2 Cor. 5:18-19

[AustinC]

Once again we see the material false statement concerning "innate faith" This is total rubbish. As I said, one falsehood to support another falsehood.
Ask yourselves why Calvinists have removed Romans 4:4-5 and Romans 4:23-24 from their bibles.
If God is sovereign, and He is, why would Calvinists claim Romans 4 "causes" God to do something, as if salvation depends on the man that will....

Non-stop rubbish is what we get from Calvinism.

Tell us exactly what you believe about faith, Van. Everything I have read from you is that faith is given to humans at conception. Do you wish to clarify?

 

[AustinC]

Right, got it, God instills via irresistible grace His gift of faith into a person, then turns around and credits that very same gift from God faith unalterably instilled as righteousness because it was not initially? The nonsense one must accept to wedge Calvinism into scripture is non-stop.

Do you agree to the above statement? I can't tell if you are in agreement or if you call it nonsense. Please clarify.

 

[AustinC]

If the gift of faith fiction of Calvinism were true, Romans 4:4-5 and Romans 4:23-24 would not say God credits our faith for our sake.
His faith, your faith, our faith becomes, using invisible ink, His gifted and instilled via irresistible grace faith, your gifted and instilled via irresistible grace faith and our gifted and instilled with irresistible grace faith. But Calvinism does not add to scripture. Right, got it...

What, exactly, do you believe? You seem to utterly reject what you wrote above.

 

[AustinC]

On and on, one personal attack after another, avoiding the topic which is God is reconciling the world, one believer at a time by putting the individual into the body of Christ based on crediting their faith as righteousness. God has not reconciled the entire world, but He has placed every person eternally saved into Christ. We have the ministry of reconciliation because God is still actively saving the lost.

When does human faith originate in a human, Van?

 

[atpollard]

On and on, one personal attack after another,

Pot ... Kettle ... Black ...

Folks do you believe this poster is really of understanding those born anew have been past tense reconciled, but God is still reconciling the world (humankind) one sinner at a time at the present and until the end comes.

Can you not read? Please address what I said. Did you read "reconciled the world" or reconciling the world. Do you read reconciled us or reconciling us. Good golly miss molly

Once Calvinist after another avoids the obvious truth,

Equating John Calvin's views with Calvinism is bogus.

Good golly miss molly, can you not admit error. was reconciling does not mean reconciled. Good grief

So simple a child could understand it...

I am sorry Sir if you think your claims above are rational.

Repeating bogus views does not make them less bogus. Your view is unbiblical.

And once again you make the material false statement I have ignored part of your screed.

Does the bible say we reconcile ourselves to God? Nope. Such is your ludicrous claim.

On and on Quantrill regurgitates the same falsehoods.

On and on the same Calvinists post the same screed, attacking the poster and ignoring the post. Next, the Calvinist will say to be "gracious" rather than "intolerant" of false teachers.

I was a bit surprised you would admit Quantrill's claim is bogus. But I am not surprised you would ridicule God's sovereign choice as emotionally based. Should I falsely claim you deny God's sovereignty? Naw, that would put me in your sandbox.

In the Watergate days, your post would be termed a non-denial denial.

Folks, pay no attention to Calvinists who deny God's sovereignty in Election for Salvation.

Once again note the Calvinist effort to claim the bible does not teach God credits our faith. They repeat this falsehood non-stop.

Around and around the Calvinists dance and weave, claiming this falsehood to support that falsehood, but the house cards falls when God credits our faith as righteousness.

Ask yourselves why Calvinists have removed Romans 4:4-5 and Romans 4:23-24 from their bibles.

Non-stop rubbish is what we get from Calvinism.

Falsehood on top of falsehood, now Dave G claims, for the umpteenth time, faith is not according to grace, but rather faith is according to works. Utter nonsense smeared over utter nonsense. This is all they have, non-stop rubbish. Remember Romans 4:16?

Right, got it, God instills via irresistible grace His gift of faith into a person, then turns around and credits that very same gift from God faith unalterably instilled as righteousness because it was not initially? The nonsense one must accept to wedge Calvinism into scripture is non-stop.

His faith, your faith, our faith becomes, using invisible ink, His gifted and instilled via irresistible grace faith, your gifted and instilled via irresistible grace faith and our gifted and instilled with irresistible grace faith. But Calvinism does not add to scripture. Right, got it...

 

[atpollard]

Right, got it, God instills via irresistible grace His gift of faith into a person, then turns around and credits that very same gift from God faith unalterably instilled as righteousness because it was not initially? The nonsense one must accept to wedge Calvinism into scripture is non-stop.

I agree with Dave G.
Your Christian grace and love is underwhelming.

quod si invicem mordetis et comeditis videte ne ab invicem consumamini

finis

 

[Quantrill]

I believe in The Full (Comparatively by God's people and the Superintendence of The Holy Spirit) Preservation of The Inspiration.

The little quirks and idiosyncracies that are of little or no measure may be dismissed, to give the present version of the KJV, for example, a designation of, "Inspired", as it sits.

God has no use for anyone who says otherwise.

Yes, it is a revised version of the 1611 and needs to be revised again.

A Bible version is to be Compared to the body of texts, which have been preserved and other volumes, such as its predecessors.

Whatever was written on Moses' tablets has no less Authority and Inspiration than, "Do not murder", does, in English.

Inspiration doesn't always follow in the same set of tracks.

The Inspiration and Authority of the Bible are based on its Integrity, which is Perfect.

We have a MORE SURE WORD of PROPHECY (than the Prophets, themselves).

God Has Magnified His Word above His Name because The Bible Testifies of Him.

"The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times." Psalm 12:6

You wont see me denying The Word of God by referencing versions based, heavily, on The false Jehovah's Witnesses Bible, or manuscripts which disagree with each other thousands of times.

Nice speech. But, you didn't answer my question. Is the Bible the Word of God?

Quantrill

 

[Quantrill]

Thanks for citing the passages that support God is reconciling the world one sinner at a time, when God alone puts an individual into the body of Christ.

The passages I presented were in response to your statements in post #(70). But go ahead and twist my answer as you do the Scripture.

Quantrill

 

[Quantrill]

I admire that.
Believe it or not, I have the same convictions.

To me, you're assuming that I have approached God's word with a "systematic theology" framework, and have attempted to fit Scripture to that framework.
I assure you that this is the furthest thing from the truth.

I arrived gradually at this understanding, and I often question it...
Only to be redirected to where I'm currently at and to have it even more solidified.

Been there and done that more times than I can count, Quantrill.

Neither do I...

But over the course of my studies, certain meanings became apparent to me.
Also know that I will not impose such rigid rules upon you...
To me, you're free to understand it as you wish, and we are both free to disagree.

I won't think any ill of you for not going alone with me.

Sounds good. Hang in there.

Quantrill

 

[Quantrill]

I see your point, and confess, once again, to once seeing it as you do...
Though I no longer do.

Again, I once saw it as you appear to.
But then over the next few years, I began to see something else...

The ramifications of God deciding not to impute all of mankind's trespasses ( sins ) to them...
If their trespasses are not imputed to them per the passage you seem to think that it does,
Then the question arises...

When are they imputed to them for judgment?

God specifically says that the dead will be judged out of the books ( Revelation 20:11-15 ) based on their works ( trespasses ).
Therefore, God must impute ( credit ) people with trespasses, or He cannot judge them.

Though God does not impute peoples 'trespasses' to them, they are still guilty in Adam.

Again, go to (Rom. 5:13-14). God did not impute sin to the world from Adam to Moses. Yet they died. Why? Because they were still guilty of Adams sin.

Do you see? All were sinning from Adam to Moses. But not as Adam did. Adam was under law. They were not. God imputed Adams sin to mankind. Mankind later were sinners as a result. God did not impute their sins to them because they were not under law. But Adams sin was still imputed to them, and so they died. Still guilty and on their way to hell.

Quantrill

 

[AustinC]

Though God does not impute peoples 'trespasses' to them, they are still guilty in Adam.

Again, go to (Rom. 5:13-14). God did not impute sin to the world from Adam to Moses. Yet they died. Why? Because they were still guilty of Adams sin.

Do you see? All were sinning from Adam to Moses. But not as Adam did. Adam was under law. They were not. God imputed Adams sin to mankind. Mankind later were sinners as a result. God did not impute their sins to them because they were not under law. But Adams sin was still imputed to them, and so they died. Still guilty and on their way to hell.

Quantrill

??? Perhaps you have a unique definition of impute. ???

 

[Quantrill]

Reconcile:

verb
verb: reconcile; 3rd person present: reconciles; past tense: reconciled; past participle: reconciled; gerund or present participle: reconciling
restore friendly relations between.
"she wanted to be reconciled with her father"

cause to coexist in harmony; make or show to be compatible.
"a landscape in which inner and outer vision were reconciled"


Agreed.

In their hearts, I see that those that will never be saved still hate God, and therefore they have not been reconciled to Him.
That is how I define it.

But I also see that the elect were reconciled to Him by the death of His Son ( Romans 5:12 ), and that, even when they were enemies in their minds ( Romans 5:10, Colossians 1:21 ), they were, nevertheless, the ones who were reconciled in 2 Corinthians 5:18-19.
They are the ones whose trespasses were not imputed to them.

Unbelievers ( "non-elect" ) do not have the privilege of having their sins wiped away, only believers ( the elect ) do.

To me, it is inconsistent to have it any other way, because God cannot decide to forego imputing trespasses and still have something legitimate to judge sinners for.

I'm not sure what you're trying to prove in the first part of your post. God does not need to be reconciled. Man needs to be reconciled to God. There is a rift, but it is on man's part, not God's. God does not reconcile Himself to man. Man is reconciled to God, by God.

The way you define it, I disagree with. God has reconciled the world. Not just believers. That doesn't mean righteousness is imputed to them. It means their trespasses are not imputed to them. Thus Paul's admonition, 'be ye reconciled'.

The elect have nothing to do with it. God reconciled the world. The non-elect and elect are part of that. Just because there is an elect doesn't mean God didn't reconcile the world.

It is not inconsistent as there is a big difference between trespasses and sins, and Adams sin which is imputed. God didn't forgo anything. If He wants, He doesn't have to impute the trespasses of the world due to Christ's death and blood. But the world is still guilty in Adam.

Quantrill

 

[Alan Gross]

Nice speech. But, you didn't answer my question. Is the Bible the Word of God?

Quantrill

shorter speech: The little quirks and idiosyncracies that are of little or no measure may be dismissed,

 

[Quantrill]

??? Perhaps you have a unique definition of impute. ???

Impute----to reckon over to ones account.

Quantrill

 

[atpollard]

Do you see? All were sinning from Adam to Moses. But not as Adam did. Adam was under law. They were not. God imputed Adams sin to mankind. Mankind later were sinners as a result. God did not impute their sins to them because they were not under law. But Adams sin was still imputed to them, and so they died. Still guilty and on their way to hell.

[Eze 18:20 NASB] 20 "The person who sins will die. The son will not bear the punishment for the father's iniquity, nor will the father bear the punishment for the son's iniquity; the righteousness of the righteous will be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked will be upon himself.

 

[AustinC]

[Eze 18:20 NASB] 20 "The person who sins will die. The son will not bear the punishment for the father's iniquity, nor will the father bear the punishment for the son's iniquity; the righteousness of the righteous will be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked will be upon himself.

To be fair, this verse is in reference to a saying that the exiles had used whereby they accused God of judging them for their ancestors sins. God is correcting them so they would own their particular sins.

 

[atpollard]

To be fair, this verse is in reference to a saying that the exiles had used whereby they accused God of judging them for their ancestors sins. God is correcting them so they would own their particular sins.

Thank you.

It still shines light on the point that under the proposed paradigm, God will have forgiven every sin except the one these people did not actually commit, and then punishing the “son” exclusively for the sin of the “father”.

It contradicts the LESSON that God was making in the quoted text.

 

[Dave G]

I'm not sure what you're trying to prove in the first part of your post.

Quantrill,
I'll give this one more try...

What I'm trying to do is to get you to see that if someone reconciles themselves to another ( in this case, God reconciling the "world" ( which you seem to think means every man, woman and child who ever lived ) to Himself, then that person or group has had their relations made friendly again.

The Lord would then look favorably upon them, and not unfavorably.
That's what "reconcile" means, at least to me...to make friends with and to bestow favor on.
For example:

If I were to have an argument with my brother over something, and we become enemies...
Then I were to go to Him, asking forgiveness and he does so,
Then our relationship is restored and we are reconciled to one another.
We go from being enemies, to friends again.

It's the same with the Lord.
Yet the Lord clearly says this of those He has, apparently ( if I'm understanding you correctly ) reconciled to Himself:


" Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels:" ( Matthew 25:41 ).

" If any man love not the Lord Jesus Christ, let him be Anathema. Maranatha." ( 1 Corinthians 16:22 ). <--- "Anathema" means "cursed".

" But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.
9 As we said before, so say I now again, If any [man] preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed." ( Galatians 1:8-9 ). <--- Those that preach another gospel are accursed.


Question:
How can God curse those that He has reconciled ( declared them to be His friends ) to Himself, when they are now His friends?

If you can honestly tell me that God casts His friends into Hell, then I'll have to accept that.
But I cannot agree with the contradiction presented when the word "world" is used to describe every man, woman and child that ever lived in 2 Corinthians 5:18-19.
As I see it, the "us" in verse 18 are believers out of every tongue, tribe and nation ( Revelation 5:9, Revelation 7:9 ) and only include "them which are called, both Jews and Greeks ( 1 Corinthians 1:24 )".
To me, they are the "world" in verse 19.


This will be my final reply to you in this thread.
As always,
I wish you well, sir, and I bid you a good morning and rest of the day.

 

[Van]

Tell us exactly what you believe about faith, Van. Everything I have read from you is that faith is given to humans at conception. Do you wish to clarify?

Note how the Calvinists make up falsehoods then attribute the falsehoods to others. Vicious and vindictive.

 

[Van]

Two questions concerning (2 Cor. 5:18-19)

1.) How did God reconcile the world to Himself?

2.) How could God not impute the world's trespasses to them?[/quote]

1.) The text actually says God is reconciling the world to Himself. So that refers to an ongoing process. God is reconciling the world (humankind) to Himself, one sinner at a time. Therefore the "us" (verse 18) refers to those God has already placed into the body of Christ, thus a done dead of reconciliation.

2.) Referring to those reconciled, those placed in Christ already, He removed their sin burden, what God had held against them as a consequence of their sins, by the washing of regeneration, also called the circumcision of Christ, because Christ's sacrifice, the shedding of His blood, provides the justification for the forgiveness of their sins.

An important additional point of the passage is assigning us (those reconciled already) the ministry of reconciliation, begging the lost to be reconciled to God through belief in our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.​