Omnibenevolent God Creating Hell?

No it was. It ceased to be when the Holy Spirit arrived. We have no need for illustrations when we have the reality. Anyway maybe we can discuss it some other time.
</font>[/QUOTE]Well, you must be Reformed, I guess. Yeah - maybe some other time. This issue comes up from time to time on the BB though I don't usually get in on it. I conserve my time for issues I think are more of a priority for me.

Without going into the atonement then I will rephrase what I said and say it like this: God swore an oath that no sacrifice would ever be given for Eli's house. Since the house of Eli never had a sacrifice made for them then Jesus did not die for them. That is still limited atonement.
</font>[/QUOTE]Don't have time to post all the passages about Jesus' atonement for all men. I don't think "atonement" means the forgiveness of all sins here, maybe just the sins of Eli's sons. The atonement in the OT had to be made over and over; it was not final. But the atonement of Jesus was "once for all men." The atonement is made for all, but is only applied to those who believe. Maybe you call that Limited Atonement, but I don't.

If it is God's will that all men are saved then all we need to do is pray that all men are saved and we have everyman saved because this is the confidence we have in approaching God: that if we ask anything according to his will, he hears us. 15 And if we know that he hears us--whatever we ask--we know that we have what we asked of him. 1 John 5:14.

Your argument fails doesn't it unless you are a universalist? If we pray in God's will we receive what we ask for. Find His will and you can have everything. He will give you more love and more wisdom and more lavish than we can imagine if we ask for them because that is His will for those He loves. </font>[/QUOTE]I am not a universalist at all. I am not even an inclusivist -- in fact, I've argued against inclusivism on the BB a few times. God's will is for all men to be saved but he does not force that on those who don't want it. I do believe that God draws men to Christ but I also believe that we are not forced. It's one of those paradoxes or mysteries, like the Trinity.

 

johnp says:

We went over this before, you used the word “Despot” which word I did not use and by inserting it into the question you misrepresented me. I did not and I would never use this title for Jesus.
If you are comfortable with it, fine. I’m not.

Re:universalism

If He prayed for one or some of this world then it shows that He can pray for anyone in or of this world.

He prayed for forgiveness, but it doesn't matter the point is that in this instance (as opposed to John 17 which prayer is limited to His apostles and disciples) He prayed a prayer limited to those of this world who crucified Him in ignorance.

Jesus is the light but light about Jesus can and is progressive in the Scripture and/or limited in scope for humanity down through the ages.

Define it anyway you want, I gave you my definition ”all” means the world of “all” sinful men in the context of propitiation/appeasement vs justification/reconciliation:

John 1:29 The next day John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world.

1 John 2:2 And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world

1 John 5:19 And we know that we are of God, and the whole world lieth in wickedness.

1 John teaches that He is the propitiation for the whole world which lies in wickedness (Lit. The wicked one) as well as ours. "propitiation" is appeasement, "justification" is reconciliation.

I just showed you above and showed you before from 1 john that “propitiation” extends to the whole world including those lying in the “wicked one”. Justification is limited to those who believe in Him.


HankD

 

A "Minor" point, "Forgiveness" does not equal "Remission" (taken away) of sin, without shed blood, there is no remission.

OT saints made "Sacrifices" and their sins were "Forgiven", but not "Taken away" until Jesus fulfilled the requirements of the law, "Death for sin".

Le 19:22 And the priest shall make an atonement for him with the ram of the trespass offering before the LORD for his sin which he hath done: and the sin which he hath done shall be forgiven him.

Heb 10:4 For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins.

Joh 1:29 The next day John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world.

"Flesh" sinned and only "Flesh" can pay the "wages of sin", hence, the "WORD" (God) made "flesh".

forgiveness is best interpret as "payment postponed", until later date, since the wages of all sin must be "Paid", God "NEVER" forgives sin in the context of "Remission", the "Law" won't allow it, only Death (shed blood) can remit sin.

Don't interpret Forgiveness as Remission, they are different.

"propitiation" is easier to understand if the word "Substitude" is used, the law required "our death" for our sins, but Jesus's death was a "substitude" for our death, fulfilling the law.

 

This is interesting Me4Him. There is a lot here that needs to be sorted.

I said to HankD, Would you like to tell me what He actually prayed for? Was it forgiveness for the act that He instigated (the cross) or was it to everlasting life? I know one of the guards was moved to witness.

So the sacrifice of atonement in Leviticus 16 cleaned the nation of Isreal for the preceding year. The OT sacrifices were made in order for God to be reconciled to His chosen nation. It was not a remission of future sins but the sins committed that year were put aside, forgiven and forgotten. This made no one righteous but ceremonially clean for God to dwell with His people.

If the prayer for forgiveness was for the guards we have little warrant to think they received the right to become Children of God but just remission from the consequences of touching Christ.

Remission means forgiveness but there are forgivenesses that do not remit all a persons sins but just for the sin the sacrifice is intended for. The atonement was a cover all sacrifice for the whole of Israel's sins except those barred.

This is wrong. God is not under the law. I can cite many scriptures where He not only does not do those things commanded of us but actually does those things He tells us not to. God is not bound by law.

It is also wrong to say that all sins must have a payment for them.
EZE 18:21 "But if a wicked man turns away from all the sins he has committed and keeps all my decrees and does what is just and right, he will surely live; he will not die. 22 None of the offenses he has committed will be remembered against him. Because of the righteous things he has done, he will live.


What do you think?

john.

 

The sacrifices of the old covenant were a shadow of things to come, they were not the reality.

Hebrews 10:4 For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins.

Hebrews 10:11 And every priest standeth daily ministering and offering oftentimes the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins:

We all know that there is only one whose blood can take away sin.

John 1:29 The next day John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world.

Anyway I have been repeating myself in the last few posts and will probably leave off this debat, at least under the terms of engagement when I joined in.

Thank you johnp for the food for thought in this debate. Your observation of Eli and his household is an excellent point for "limited atonement (I prefer "limited justification").

The one answer which is the real rebuttal to classic Limited Atonement is that Limited Atonement is a general "decree" while Eli and his house hold are specific or particular to a given family in a specific time and place.

Similarly in the other direction is:

Acts 16
30 And brought them out, and said, Sirs, what must I do to be saved?
31 And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house.

Made in particular or specifically to the jailer and his household but folks like to quote this as a general doctrine of salvation which IMO it is not because lots of people are saved by believing in Jesus and yet their households are/were not.

If one leaves off the "and thy house" then its a good general model and should/could be quoted to anyone.

Bye for now.

HankD

 

Thank you for providing this link. I have discussed and believed one of the arguments presented here for Theological Fatalism for quite some time but had never seen a formal presentation of it.

I accept the Boethian solution which argues that God is outside time and therefore able to see all of history at the same "time." It never made sence to me that God should be constrained by time since He is not constrained by anything else. I believe that time was created along with everything else and that it will go away after the Second Coming.

 

I said to HankD, Would you like to tell me what He actually prayed for? Was it forgiveness for the act that He instigated (the cross) or was it to everlasting life? I know one of the guards was moved to witness.

So the sacrifice of atonement in Leviticus 16 cleaned the nation of Isreal for the preceding year. The OT sacrifices were made in order for God to be reconciled to His chosen nation. It was not a remission of future sins but the sins committed that year were put aside, forgiven and forgotten. This made no one righteous but ceremonially clean for God to dwell with His people.

If the prayer for forgiveness was for the guards we have little warrant to think they received the right to become Children of God but just remission from the consequences of touching Christ.

Remission means forgiveness but there are forgivenesses that do not remit all a persons sins but just for the sin the sacrifice is intended for. The atonement was a cover all sacrifice for the whole of Israel's sins except those barred.

This is wrong. God is not under the law. I can cite many scriptures where He not only does not do those things commanded of us but actually does those things He tells us not to. God is not bound by law.

It is also wrong to say that all sins must have a payment for them.
EZE 18:21 "But if a wicked man turns away from all the sins he has committed and keeps all my decrees and does what is just and right, he will surely live; he will not die. 22 None of the offenses he has committed will be remembered against him. Because of the righteous things he has done, he will live.


What do you think?

john. </font>[/QUOTE]I "think" you don't understand God/law/sin very well

The "First law" given to man was, "Adam, if you eat, you die". (The wages of sin is death)

"EVERY" jot/title from Adam that "transgresses the law" is a sin that only the "DEATH" of a "PERSON" can pay, no sheep, lambs, rams, bulls, no animals, PERIOD.

"MAN" (flesh of man) sinned, and only "MAN" (flesh of man) can pay the wages of sin.


1. The law requires the "death" of a person to pay for sin, (why Jesus came)
2. "NO JOT/TITLE" of the law will go "UN-Fulfilled, (every sin paid),
3. NO MAN comes to the father except by/through Jesus,


If animals sacrifices "took away" sin, then Jesus coming/dying was for nothing.

Learn one little rules about God/Law/sin, and your doctrine will be right.

GOD NEVER FORGIVES SIN

Every "jot/tittle" that transgresses the law, (evil thoughts) will be paid by the "DEATH" of a "PERSON". (Jesus or person)

Not one sin will go unpaid, the "Books" will be "balanced" to the very "last mite". (penny)

Lu 12:59 I tell thee, thou shalt not depart thence, till thou hast paid the very last mite.

This is why "Once saved, always saved" is true, Jesus isn't dying for any more sins.

 

Many know Jesus came, but "WHY" is still a "mystery" to some.

If you can't explain the "WHY" behind the events in scripture, then the scriptures are still a "mystery" to you.

Let's see if any can give an answer to your question, explain the "WHY" in context of Calvin doctrine.

 

Hello StraightAndNarrow.

I didn't know it had a name. Boethius (c480-524) right?
I've not had an argument with anyone using this argument before who ever told me it comes from way back. I thought it came from closer by like the Twilight Zone.

Great. Just as soon as we get enough time to get something done we run out of it?
Shall I start old chap or would you like to get your retaliation in first? Benjamin did say, Thanks to all others and you are all welcome to take this discussion where ever it leads. I shall read what the man said I think. To my mind time is as essential for all things to happen in as 3d space.

Why should part of His being be a constraint?

john.

 

Hello HankD.

No it supports it for not only does the man save himself but because of that he saves his children who are part of the elect as I was and my children were saved because I was elect. Jesus dying for individuals can never be a general decree. All you do is argue with God because it was Him who said no sacrifice would ever be given for Eli's household and that must include any general sacrifice must it not or Eli's family have their sacrifice? General or not it doesn't matter because no sacrifice is what God says.

Encouraging people not to preach God's word is a very serious matter. The scriptures says, "And thy house."

No of course it can't. A life for a life. It says nothing about the other way to Heaven does it?
EZE 18:21 "But if a wicked man turns away from all the sins he has committed and keeps all my decrees and does what is just and right, he will surely live; he will not die. 22 None of the offenses he has committed will be remembered against him. Because of the righteous things he has done, he will live.

Because of the righteous things he has done, he will live. His sins will be forgotten by God because he does right. No blood is necessary, this is also part of the law.
It doesn't matter if it is not possible the promise is there and if that is so then no blood is necessary to have our past guilt removed. And if that don't wind someone up I will be surprised. But that's what the verse says. Because of the righteous things he has done, he will live. Not because of any sacrifice but obedience.
I know you said 'bye for now' but I thought this needed to be covered.

john.

 

He came to strut His stuff and make His glory known why do you think He came Me4Him?

john.

 

It's cool Benjamin. Thanks for the argument.

Alawys.

They did not get out of hand, did you ever visit the C/A forum?
I never agree to allowing false doctrine without contention but I don't want you burnt. Freedom of speech came through the Calvinists.

God bless. john.

 

Hello Me4Him.

I think you might be right but you know of them less.

Just shows that fruit is not always good for you I think.

No it's God that sets the tarrif not you. If He says no sacrifice is needed just do as you're told then that's the tarrif for that. You fail to answer the passage below:
EZE 18:21 "But if a wicked man turns away from all the sins he has committed and keeps all my decrees and does what is just and right, he will surely live; he will not die. 22 None of the offenses he has committed will be remembered against him. Because of the righteous things he has done, he will live.

Flesh of man? No way it was man? Flesh of man can pay the wages? Wages are received not paid out unless you are the Boss.

Does one suck or blow the egg? Answer the scripture above don't ignore it.

Answer the scripture above don't ignore it.

I'm sure you are correct but just a technicality, those in Hell will be paying their debt off forever so their instalments will never be finished.


john.

 

OTHER WAY TO HEAVEN????

Do you know that you're teaching "WORKS" for "salvation"???

And "contradicted" Jesus when he said:

Joh 14:6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: "NO MAN" cometh unto the Father, but by me.

Tit 3:5 Not by works of righteousness which we have done,

I "think" you've proved more about the "fallacy" of "Your doctrine" than I could ever hope to prove.

 

Hello Me4Him.

Just goes to show how much you retain in your memory man if you think that this Calvinist teaches works like what you do.

Answer the scripture above don't ignore it. How many times did I ask you to apply your mind to EZE 18:21 "But if a wicked man turns away from all the sins he has committed and keeps all my decrees and does what is just and right, he will surely live; he will not die. 22 None of the offenses he has committed will be remembered against him. Because of the righteous things he has done, he will live. ?

I did not contradict Jesus or anyone but you just contradicted the passage. What does the passage say? Why don't you answer it? You contradicted the scripture with scripture try harmony for once.

john.

 

Let "READ" the scripture and "SEE" what it "Actually" says.


"But if a wicked man turns away from all the sins he has committed (crucify the old man)


and keeps all my decrees (believe in the lord)

and does what is just and right, (not live in sin)

he will surely live; he will not die.

22 None of the offenses he has committed will be remembered against him. Because of the righteous things he has done, he will live.

You take "MAN'S WORKS" and make them "Righteousness", Justifying the man, then turn around and say all men are "totally Depraved".

Do you know "What you believe"???

Like a "bar room door" you "swing" both directions, depending on which direction the conversation is going.

 

Hello Me4Him.

Like those ones in the cowboy films that you can see through? I can remember choosing to drink whaskey cause the cowboys drank it. I could talk about pubs all night.

That would be a good start.

He will be the old man not a new one. Should he kill himself before regeneration? Could the old man crucify the old man? Blown away.

all my decrees Is what it says. Yes or no? It is not a singular is it?

he will surely live; he will not die. A works righteousness will get you into Heaven. That's what it says. Yes or no? all my decrees is plural.

Yes because of the righteous things he had done his former sins will be forgotten. Yes or no? No blood is needed yes or no.

Shall we transfer the thread to the 'confused about Calvinism' thread for you?

Where have I taken man's works and made them righteousness please. What planet are you on? You should know by now that I am the Calvinist of Calvinists man. Now think it through properly you are not paying attention and you keep getting savaged. It isn't friendly advice it is a correction. You should try to understand your enemy before you attack him. You owe it to us to try to understand what we say because it is what you want us to do for you.

That is not Let "READ" the scripture and "SEE" what it "Actually" says. is it?

None of the offenses he has committed will be remembered against him. Because of the righteous things he has done, he will live.

You should pray for God to show you what He says here because I can't show you.
Try again. Break the two sentences down word by word.

Look: None of the offenses he has committed will be remembered against him.

None means none.

None of the offenses he has committed...

The man has transgressed the law...but none of these offences will be remembered.

Why not?

Because of the righteous things he has done, he will live.

No blood, sweat or tears.

I don't believe in 'what' but Who. You don't know what I believe.

john.

 

all my decrees=LAW

Ro 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.

Ro 3:28 Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith (in Jesus)

without the deeds of the law.

Jesus said "NO MAN" comes to the Father except by him,

you say "Righteous works" can justify a man,

The "LAW" says only "DEATH" can satisfy the law's requirement for sin.

I "think" you're a "little mixed up" in what the Bible actually teaches.