The condemned already !

[savedbymercy]

When we read Jn 3:18

18 He 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.

We read of them being condemned already, and for that to be True, such ones Christ could not have died for, because God in Justice cannot and will not condemned anyone, any sinner for whom Christ died, simply because Christ has already been condemned for them, having had their sins and condemnation charged to Him. Where Rom 5:18 states that condemnation came upon all by one Adam Rom 5:18

18 Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life.

Well, that Judgment unto condemnation came upon Christ instead of them, because He was their Surety !

So now that Justice for them has been served, God would be unjust to have anyone Christ died for under the sentence of condemnation at anytime, that would be equivalent to our double jeopardy laws !

 

[savedbymercy]

The condemned already !2

Now Christ's Death for those He died for, was condemned for, it made them dead to the Law, which Paul teaches here Rom 7:4

4 Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ; that ye should be married to another, even to him who is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto God.

Yes, Believers were made dead to the Law by the Body of Christ, or to say by His Death, because as Peter wrote, He bare our sins IN HIS BODY 1 Pet 2:24

24 Who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree, that we, being dead to sins, should live unto righteousness: by whose stripes ye were healed.

That made believers dead to the Law. Now being dead to the Law means being dead to any condemnation by the Law, its curse and sin, because sin is Transgression of the Law 1 Jn 3:4

Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.

However all for whom Christ died is free from any condemnation, curse and sin charged by the Body of Christ, and so those already condemned in Jn 3:18, are ones simply for whom Christ did not die, so they believe not, in fact unbelief is the consequence of being already condemned !

 

[DHK]

Joh 3:17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.
--It is odd that you focus on verse 18 but leave out verse 17.
He didn't come to condemn the world, but rather that the world through him might be saved.
God's will is that the world might be saved.
Which world SBM?
The entire world of all ages?
The entire world of the first century?
The elect of the first century?

Which world? How do you know? More importantly, how can you know for sure that you are part and parcel of that world?

 

[savedbymercy]

Joh 3:17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.
--It is odd that you focus on verse 18 but leave out verse 17.
He didn't come to condemn the world, but rather that the world through him might be saved.
God's will is that the world might be saved.
Which world SBM?
The entire world of all ages?
The entire world of the first century?
The elect of the first century?

Which world? How do you know? More importantly, how can you know for sure that you are part and parcel of that world?

Did you understand the points made in the 1st Two posts ? You appear to be evading them, rehearse them with me to see if you understood them !

 

[PreachTony]

When we read Jn 3:18

18 He 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.

We read of them being condemned already, and for that to be True, such ones Christ could not have died for, because God in Justice cannot and will not condemned anyone, any sinner for whom Christ died, simply because Christ has already been condemned for them, having had their sins and condemnation charged to Him. Where Rom 5:18 states that condemnation came upon all by one Adam Rom 5:18

18 Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life.

Well, that Judgment unto condemnation came upon Christ instead of them, because He was their Surety !

So now that Justice for them has been served, God would be unjust to have anyone Christ died for under the sentence of condemnation at anytime, that would be equivalent to our double jeopardy laws !

But aren't we all born in unbelief? How many people believed on Jesus to the saving of their soul the moment they were physically born into this world? By your logic above (and frankly, by your mis-application of scripture) you are basically saying the entire world is condemned already.

The truth is, SBM, you play way too literally with these notions of permanency from the beginning. You've told me before that you pretty much hold to men being born saved and born damned, which is not something I see in scripture, but it does seem to fit your chosen theology.

Of course, whenever you hold to a theology that states that God, in His mercy, has sentenced untold multitudes to everlasting torment by NOT electing them, then I kinda think you are already on shaky ground.

 

[savedbymercy]

But aren't we all born in unbelief? How many people believed on Jesus to the saving of their soul the moment they were physically born into this world? By your logic above (and frankly, by your mis-application of scripture) you are basically saying the entire world is condemned already.

The truth is, SBM, you play way too literally with these notions of permanency from the beginning. You've told me before that you pretty much hold to men being born saved and born damned, which is not something I see in scripture, but it does seem to fit your chosen theology.

Of course, whenever you hold to a theology that states that God, in His mercy, has sentenced untold multitudes to everlasting torment by NOT electing them, then I kinda think you are already on shaky ground.

Did you understand the points I made in the first Two Posts ? Please review them with me so I can see if you understood them ! Not that you agree with them or not, but did you understand them ! That determines whether or not i can discuss them with you or not ! Thanks !

 

[PreachTony]

Did you understand the points I made in the first Two Posts ? Please review them with me so I can see if you understood them ! Not that you agree with them or not, but did you understand them ! That determines whether or not i can discuss them with you or not ! Thanks !

Well, it's obvious you don't believe that I understood your points. Even though I asked you a question about your premise, you refuse to answer and instead obfuscate by acting as though I don't understand you. You are so frustrating. :BangHead:

 

[savedbymercy]

Well, it's obvious you don't believe that I understood your points. Even though I asked you a question about your premise, you refuse to answer and instead obfuscate by acting as though I don't understand you. You are so frustrating. :BangHead:

Listen, are you posting in this thread in order to discuss what I posted in this Thread ? Simple yes or no ?

 

[JonC]

God would be unjust to have anyone Christ died for under the sentence of condemnation at anytime, that would be equivalent to our double jeopardy laws !

This is the part I'm having trouble reconciling with Scripture. I'm not sure that I understand you correctly, but what I understand your comments to mean is that those who are saved were at no time under condemnation. What I understand by condemnation is the subject of God's wrath, enemies of God.

 

[PreachTony]

Listen, are you posting in this thread in order to discuss what I posted in this Thread ? Simple yes or no ?

Yes! I asked you a question relating to the premise you posted. You wrote about those in unbelief being already condemned. I asked how that relates to the fact that no one is born with belief, as I've yet to see a newborn mind capable of comprehending belief. Instead of offering up clarification or expounding on your original premise, you asked me if I understood you and then basically refused to help me understand.

You strike me as one of those people who actually believes the phrase "if you have to ask then you'll never know."

 

[savedbymercy]

Yes! I asked you a question relating to the premise you posted. You wrote about those in unbelief being already condemned. I asked how that relates to the fact that no one is born with belief, as I've yet to see a newborn mind capable of comprehending belief. Instead of offering up clarification or expounding on your original premise, you asked me if I understood you and then basically refused to help me understand.

You strike me as one of those people who actually believes the phrase "if you have to ask then you'll never know."

Ok, get back with me when you are ready to discuss the points I made in this Thread ! In order to that, I must first know that you at least understand the points I made, if you evade that, you reap what you sow !

I understood you

Then prove it, explain back the points I made in the first Two posts, show me that you understood them , then I am open for questions based upon those points I made !

 

[PreachTony]

Ok, get back with me when you are ready to discuss the points I made in this Thread ! In order to that, I must first know that you at least understand the points I made, if you evade that, you reap what you sow !

Then prove it, explain back the points I made in the first Two posts, show me that you understood them , then I am open for questions based upon those points I made !

Please tell me you are not teaching a class somewhere? You make a statement, someone asks you a question about your statement, and you refuse to answer them until they prove they understood your statement. I pray you are not teaching children...

 

[savedbymercy]

Please tell me you are not teaching a class somewhere? You make a statement, someone asks you a question about your statement, and you refuse to answer them until they prove they understood your statement. I pray you are not teaching children...

So its quite clear you dont want to discuss the points I made, it appears to me you dont even understand them or you are scared to show that you do. When you can show me you understand them, get back with me so we can debate and or discuss them !

 

[kyredneck]

Please tell me you are not teaching a class somewhere? You make a statement, someone asks you a question about your statement, and you refuse to answer them until they prove they understood your statement. I pray you are not teaching children...

Really....let's hope not.

 

[convicted1]

Really....let's hope not.

Evasion!! Rabbit trail!! Get back with him after you read what he posted so that you can understand what he posted!!

To answer your post here...

:thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup:

 

[convicted1]

Please tell me you are not teaching a class somewhere? You make a statement, someone asks you a question about your statement, and you refuse to answer them until they prove they understood your statement. I pray you are not teaching children...

:thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup:

 

[DHK]

Did you understand the points made in the 1st Two posts ? You appear to be evading them, rehearse them with me to see if you understood them !

Don't be childish. I am not going to rehearse your a, b, c's for you. Learn them yourself. Now answer my response. You neglect context. You don't consider verse 17 when quoting verse 17. Here is the question again:

Joh 3:17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.
--It is odd that you focus on verse 18 but leave out verse 17.
He didn't come to condemn the world, but rather that the world through him might be saved.
God's will is that the world might be saved.
Which world SBM?
The entire world of all ages?
The entire world of the first century?
The elect of the first century?

Which world? How do you know? More importantly, how can you know for sure that you are part and parcel of that world?

 

[savedbymercy]

Don't be childish. I am not going to rehearse your a, b, c's for you. Learn them yourself. Now answer my response. You neglect context. You don't consider verse 17 when quoting verse 17. Here is the question again:

Then I don't know you understand my points made if you don't prove it! You are being evasive and starting rabbit trials away from my points!

 

[PreachTony]

Then I don't know you understand my points made if you don't prove it! You are being evasive and starting rabbit trials away from my points!

We're all asking you to explain statements you've made. It's easy to infer that we don't understand the points in the manner in which you are trying to make them...yet you won't discuss with us unless we can prove to you, using your own metric, that we understand your points. In other words, you don't want to discuss or debate with anyone...you just want people to blindly accept your premises and then congratulate you for your own brilliance.

 

[DHK]

Then I don't know you understand my points made if you don't prove it! You are being evasive and starting rabbit trials away from my points!

I understand your points. I don't want to go down your evasive rabbit trails. Deal with my response. This response of yours indicates to me your inability to answer my rebuttal to you. Perhaps it is your way of admitting defeat?