Featured The eternal purpose of Christ pt2

:applause::applause::applause::applause:

 

That is the favorite quote of the LGBT community, mon ami.

He was telling them that they had to forsake all and follow Him, even if it meant to leave their families behind. There was one who said Then a teacher of the law came to him and said, “Teacher, I will follow you wherever you go.” Jesus replied, “Foxes have dens and birds have nests, but the Son of Man has no place to lay his head.” Another disciple said to him, “Lord, first let me go and bury my father.” But Jesus told him, “Follow me, and let the dead bury their own dead.” He was calling Jews to leave all they knew behind, just like God did Abram. There were many who rejected Him as their Messiah, and I am sure those that chose to follow Christ, lost their whole family in the process. It would be like someone leaving the RCC. I am sure many had their family disown them. But God is a 'Me and only Me God."

Yes. God hates sin. God hates all workers of iniquity. But that is poetical language, to you. To me, it is the inspired words of God and ALL SCRIPTURE is All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness.[2 Tim. 3:16] Even the poetical language verses fit that bill, mon ami.

Not per the bible.

When it was too late.

Yes the demons believed and shuddered. They believed because they saw God, being in heaven with Him before they rebelled. That is not faith. Faith is believing in something that you can not prove, have not seen. I have not seen God, I can not prove God exists, yet, without a shadow of doubt, I know He exists. None of us can prove God exists. Too many will not believe anything they can not see. None of us can see God.

Then there IS more than one kind of faith. I thought you said 'faith is faith'? See what I mean. You will say something in one post and then flip ends on another.

Uhhhh, grace saves. Faith is the conduit with which it travels.

No disagreement here.

No, you mangle what Christ said. You 'copied and pasted' and then mangled.

If someone is not baptized in water before they die, they die lost? That is the literal interpretation, mon ami.

Yes, I believe every word in the bible, just not your mangling of them.

One's basis of one's salvation better be Christ. People have faith in themselves, in their parents, in their companion, in their abilities, &c. That is a carnal faith...those who believe in vain.[1 Cor. 15:2] That faith comes from 'self'. Saving faith comes from God.

Unless God wroughts a work in their hearts, they will remain in unbelief.

Yes your theology is.

Yes they are, but you mangle them.

Unless God first works in their hearts, they will never believe.

I am quite good here, thank you.

You have said God will not save someone against their will, yet God is not willing any should perish. That means man's will is stronger than God's. How can you not see the logical end of your theology, mon ami???

Yes.

Yes.

Yes.

God will save all who come to Him. Yes. But why do they come to Him?

And the literal interpretation is those who are not baptized die lost. The CoC love that verse and also Acts 2:38.

Yes. No disagreement here.

To be honest, I have not really studied Acts that much. I have been doing an intensive study on Romans. I need to study this book a lot more before I can truly engage you or anyone for that matter.

God is not out of control, go berserk, &c. But He did say vengeance was His.

vengeance: infliction of injury, harm, humiliation, or the like, on a person by another who has been harmed by that person; violent revenge; an act or opportunity of inflicting such trouble; the desire for revenge.


The word used for 'vengeance' from Rom. 12:19:

revenging, vengeance, punishment

That is the same greek word used in 2 Thess. 1:8, by the way.

 

Time out!! DHK, time out!!

We are both getting unseemly somewhat in our postings. Let us not go down that road. I will bow out before I do. I am having a hard time following what you are conveying.

You have said before that 'faith is faith' and then turned right around and said 'but not all faith will save'. How can I reconcile those two trains of thoughts mon ami?


You say God is love, and I agree with you. But you say God loves everybody and then turns around on the day of Judgment and gives the worst possible punishment that could ever be by casting them into the lake of fire forever.

If you had an unruly child, I am sure you would go to the ends of the earth and use every fund necessary to help them out, even give your life for them. But at the end of your rope, would you toss them into a fiery furnace? Absolutely not. Even though you did all you could do to save them, you would never get that disgusted with them. Yet, God will do that to many of His own creation. That is not any 'out of control' God, a berserk God, but a righteous and holy God who must punish sin. He either punishes sin in the sinner or the Sinbearer.

 

Adam Clarke:

Thomas Aquinas

 

Brother DHK,

All the world does not see their need for a savior, did the Pharisee who went to the temple and cited all his good works of what he believed he had done for God and thanked God that he was not like the publican see his need for a savior like the publican did?

 

Hmm...

Protestant had said :

God is holy.

God's holiness will not allow sin to go unpunished.

Yes, God is love.

He loves holiness and righteousness and justice.

This is why He will judge the reprobate in holiness, righteousness and justice when He casts them all into the Lake of Fire.
_________________________________________________________________

And you have the temerity to tell him that his post was unworthy of an answer.

Answer him point-by-point. I don't see how any Christian can possibly object to anything he said. How can you claim to be a missionary yet deny such fundamental propositions from the Word of God?

You owe an answer, or rather an apology for your non-answer.

 

No apology was needed since that is not the entirety of his post.
No need for you to be deceitful.

Of course God is holy; who ever said otherwise.

I never said he wouldn't.

It is a statement in the Bible.

No is holy, righteous, and just.[/quote]

This is a foolish statement to make. The word "reprobate" is not found in the Bible, but in the works of Calvin and perhaps Augustine.

As I asked SG:
What part of Jesus' words do you not understand?

Mar 16:16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.

At one point in your life you did not believe.
Did that make you part of the "reprobate"?
Had you continued in your unbelief would you then be part of the reprobate?

Salvation is by faith and faith alone.

 

So what is your point? Many see their need for a Savior and still reject him.
Did Christ die for them? Yes. He died for all. Or do you question his omnipotence, his ability to die for all? Did he not have enough blood to share?
It is a fairly weak God that you portray. What do you say to others if you witness?
Christ died for the elect, but I am not sure if your one of them. His blood may not cover you. He only had enough to cover the sins of a certain number of people (like the 144,000 of the J.W.'s), but just in case I will give you the plan of salvation anyway. You sound more like a J.W. than a believer in Christ.

 

So what do you want? A battle of commentaries? Do you think that will change my mind?

Wesley:

 

I have stated this consistently, many times, defining what faith is.
The little children came to Jesus. Jesus said you must be like them to enter the kingdom of God. He was referring to the simplicity of their faith--the nature of the faith.
--The little children were not saved. Yet they had faith. All men have faith.

The ten lepers came to Jesus. They had faith to be healed. But only one was saved. He returned and put his "saving faith" as you would call it, in Christ. Faith is faith. The others put their faith in Christ to heal (as he did), but then he returned and put his faith in Christ to heal spiritually or to save.

Faith always has an object. The object of my faith, in order to be saved, must be Christ.
The unsaved Roman Centurion had more faith than any one else in all of Israel. Why? He did not ask the Lord to come to his house to heal his daughter but had faith that he could heal her from afar. This took faith. But he was not saved. After his daughter was saved, while on his way home, the account says, "then he believed." That is when he put his faith in Christ.

Faith is faith. It is confidence or trust in another. Saving faith is when a person puts their confidence or trust in Christ alone for salvation. The rich young ruler put his faith in his riches rather than in Christ.

God said that he does not take pleasure in the wicked. He pled: "Why will ye die..."
He loved them though he knew the outcome. He knew they would stand in the Great White Throne Judgement, yet plead with them in loving kindness.
He loves all, and likewise pleads with all to come unto him. He will never reject anyone.
The reason anyone will go to hell is because of his justice, not because of "hatred," because he has no other option. They rejected his son. He does not love the action; gleefully throwing people in hell as you depict him. It is a somber perhaps even sorrowful occasion. He has no other option.

Christ went to "the fiery furnace on order to save mankind. He did all he could. His offer of justice was rejected. He went to the ends of the earth to save all mankind.

You have depicted him as out of control. You have depicted him as one that gives the "reprobate" as absolutely no chance to be saved even if presented the chance, the ability to be saved. You have gone against your own scenario. Your picture of God just throws them into Hell with no chance of ever being saved. That is terrible. That is not what the Bible teaches. Whosoever will may come.

 

Brother DHK,

I am sorry in your theology you present to others God has left salvation up to "chance"? Do you take odds on their souls for betting purposes as well? Does everyone get an equal "chance" or some more than others?

 

Did I say God has left everything up to chance? Can you quote those exact words? Or do you just take things out of context because I happen to use that word in a different context? Typical for Calvinists. Context means nothing.

 

Brother DHK,

You did not say God has left everything up to chance, however you clearly implied that salvation is a "chance" experience by complaining to Brother Sov Grace that in his theology God gives the reprobate "no chance to be saved even if presented the chance" and "throws them into Hell with no chance of ever being saved", don't such statements imply that the salvation you teach is a chance experience? What determines the odds, man or God? Are the odds increased if God gives the sinner more chances to hear the gospel? If so, how is that fair? Also, scripture teachers us all the players are equal as their natures are all inherited by their same father Adam, thus how come some players end up believing the gospel presentation while others do not? I would expect all to respond the same if they have equal ability. Do they have equal ability in their nature, yes or no?

 

Then simply change the word "chance" to "opportunity" and you will have a more accurate rendition of what I was trying to say. It seems you have a problem with words.

Don't have a clue what you are talking about. Like I said it seems you have a problem with words. There is no gambling involved here as you imply. God gives people the opportunity, even the responsibility, to be saved. Are you holding God hostage if man rejects His free offer? It seems now that you have depicted God both as a gambler and then a victim of man at the same time? It is not a very good picture of God that you paint.

All have inherited sin natures, yes? Are you married? How many children do you have? Do they all end up as successful as each other in life--equally successful, or are some more successful than others? Why would that be?
Do you know parents that have raised children: some submissive and obedient, and others for some inexplicable reason turned out to be rebellious? Why would one be obedient and the other rebellious?
If you have all the answers to life please tell. There are many parents that would like to know.

In the light of the above I consider your question to be foolish, as God has not created two individuals the same. Even the finger print of every person ever created has been different from one another. No two persons are alike. Thus the answer to their offer of salvation is dependent entirely upon their will. Will they decide for Christ or not. Not every one is created the same. You assume they are. Are there two of you?

 

A man's will is determined by their nature within them that influences their choices, but you have man's will determining if they receive a new nature when scripture clearly states becoming born again is determined by Gods will, "Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God." (John 1:13). One cannot will their physical birth into this world, likewise one cannot will their spiritual birth, rather in both instances the Father is responsible for both. What influences the will to choose as it does, circumstances in a person's life, God, their spiritual nature, or something else, if something else what?

 

Thanks for the clarification. I don't have the problem with words brother, you are the one who incorrectly used the word "chance". From the article titled "Difference Between Opportunity and Chance" from here http://www.differencebetween.com/difference-between-opportunity-and-vs-chance/

"Chance and opportunity are two words that are used commonly in our daily lives. Though having nearly same meanings, they are used in different contexts and have different usages. Many people tend to use these words interchangeably which is a wrong practice. This article will attempt to highlight the subtle differences between opportunity and chance."

 

Is it convenient to forget about verses 11 and 12

Joh 1:11 He came unto his own, and his own received him not.
--Israel rejected him without the Spirit.
Joh 1:12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:
--Man does not need the Spirit to force him to be saved. In this you are wrong.
Verse 13 simply shows the process in which a person is saved. It does not mean that a person must have his heart opened by the Spirit in order to be saved. You are wrong here.

One is born physically and one must be born spiritually. You take the analogy too far.
What you don't get is "the how."

What did Jesus mean when he said:
Joh 3:5 Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.
--There are only two elements mentioned here, both of which are necessary to the new birth or salvation.
One must be born of the Spirit. We all agree on that.
But what does it mean to be born of "water"? Many theories have been offered. Obviously we reject the RCC idea of baptismal regeneration.
Instead of going through the various theories, I will simply tell you what I believe and why.

"Water" is symbolic of the "Word."
Nicodemus was probably standing in sight of the Temple where he could view the many ceremonial cleansings of the Jews.
The most common purpose of water is for cleansing.
Jesus said in John 15:3:
Joh 15:3 Now ye are clean through the word which I have spoken unto you.
--Water cleanses; the Word cleanses.

Nicodemus knew this from the OT.
Psa 119:9 Wherewithal shall a young man cleanse his way? by taking heed thereto according to thy word.
--It is the Word that cleanses our way. Nicodemus knew that.

Jas 1:18 Of his own will begat he us with the word of truth, that we should be a kind of firstfruits of his creatures.
--Here James uses the word "begat" or "born". We are "born" of the Word.
The Word of God is imperative in the New Birth.

And even more clearly in 1Pet.1:23,
1Pe 1:23 Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever.
--It is abundantly clear that one is born again by the Word of God.
Water cleanses. The Word cleanses. Water is symbolic of the Word.
There are two and only two elements necessary for the new birth: (water and the Spirit) or The Word and The Spirit.

One is born again by the Spirit of God.
One is born again by the Word of God.
Both are necessary. If the Word of God is not preached the person cannot be born again. There must be belief in that Word (and conviction by the Holy Spirit) in order for the person to be born again).
The ministry of the Holy Spirit is clearly spelled out in John 16:8-11.

 

Brother DHK,

As usual I have enjoyed our debate and as usual we will have to agree to disagree! I am going to be off the board at least until Monday, but would be interested in your reply to the question I posed you before, but did not get a reply. I will bow out of this thread at least until Monday and give you the final word for the weekend!

 

I answered that question in much detail using families and children as illustrations. You never answered that part of the post.
Let me ask again:
Two children raised in an identical atmosphere: same parents, same environment, etc.
Why does one become a carpenter and the other a preacher?

 

Brother,

No two siblings could be raised in truly "identical atmospheres" as every sibling has different circumstances to some degree. For example we all know different people and even if both siblings knew only the same people it is a matter of fact nobody treats everybody identical. We all have different life adversities (one siblings health isn't going to be identical to the other's. They will have different cholesterol readings, blood pressure readings, etc.), we all have different triumphs, are taught different things. Also, no parents on earth say the same exact things at the same identical times to each child in the child's life. Further, different things happen to different people at different points in times of their lives, thus atmospheres are always different for each person, thus your answer to my question by giving me the example of the siblings is not a true like kind analogy. However, unlike the atmosphere of siblings that is always different, you would have to agree that both siblings sin natures are the same, otherwise you would have to conclude that some people inherit natures that are less depraved than others and we know this isn't Biblical. Identical causes on identical things cause identical reactions, the reason one believes the gospel and the other doesn't is simple, one is already born again, the other is not! If you contend this is not the case, please provide an explanation of what causes one's will to be believe the gospel and another person's will not to? Paul asked this question indirectly when he said, "For who maketh thee to differ from another? " (1 Corinthians 4:7) The answer he was looking for is obvious-God.