Featured The eternal purpose of Christ pt2

Psa 7:10 My shield is with God, who saves the upright in heart.
Psa 7:11 God is a righteous judge, and a God who feels indignation every day.
Psa 7:12 If a man does not repent, God will whet his sword; he has bent and readied his bow;
Psa 7:13 he has prepared for him his deadly weapons, making his arrows fiery shafts.
Psa 7:14 Behold, the wicked man conceives evil and is pregnant with mischief and gives birth to lies.
Psa 7:15 He makes a pit, digging it out, and falls into the hole that he has made.
Psa 7:16 His mischief returns upon his own head, and on his own skull his violence descends.
Psa 7:17 I will give to the LORD the thanks due to his righteousness, and I will sing praise to the name of the LORD, the Most High.

His indignation is not against the person, but rather against the evil. Sometimes, in the eyes of the OT prophet, the two were hard to separate. But revelation is progressive. In the NT Christ clearly differentiated between the two.
Love your enemies. Do good to them that hate you.
To use OT theology to bolster NT teaching is wrong. Christ clearly taught against this belief. God is angry with the wickedness of the sinner, not the sinner himself, who he continues to woo and plead to come to Himself. His love knows no bounds.
The Calvinist ties up the love of Christ; puts limits on it; says that it is finite, etc. This is an unbiblical and antibiblical theology. The finite man cannot comprehend the infinite love of the Lord Jesus Christ and that love that he bestowed on ALL mankind.

 

Brother PreachTony,

Your conclusion is false that it would be because of God that one goes to eternal flames if God does not cause them to believe. If two people fall in the water on their own and are drowning, then someone comes and saves one of the two, is he the cause of the other man drowning? Perhaps more appropriately is this analogy, if a judge pardons one criminal, but doesn't pardon another is the judge responsible for the other person going to jail for being a criminal? Of course not! People go to hell because of sin which per scripture is transgression of the law (unbelief only being one of many) "Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God". God does not create sin in anybody, hence he is not the cause of anybody going to eternal flames.

 

Rom 3:19 Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God.
Rom 3:20 Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin.
Rom 3:21 But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets;
Rom 3:22 Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference:
--Context is important.

 

God hates the workers of Iniquity, He detest them, they are unloved by Him Ps 5:5 !

 

Invalid comments! Those Christ died for are reconciled to God by His Death while they are enemies in a unrepentant state Rom:10 !

 

God does not call all human being to repentance, only his elect "...for I am not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance." (Matthew 9:13). Now is Christ declaring in this verse the Pharisees he spoke this to are righteous? No, but rather The "righteous" in that verse are those who are unregenerate and thus are self-righteous (such as the Pharisees) in their own eyes. He is calling the repentant sinners such as the publican at the temple. This is seen here, "11 The Pharisee stood and prayed thus with himself, God, I thank thee, that I am not as other men are, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even as this publican.
2 I fast twice in the week, I give tithes of all that I possess.13 And the publican, standing afar off, would not lift up so much as his eyes unto heaven, but smote upon his breast, saying, God be merciful to me a sinner.14 I tell you, this man went down to his house justified rather than the other: for every one that exalteth himself shall be abased; and he that humbleth himself shall be exalted." ( Luke 18:11-14)

The Bible does not use one single time such words as "offer", "accept", "invite into your heart" or "altar call" in relation to the gospel. These are terms man made up. As a matter of fact, when the Bible does use the word "accepted" it is referring to how Jesus makes His children accepted, not them "accepting" him. " "To the praise of the glory of his grace, wherein he hath made us accepted in the beloved" (Ephesians 1:6)

 

Brother DHK,

I do not see how me not quoting verse 22 in the above chapter annuls my point that I was trying to make that sin (or in other words transgression of the law) makes one guilty before God.

 

:thumbsup::wavey:

 

[=DHK
(To use OT theology to bolster NT teaching is wrong. Christ clearly taught against this belief. God is angry with the wickedness of the sinner, not the sinner himself, who he continues to woo and plead to come to Himself. His love knows no bounds.
The Calvinist ties up the love of Christ; puts limits on it; says that it is finite, etc. This is an unbiblical and antibiblical theology. The finite man cannot comprehend the infinite love of the Lord Jesus Christ and that love that he bestowed on ALL mankind.[/QUOTE])


This is why most of us have fled from the error of dispensationalism.:wavey::wavey:

It makes a person unable to understand their bible

 

It does not but he had to post something.:laugh::thumbsup::laugh:

 

Isn't it a wonderful truth.
God made all the world guilty before him, that all the world might see their guiltiness. In so doing all the world would see their need for a Savior. Jesus died for all the world. His will is that all the world would be saved. The only reason that all the world is not saved is because much of the world refuses the Savior's offer of salvation, for salvation is of faith.

 

)

Tell me how this is related to dispensationalism?
Why not throw all the OT covenants and God's NT covenant out the window. You don't seem to believe in them any way.

 

)

No it is once again wrong...denying the effects of the fall..it is man centered and as such is to be rejected.:thumbsup:

 

Tell the truth now. Don't lie.
Were you or were you not, at one time in your life, "a worker of iniquity?"
Yes or no. Just answer the question.

 

I didn't deny the Fall or the effects thereof. What makes you think that?

 

)

Look at your last twenty posts here......you suggest the scripture of the ot is not for us..

You suggest the OT. God is somehow different than the NT. GOD.

You suggest the God given scripture in the OT prophets taught differently than Jesus and Tha apostles in the NT....

THE THREAD is not really about that....but it is sad to see how much you do this and are not concerned about how you fragment the message.

Then off course you accuse me and others of error not knowing the scriptures and yet it looks like everyone not going by the NAME DHK. ....does not agree at all.

 

I am speaking about context. I can get plenty of Calvinist theologians or commentaries to agree with me. This has nothing to do with dispensationalism at all.
It has to do with poetry, figures of speech, principles of hermeneutics, etc.

Look, Icon, The RCC believes that when Jesus said "eat my flesh and drink my blood," and that refers to the actual body and blood of Christ. But they don't believe that because they are dispensationalists, do they?
That is the logic you are applying here. It is ludicrous!

 

Your view and others who examine scripture through the wrong lens starts with man not God.

Now of course you would never post that as I just did...because when it is posted that way you get an immediate disgust for that thought.....and rightly so....

But if you examine what you post about man and his ability....man able to do anything and everything by himself.....that is what I mean by a denial of the lasting effects of the fall...

You know this is so.....you deny the word nekrous. .....corpse......you are quick to say death is separation. ....which is also true....that is not a total falsehood....death has to do with separation. .......but the word corpse means unresponsive in the spiritual realm as a corpse is in the physical realm....

I harp on this over and over. ....because a wrong view here is fatal theologically. ...you cannot recover from that error.

A correct view opens the door to regeneration, grace, the need of Covenant redemption.....

When believers study into these truths....there is no return to t h e theology you and others offer.

You bemoan that Calvinism can divide a church.....sure.....but truth divides from error.

 

While not everything is directly related to dispensational error as you show here....the underlying base of dispensationalism has to show through in any extended conversation.

DHK.....you do it so much it seems natural to you. For us who did the same thing and moved on from that we spot it like an undercover detective spots a drug deal going down:wavey:

 

You are grasping at straws; blowing in the wind. You have nothing to stand on.
Every point I have given, I have given a reason for my belief, and dispensationalism (in this thread) has not been one of them. So you are just making up excuses for your own inability to answer an intelligent post, as well as throwing around baseless accusations.
I have given my reasons even in my own posts: context, context, context.
As well as: poetry, figures of speech, etc. If you want to call me a liar, go ahead and do so, but I have not attributed anything to dispensationalism. You make things up because you are unable to refute a post. Incredible!!