Featured Sympathy for the Arminian Part 2

We need to be careful in reading election in an unqualified manner when reading how the prophets appeal to the covenant nation of Israel. There is not a one-to-one correlation between the covenant nation of Israel and God's elect. God has one group of elect individuals from the time of Adam. That group does not include all from the covenant nation of Israel.

 

Ame, Brother, amen.


God's anger was kindled against Israel, yet His hand was stretched forth for His elect, the remnant, so that the election by grace would stand.


All of us are born on equal ground, lost, worthy of eternal death. God sent His Son to procure those whom He chose beforehand to be saved.

[/B]

 

Brother, we are commanded to present the gospel, and it will do one of two things, convict or condemn. God isn't obligated to save any of us, but in His mercy, He has chosn to save some. Now, if Jesus died/atoned for everyone, then everyone would be saved. Look up the Greek word for propitiation. It means "payment, appease God's wrath". So if there is a universal atonement, then God's wrath is no longer on sinners, plus a "double payment" is made. The one Jesus paid, and then the sinner pays for their sins in torment.

 

Who said they couldn't come? Do you have scripture that says that? Why are you captive to that thinking? I believe you have fallen prey to that "Limited" Atonement misunderstanding. And perhaps that hard-line soteriology among some Calvinists, (which you rarely find among Primitives & OR Baptists) I would retrace my steps if I were you to re-evaluating Atonement as a subject matter. The Atonement described in Doctrines of Grace is more in lines to a "particular" or I prefer "Definite" Atonement." That proper way of defining it is a huge paradigm shift in itself.

But even if you disagree with all of this, you yourself still have a touch of the wanting to appeal for a universal atonement....one where everyone can be saved if they only want to....isnt that your whole argument? If only humans would get a clue & hop to it, then everyone would be saved. But what if nobody gets that want to be saved bug? Then what.....Primarily because of human desire to sin they all go to hell. Is that your proposed theology, your plan for salvation?

 

BINGO!!!:thumbsup:

 

If they aren't made willing to come, they cannot come! Its quite simple.

 

You are now just regurgitating the cal talking points without logically addressing my point. God is not a God if illogical rationale, He is a God of reason. Propitiation when being used in context always speaks of appeasing Gods wrath against sin. It is not an automatic get out of hell free ticket. Apart from faith nobody is saved. The meal has been purchased, but nobody is forced to eat. Failure to eat does not mean the meal has not been purchased. That is the logic your new theology holds to.

 

I am not regurgitating anything Brother. I am showing you that Jesus' atonement appeased God's wrath concerning sin. Jesus didn't pay someone's sin debt that they might be saved, but that they would be saved. The Saviour on the cross was a Surety that procures salvation, not just potentially saves. God makes the unwilling willing, iow. Not forcefully so, but "by My lovingkindness have I drawn thee".

Now, let's follow this up with some passages of scripture in John:

These were not the Saviour's sheep, therefore they couldn't truly understand what Jesus was speaking about.

Jesus takes this passage all the way to the personal level. He showed He will call His sheep, and they will follow whithersoever He goes, and will flee from Satan.

This passage parallels Ezekiel 34. We, as Gentiles, were the sheep that were not of His fold, that He procured on the cross.

Again, He came to save His people, His sheep, from their sins(Matt. 1:21.)


contined.......

 

I believe this passage is self-explanitory, imo.

Here, Jesus expanded it to include all of the others who God chose from the foundation of the world to save. Now, follow up with Romans 8, Ephesians 1, and 1 John 2.

 

Willis, you have bought into the context ripping hook, line and sinker. You have also assumed that sheep and the other sheep refer to gentiles, when a proper hermeneutic readily dismisses that notion. Even the 'other sheep' are not gentiles but the Jews of the dispersion, tribulation and millennial Jews. The sheep in verse 10 are no different than those in 11 and 14 in John chapter 10, but from a different place / time. The fact is the audience would understand Jesus' self designation as 'Shepherd' from the way God was called a “Shepherd over Israel (Genesis 49:24, Psalm 23:1; 80:1), and Christ specifically as Israel’s Shepherd (Zechariah 13:7, Hebrews 13:20, 1 Peter 2:25; 5:4). A shepherd and his sheep are used as a Jewish relationship in the Bible, both OT and NT.

In regards to the atonement, if His death alone saved, faith is rendered unnecessary. I know you will counter God chose to use faith as the means to save, but only those like kyredneck and pinoybaptist are honest enough to understand where this logical conclusion MUST end at, and that is eternal salvation requires nothing...not even faith...in saving. In addition, none of creation can be redeemed as Christ's atonement doesn't apply to anything but the 'elect' according to you.