Featured Calvinist/Non-Calvinist - Where exactly am I?

pt2

9. If ALL the sins of ALL men were laid upon Christ, then God would not have dealt in judicial wrath with Israel because of the sins of their forefathers. But he did do so; and He did so after the crucifixion of His Son. No less than Christ Himself is our authority for this: "Therefore also said the Wisdom of God, I will send them prophets and apostles, and some of them they shall slay and persecute: That the blood of all the prophets, which was shed from the foundation of the world, may be required of this generation; From the blood of Abel unto the blood of Zacharias, which perished between the altar and the temple: verily I say unto you, it shall be required of this generation." (Luke 11:49-51) This passage teaches plainly that the punishment for the accumulated sins of their forefathers was to fall upon a single generation of the Jews. Christ confirmed this by saying, "It shall be required of this generation." But if atonement was made for all sins at the Cross, then all of this would have been cancelled (remitted). That it was not so cancelled we know from the fully authenticated fact that in A. D. 70 this solemn threat was executed, and God did "require" this at the hands of the Jews then living.

10. If ALL the sins of ALL men were laid upon Christ, there wherein lies the need for and wherein would be the propriety of the dead being "judged according to their works"? (Rev. 20:12) If the only issue between God and the world is their attitude toward Christ; if the only ground of condemnation for men be the rejection of the divinely appointed Savior, then it would be meaningless, or worse, to arraign them for their works. The fact that Holy Writ does declare that the wicked shall yet be judged "according to their works" is incontestable evidence that they will have more to answer for, and will suffer for something more than their rejection of Christ.

11. If ALL the sins of ALL men were laid upon Christ, how could there possibly be any degrees of punishment for the lost? If the only sin which God now imputes to the wicked be their rejection of Christ, then one common guilt would rest upon all, and consequently one common punishment would be their portion. That there will be degrees of punishment among the lost is clearly established by the following scriptures: "It shall be more tolerable for Tyre and Sidon at the day of judgment, than for you." (Matt. 11:22) "These shall receive greater damnation." (Mark 12:40) "And that servant, which knew his lord's will, and prepared not himself, neither did according to his will, shall he beaten with many stripes. But he that knew not, and did commit things worthy of stripes, shall he beaten with few stripes." (Luke 12:47, 48) "He that despised Moses' law died without mercy under two or three witnesses: Of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God?" (Heb. 10:28, 29)

12. If ALL the sins of ALL men were laid upon Christ, and the only sin which God now imputes to any is the refusal to receive His Son, then it inevitably follows that all the heathen who have lived since the crucifixion and have never heard of Christ, will certainly be saved. There is no other alternative possible. Not having heard of Christ, they cannot be charged with rejecting Him, and if all their other sins were atoned for (as we are asked to believe) then, necessarily, they must stand guiltless before God. But if this were true, then John 14:6 would be untrue, for there the recorded declaration of Christ is, "No man cometh unto the Father but by Me."t2

 

Yes though you must concede through observation that there are those who do box themselves in. I refuse to do that. For example, I am still trying to flesh out why there are any reprobates walking the earth. When they stand before a righteous Creator, is he going to send them to hell for being incapable of choosing Christ as lord and savior....or is there something here I'm missing? Why does Sinclair Ferguson quote Samuel Rutherford in saying the reprobate has the same warrant to choose for Christ as the elect?

Oh and there are lots more but with time, study and the HS...oh and prayer, those answers will one day become evident....but only if I stay open.

 

Why does that trouble you?Do you think there should be only believers and believers-to-be?

Do you acknowlege that God is glorified in the damnation of sinners?

There is a purpose for every reprobate walking the face of the earth. Pharaoh was a reprobate and yet he was used by the Lord in displaying the latter's power and Name known over all the world.

Does the Lord owe mercy to anyone?

Have you ever pondered 2 Cor. 2:15 and the surrounding context:For we are to God the pleasing aroma of Christ among those who are being saved and those who are perishing. (NIV)

They will be condemned for their sin. They are entirely blameworthy. Do you believe that God is at fault somehow? I certainly hope not. You have said that He is a righteous Creator --but is also the LORD of all --doing whatsoever He pleases.

 

Well then review this ....THE MARROW CONTROVERSY #02: DANGER OF LEGALISM. http://www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=22049519

Maybe in fact you are a Legalist???

 

Reprobates have gone down a trail of rejecting God and truth, read Romans 1. Also see 2 Timothy 3:1-9 where their attributes are described, they oppose truth, they oppose those who preach truth, they put on a semblance of godliness &c.

I'm not sure what Rutherford's point is, salvation isn't clinched by mans decision, but by God showing mercy. Not everyone you admire is going to be 100% razor sharp in their theological views.

 

I look at pure Calvinism as accepting infant baptism. Today it is a broad brushed term covering all who believe in TULIP/DoG.

Here you express Sovereignty in salvation via the Gospel. John 1:13, Eph. 1:11, Rom. 9:16, Romans 11:7 &c.

Yes, Christ is central to the Gospel. This however does not minimize Sovereignty's central place in the Gospel, it actually enhances it as Christ is Himself Sovereign. I believe part of the failure in minimizing Sovereignty in the Gospel reflects a misunderstanding of the person of Christ and shows shades of an anemic 'hollywood' pushover type of Christ that the world embraces. They're in for a rude awakening.

 

Except this is not how the Gospel works according to God's own model for Atonement as explained in Lev 16. In God's own system the "atoning sacrifice" - the "sin offering" is full and complete in Lev 16:15.

At the cross "the Atoning Sacrifice For OUR sins and NOT for OUR sins ONLY but for the sins of the WHOLE WORLD" 1 John 2:2 was full complete.

Lev 16:15 completed -- for the Day of Atonement model God sovereignly established to explain how redemption works.

All the remaining work from Lev 16:15 onward is the work of Christ our High Priest applying the benefits of the Atoning Sacrifice.

According to Heb 8 and 9 - that is what Christ is doing in heaven now.

So there is no conflict with the fact that the wicked are still under condemnation until they accept the benefit of the completed "atoning sacrifice" - via the ongoing work of Atonement (as in the Day of Atonement Model of God defined in Lev 16).

However Rev 15:8 predicts a time when all of that will end. The heavenly sanctuary service ended. High Priestly work of Christ ended.

Nothing but the Rev 16 - seven last plagues remain and at that point we have the Rev 22:10-11 statement that nobody crosses over. No lost become saved.

No saved fall from grace, and are severed from Christ and thus lost.

Rev 22.

10 And he saith unto me, Seal not the sayings of the prophecy of this book: for the time is at hand.
11 He that is unjust, let him be unjust still: and he which is filthy, let him be filthy still: and he that is righteous, let him be righteous still: and he that is holy, let him be holy still.
12 And, behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be.


But until that point is reached the lost may still cross over and become saved.


And the saved may still cross over and become lost.


The wicked are under condemnation until they enter in to the Heb 9 work of Christ as recipients - of the benefits given by one who "STANDS and the door and knocks if ANYONE hears my voice AND OPENS the door I WILL come in". Rev 3.



in Christ,

Bob

 

Enoch and Elijah go straight to heaven without having to "First live passed the time of the cross".

I think we all agree with that Bible point.

Hebrews 11 presents the OT saints as the giants of faith - not NT saints. And claims that by faith they all found approval with God who were saints.

In Heb 4:1-2 God says that the "Gospel was preached to us (who live in the NT )- just as it was to THEM also (who lived in the OT)".

Gal 1:6-11 "There is only ONE Gospel".

Gal 3:7-8 "The Gospel was preached to Abraham".

John 8 "Abraham rejoiced to see My day and was glad".

The NT gives us the "hint" that the OT is not an "exhaustive account of every word spoken for the first 4,000 years of Earth's history" and I think we all agree with this point.

in Christ,

Bob

 

True - as every lost person can attest who has become saved and can testify to a time in the past when he/she embraced unbelief against the Gospel.

But the "Atoning Sacrifice" full and complete for "our sins and NOT for our sins ONLY but for the sins of the WHOLE WORLD" 1John2:2 is the Lev 16:15 portion of the full Day of Atonement model. The ongoing Heb 8 and 9 work of high Priest (Christ our High Priest) is going on in heaven according to Hebrews - that portion of atonement (that is beyond the Lev 16:15 sacrifice full and complete) goes on today.

The 1John 2 statement about the "Atoning Sacrifice" full and complete for "our sins and NOT for our sins ONLY but for the sins of the WHOLE WORLD" is not "just now being written'.

I think we all agree with that point.

in Christ,

Bob

 

In John 3 and John 16 the power of the Holy Spirit to "convict the World of sin and righteousness and judgment" and to draw one to Christ is explained as a pre-cross reality in John 3 speaking to Nicodemus.

In the free will model - the decision for Christ is based out of external conviction and drawing not "internal programming".

In the free will model - the sinner not only has the option to choose the Gospel or not - they also have the free will choice to reject the work of the Holy Spirit - which is the only mechanism open to them for becoming saved.

Without the Holy Spirit - in rejection of the work of the Holy Spirit - they cannot of themselves become converted, saved, repent etc. Hence that choice is "fatal".

Therefore in Matt 12 Christ does not say "now if only I could remember not to program some of you to reject the Holy Spirit".

Nor does He say "Hey I have pre-programed some of you to reject the Holy Spirit. Don't worry about it since there is nothing you can do it about it. It just means you are doomed".

I think we all agree that the text is worded in a much more Arminian "appeal to you the person not to take some wrong course of action" than an appeal to God to remember not to pre-program you in some unfortunate fashion.

in Christ,

Bob

 

Icon, you know what this sounds like you're saying?

I know you gospel means folks are convinced Christ's blood does not atone for unbelief, but lollygagging and not studying also? Give me a break.

 

That is absolutely false! Leviticus 16:16 forward has already been accomplished as the appearance of the High Priest before the people was fulfilled by the resurrection of Jesus Christ in the changed robes of a glorified body.

The Lord is "SEATED" now in heaven demanding the work of atonement is finished (Heb. 10:8-10). What He is now doing in heaven is applying the FINISHED work to the elect as they are born into the world and He is usher in all things which will be finalized in His second coming.

 

Hebrews points to Christ as our High priest in heaven in both Heb 8 and 9 and He does his ministry - in heaven - seated at the right hand of the Father.

Heb 8
The New Priestly Service

8 Now this is the main point of the things we are saying: We have such a High Priest, who is seated at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens, 2 a Minister of the sanctuary and of the true tabernacle which the Lord erected, and not man.
3 For every high priest is appointed to offer both gifts and sacrifices. Therefore it is necessary that this One also have something to offer. 4 For if He were on earth, He would not be a priest, since there are priests who offer the gifts according to the law; 5 who serve the copy and shadow of the heavenly things, as Moses was divinely instructed when he was about to make the tabernacle. For He said, “See that you make all things according to the pattern shown you on the mountain.” 6 But now He has obtained a more excellent ministry, inasmuch as He is also Mediator of a better covenant, which was established on better promises.


Heb 4
14 Seeing then that we have a great High Priest, that is passed into the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold fast our profession.
15 For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin.
16 Let us therefore come boldly unto the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy, and find grace to help in time of need.

"We HAVE a High Priest" who "IS a Minister" - not "We HAD a High Priest".


Heb 9
arnal ordinances, imposed on them until the time of reformation. 11 But Christ being come an high priest of good things to come, by a greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this building;
12 Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us.
13 For if the blood of bulls and of goats, and the ashes of an heifer sprinkling the unclean, sanctifieth to the purifying of the flesh:
14 How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?
15 And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance.

24 For Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands, which are the figures of the true; but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us:

 

Credit where credit is due to Iconoclasts posts.

The Arminian position is at risk of the charge of universalism IF the Arminian is willing to ignore the Bible details on the doctrine of Lev 16 "Day of Atonement" and how it is fulfilled in Heb 8-10.

If Arminians choose to reject the Bible teaching about Christ as our High Priest in Heaven seated at the right hand of the Father now to appear in the presence of God for us: - as fulfilling the High Priest's role in Lev 16 on the Day of Atonement - after the Atoning Sacrifice (sin offering) is full and complete (Lev 16:15) then that Arminian is open to the charge of universalism.

Calvinist love to come to this point because it is in their favor IF they can get the Arminian to reject the Bible details regarding the doctrine of Atonement and the fact that it must include BOTH the sin offering slain - AND the work of the High Priest that follows.

in Christ,

Bob

 

In the work performed in Leviticus 16 the High Preist was NEVER SEATED until all that work was FINISHED - period! So your doctrine of investigative judgement is false doctrine.

 

Ahhhh...... have you studied Rutherford at all Rob?

 

Oh, have you studied Luther?

(IOW, if you want to go that route start a new thread)

 

Yea as a matter of fact I have.:smilewinkgrin:

And if you did read anything about Rutherford you will know that he is extremely brilliant and very Calvinist....he put his life on the line many times and he was the head of the Presbyterian church in Scotland at the time of King Chuckles the 2nd...whom he told was not the sovereign ruler...only God is. Bottom line these limies were going to hang him but he died 1st.

 

You don't like answering direct questions. Please read my post #23 and reply without being evasive. One might get the impression that you are avoiding things.

How you could determine that I am a legalist by my post is mysterious. I tried to keep it biblical.

 

Agreed. This is part and parcel of one who is under under exclusivist training.

See above.

I see this as well. There is nothing legalistic in your answer.