God desires for ALL to be saved!

I have.

 

The context is the seven woes that Christ pronounced on the teachers of the law and the Pharisees.

Look at Matthew 23:13 and 23:37. The leaders were the ones who were refusing to submit to God and the teaching of Jesus, and instructing others not to do so, either. They were unwilling as all unregenerated people are unwilling.

 

God's desire is always accomplished. You see...

Oh, never mind, what's the use, you won't agree anyway.

 

II Peter 3:9 "The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance."

To whom is Peter writing?

About what is Peter writing?

Who is God longsuffering to, according to Peter? [Note the modifying pronoun]

What kind of pronoun is "any"?

What kind of adjective is "all"?

The context defines clearly whom it is to whom God is longsuffering and whom it is He does not wish to perish.

rufus 0)

 

Bill,

I think that you are dismissing a very important part of the Piper arguement.

Piper says that 1 Timothy 2:4 Does say that God wills that all be saved. However all are not saved. How can this be, espically in light of Ps 115:3 "But our God is in the heavens; He does whatever He pleases. (NASB)"

If it is God's will that all be saved, why aren't they?

The answer: There is another will in God that wills NOT to save all even though He is willing that all be saved. Arminians and Calvinists both agree to some part of this.

Why, then, the two wills. Well, Arminians say that the higher will is abrogated to insure the most precious thing--human freedom.

The Calvinist says that the higher will is abridged for the purpose that God's soverignty in the salvation of man leaves no room for anyone to boast.

The area that your view doesn't answer very well is this: If God wills all to be saved, why is it that not all are (or will be) saved?

The Possibilities:

1. God cannot accomplish His will (impotence).
--This must be rejected

2. There is a higher power other than God which can frustrate Him,
--This must also be rejected.

3. God, while willing to save all in one sense, decides to save some. (The two-wills principle).

We must take number three. It is the only one that makes sense of the Biblical data and keeps God sovereign.

Unfortunatly, many Arminian arguements on this topic seem to exalt the sovereignty of man over and above the sovereignty of God. This is unacceptable. The Bible never presents even the remotest possibility of man (or his will, for that matter) being allowed to be placed above God's will.

Blessings, my friend,

Archangel

 

2 Corinthians 5:14(NASB)
14 For the love of Christ controls us...

Whoops, Bill. The Bible says we are controlled by an outside force.

1 Corinthians 9:16-17(NASB)
16 For if I preach the gospel, I have nothing to boast of, for I am under compulsion; for woe is me if I do not preach the gospel.
17 For if I do this voluntarily, I have a reward; but if against my will, I have a stewardship entrusted to me.

Whoops, Bill. The apostle Paul stated that he didn't willingly preach the gospel. He did it against his will. So I guess you, Bill, are going to call Paul a robot, a mere puppet. I guess, Bill, that you are going to say that God was not pleased with Paul's service since it was not done by "free will". Furthermore, based on 2 Corinthians 5:14, I guess, Bill, that you are going to say that God is not pleased with any of His children since are all controlled by Christ's love and not our "free will".

So you see, Bill, your idea of "free will" falls flat on it face based on Biblical examples and language. That's game, set, and match, Bill. Your arguments are toast.

Let's see who's laughing now.

This post is done and I'm out.

 

Bill,

This removes sovereignty from God and places it in the hands of man.

The converse is the same. Your assumptions (Arminianism) only allow for man to do the choosing. This can only be the case if Arminianism is true. You can't just assume that.

How?

This does not allow for the two-wills principle that you advocate earlier.

This shows, unfortunatly, a misunderstanding of traditional Calvinism. We do not say that we are compelled. We say that, through regeneration, God frees us from the bondage of sin and allows us to choose Him. It is that whole "Dead in sin" thing.

If the choice is ours, the choice is not God's. If this is the case, man is sovereign and God is not.

I'm not debating that point...(Yet?). I am saying that if man chooses God (without being regenerated by an act of God allowing him to choose) than man holds the trump card. This can never be.

Blessings, (AND! I appreciate the "Tone" of our discussion. It is quite refreshing to discuss rather than have people attack my mental capabilities.)

Archangel

 

According to man's logic this could be true.

 

According to man's logic this could be true. </font>[/QUOTE]Tuor,

Actually, according to the Biblical data it must be true. God always writes of Himself saying things like "I will do, For my namesake I will act, I have said it and I will bring it to pass." We never see God allowing man the sovereignty concerning anything.

While I don't like this and still bristle against it from time-to-time, I can see no other way to read the Bible.

Blessings,

Archangel

 

Revelation 3:7(NASB)
7 ..."He who is holy, who is true, who has the key of David, who opens and no one will shut, and who shuts and no one opens..."

Certainly sovereignty is taught here. And not nary a mention of "free will".

 

Just for the record, I have said this from day one, but like most, subscribe to the "two-will principle."

 

I have no doubt that this is the way you read the Bible. God created some for noble purposes and some for ignoble. God loved Jacob and hated Esau before they were even born.

Yet there are other passages that show that God believes we have a choice. In Ezekiel 18 God states that He doesn't like it when people turn from Him. He tell everyone to turn to Him and be saved.

When Jesus gives parables about the kingdom of heaven and salvation he gives examples that teach that our salvation is based on our own decisions. I've mentioned in some thread recently the parable of the king and the slave. In it, Jesus teaches that if we choose not to forgive, God will reinstate the sins that He has already forgiven. In the parable of the wedding feast, God has people thrown out because they chose not to dress apropriately.

As to the topic of soveriegnty, God gets to set the rules. Just because you might not allow others free will, if you had the choice, that does not mean that God doesn't or can't. It seems to me that your side is the one that limits God's ability. No where in the Bible do I find "In order for God to be soveriegn, He can't allow any being to make their own decision".

I hear it out of alot of people around here, but I don't find it in the Bible.

 

He did that with Adam and Adam blew it and now all of mankind is plunged into an awful mess.

 

Oh, I see. You believe that God gave Adam free will. So, according to your definition of sovereignty, you believe that at one point God was not sovereign.