born a condemned sinner, he could not say he was ever alive. But he did say that.

The scriptures do not teach a person is a sinner from birth, although I know many scriptures have been used to teach this. An example:

Psa 58:3 The wicked are estranged from the womb: they go astray as soon as they be born, speaking lies.

Calvinists often quote this verse to prove that a person is born a sinner, but it is obviously hyperbole. For what do the following verses say?

Psa 58:4 Their poison is like the poison of a serpent: they are like the deaf adder that stoppeth her ear;
5 Which will not hearken to the voice of charmers, charming never so wisely.
6 Break their teeth, O God, in their mouth: break out the great teeth of the young lions, O LORD.

If you are going to take Psa 58:3 literally, then you should take the following verses literally as well. I have 8 children and was present when each and every one was born, and none of them could speak. And neither were they poisonous like an adder, nor did any have teeth, especially teeth like a lion.

This is what happens when you build your doctrine on selected proof texts.

When I get time I will address the many other proof-texts that Calvinism falsely interprets to teach Total Depravity. They can all be shown to be misinterpreted as Psa 58:3 has.

 

[RAdam]

The problem is you totally misunderstand man's natural condition. What Paul is referring to is the enlightening of man to his sinful condition before God that comes at regeneration. There are many people in this world today that do not see their state before God. They do not see themselves wretched sinners, they do not understand they are guilty before a righteous God, but think they are pretty good people. The gospel is preached to them, yet it does not convict, it does not prick them in their hearts, they go on sinning, having pleasure in sin, and thinking themselves to be good.

Paul was like this. He thought he was righteous. He didn't realize the sinfulness of his condition. He didn't see that he was really dead in sins, guilty before God, and deserves eternal hell. He thought the murder of Stephen was perfectly fine, even though it was clearly in violation of the law of Moses. Why? Because he was unregenerate. But when the law came, when God put His law in Paul's heart, Paul saw his condition. He saw himself guilty before God. Paul had thought he kept that law but realized he didn't. Paul then realized that his life was not his own, he forgot those things which were past, counted all his accomplishments but dung, and spent and was spent in service to Christ.

 

[Winman]

You couldn't be more wrong, I completely understand that man without God's influence would sink deeper and deeper into sin.

However, I disagree that unsaved men are absolutely devoid of the influence of God. Many unsaved people are indeed very moral people and realize it is wrong to steal, lie, commit adultery... These laws came from God.

The young rich ruler proves this. He was not saved, and went away unsaved, yet he knew and understood the scriptures, and even to a great degree kept the laws of God.

Mark 10:17 And when he was gone forth into the way, there came one running, and kneeled to him, and asked him, Good Master, what shall I do that I may inherit eternal life?
18 And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God.
19 Thou knowest the commandments, Do not commit adultery, Do not kill, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Defraud not, Honour thy father and mother.
20 And he answered and said unto him, Master, all these have I observed from my youth.
21 Then Jesus beholding him loved him, and said unto him, One thing thou lackest: go thy way, sell whatsoever thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, take up the cross, and follow me.
22 And he was sad at that saying, and went away grieved: for he had great possessions.
23 And Jesus looked round about, and saith unto his disciples, How hardly shall they that have riches enter into the kingdom of God!

There is so much in this passage that absolutely contradicts Calvinism it is hard to know where to begin.

1) This young man did not hate God. Although he was rich and a ruler, he came running to Christ and kneeled down to him. He addressed Jesus with absolute respect calling him Good Master. He sought out Jesus.

This contradicts Calvinism that teaches the unregenerate want nothing to do with God.

2) He understood scripture and for the most part obeyed the law. When he said he had kept the commandments, Jesus did not correct him, in fact he said he lacked "one thing".

3) Jesus loved him.

Now, this young man was unsaved and went away unsaved, but in no way could you say this young man was depraved as most would define the word. Oh, he was a sinner for sure, but he knew the scriptures and believed them and worked hard to obey them. He sincerely wanted to know how to be saved, and he was humble. His problem was he loved his wealth and possessions more than God and was not willing to trust Jesus that if he gave them up he would have greater treasures in heaven.

Calvinism goes too far and makes man so depraved that he cannot hear, believe, or desire God. But this is not what the scriptures show.