Featured The True Gospel of Christ's Saving Death

We disagree. I respect your opinion but you have to admit that a horde of strong, famous Calvinists disagree with you on that. Part of the finished work of Christ includes the proclamation that Jesus saves and pardons and if you hear the message you are included in that. This does not infringe upon God's sovereignty.

 

How did you before you believed, come to know from the word of God Christ paid for your sins?

 

Ok. But how does it answer my question I pose?

There are two choices. Wrongly presume one's self to be God's sheep, Matthew 7:21-23 where it is impossible to have done God's will. Or failing to believe the general redemption and so not believe, so then calling God a liar, 1 John 5:9-10.

 

How did you come to believe Christ paid for your sins, if no Scripture teaches that He did, aka the notion of the general redemption, you seem to be calling a false gospel?

 

No. On whether there is a bonified "offer" of the gospel. Or whether you are "invited" as well as commanded to come to Christ.

I guess. When other Calvinists get frustrated with you because of some of your statements. But your belief system is extreme Calvinism. Wasn't it you who posted the article a while back on a defense of hyper-Calvinism?

 

John Gill is not correct here. Jude 1:4 identifies the Lord Jesus Christ as the only Sovereign God. So if Christ is not that Sovereign who bought tem in 2 Peter 2:1, who is he?

 

You did not answer my question. You really do not know?

 

It answers your question if you are really interested in trying to understand what someone else's belief system is. It may not be the answer you want.

That's false logic. Wrongly presuming to be one of the sheep has nothing to do with your theology of a general vs a particular atonement.

 

1 John 5:9-13 teaches a general redemption, ". . . the testimony that God has testified concerning His Son. . . ."

 

How does one know Christ paid for one's sins in order to believe He did? It is either impossible or the general redemption is some how presumed or believed from Scripture. Like Romans 5:8.

 

Either the word of God is understood to teach Christ paid for one's sins or one has no reason to believe in Christ.

 

I don't expect to change your opinion on this but for what it's worth I think it just comes down to a view of sovereignty which does not violate a person's free will. The Westminster Confession of Faith takes that approach so it's not my own invention. At the same time, when the gospel is heard some believe and some don't but they were all told that if they come to Christ He would save them. That is an offer in my view. Where I differ from Silverhair and some of the other non-Calvinists on here is that I believe that all those in the group who do come to Christ - did so because the Holy Spirit had drew them and convicted them and yes - maybe even regenerated them before they chose to believe. I see real decisions occurring but I do not see in the Bible anything that shows a puzzlement on God's side of wondering what people's choice will be or of Him having to hope that they will decide for Christ. But the work of the Spirit is on the person's will and when made willing they actually do come on their own. If that violates a person's concept of their own autonomy I can't help it. There are plenty of areas in our own physical lives where we believe things that we did not choose to believe in a totally autonomous way. I bet for instance that Martin likes England better than the USA and I believe he freely does that. But in a sense he was not free to do that - that's his country and his free will in that was totally influenced by things beyond his control. It's no big deal to me that we don't have autonomous free will but the fact is we still are exercising choices. Thus there is an "offer".