Can The Case Be Made That Christ Died For All?

[Silverhair]

There was nothing to refute. You, as usual, just put forth arguments nobody is making.

As per usual you will not answer a direct question. You refuse to deal with the logical problems of your theology. With you it is "don't look behind the curtain". You want to avoid the ugly truth at any cost.

 

[kyredneck]

There was nothing to refute. You, as usual, just put forth arguments nobody is making.

It's called trolling.

 

[Reformed1689]

As per usual you will not answer a direct question. You refuse to deal with the logical problems of your theology. With you it is "don't look behind the curtain". You want to avoid the ugly truth at any cost.

I'm not going to refute arguments that I am not actually making that makes no sense.

 

[Silverhair]

...because God is just.


Apparently the verse "All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God" is something you have never read.


Your argument here is utter rubbish and twisted logic. You are attempting to force God to do what you demand He do. This shows me that you place yourself in a position higher than God and thus make yourself Sovereign and God your servant.


Here you are forcing your philosophy of free will with no biblical support.


As usual you fail to quote the whole.

John 6:40-44
For this is the will of my Father, that everyone who looks on the Son and believes in him should have eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.” So the Jews grumbled about him, because he said, “I am the bread that came down from heaven.” They said, “Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? How does he now say, ‘I have come down from heaven’?” Jesus answered them, “Do not grumble among yourselves. No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him. And I will raise him up on the last day.


Here you assert your philosophy and again place yourself as sovereign while God becomes your underling.


John 3 is so good. Jesus tells us that we must be born again (Peter, in 1 Peter 1, tells us that only God can rebirth us) and defines belief.
What is not expressed in this passage is your philosophy of free will. You simply project your philosophy onto the verse.


Notice your contradiction and how you make God to be less than man.
1) God desires all to come to repentance
2) Humans can thwart God's desire
3) Human generated faith determines God's response. (Man causes, God reacts as an effect).

Your man-centeredness is obvious to all readers. The discerning Christian will see how you glory in humanity and condemn God if He doesn't follow your assertions.

Since God is just He would have provided a way for anyone to be saved, and He actually did. You just do not like the idea that He would do that. You support the DoG which makes God unjust as He has by those errant doctrines denied billions the chance to be saved.

The Gospel call in calvinism is not a well meant call or sincere offer. Only those that are included in the Unconditional Election will partake of the Limited Atonement and will be drawn to God by His Irresistible Grace. So all men do not have an equal chance to know or trust in God. Their own theology precludes this, but they just do not want to acknowledge that fact.

So your theology comes up against bible texts such as 1Ti 2:3-4, Rom 10:9-10, Rom 10:13-14, 1Jn 4:10, 1Jn 10:14, Col 1:19-20, Eph 1:13, Joh 3:14-18 and you just ignore them or make som elame excuse for why tthey do not refute your theoogy. I realize that you will reject all these because they do not fit with your theology. But you are not disagreeing with me you are disagreeing with the bible.

God desires that all be saved and He has made the condition for mans salvation, faith in His son. That is not a contradiction but it does prove that your DoG is false. I have asked this question a number of times but never get a logical answer. How do you reconcile DoG and clear scripture that contradicts it.

The Gospel call in calvinism is not a well meant call or sincere offer. Only those that are included in the Unconditional Election will partake of the Limited Atonement and will be drawn to God by His Irresistible Grace. So all men do not have an equal chance to know or trust in God.

If you carry your view through to it's logical conclusion then you must agree with the following statement.

In Calvinist theology (irresistible grace) regarding Jesus requires that:
The absolutely elect must have been saved without him;
and the non-elect cannot be saved by him.

 

[Silverhair]

Some people would just say he is a humanist.

Some people would just say that you ignore clear scripture.

 

[Silverhair]

I'm not going to refute arguments that I am not actually making that makes no sense.

You refuse to deal with them because they point out the errors of your theology and you have no answer.

 

[Silverhair]

It's called trolling.

Such as you do.

 

[Reformed1689]

You refuse to deal with them because they point out the errors of your theology and you have no answer.

Again, I don't defend arguments I have not made. So you can keep screaming they point out errors of my theology, except, as usual, you are arguing against something other than my beliefs so nothing to do on my end except laugh.

 

[Silverhair]

Again, I don't defend arguments I have not made. So you can keep screaming they point out errors of my theology, except, as usual, you are arguing against something other than my beliefs so nothing to do on my end except laugh.

Typical of you to to refuse to acknowledge that the theology you follow has errors. But your denial does not change the reality of the situation does it. Putting your head in the sand is just a foolish action from you. You are the one that said you support the DoG yet you now claim they are not your beliefs. Your inconsistent.

 

[Silverhair]

Some people would just say that you ignore clear scripture.

You just ignore those scriptures that prove your theology is wrong. You may call it funny I just call your lack of knowledge sad. You can not or will not even try to defend your failed view.

 

[Reformed1689]

Typical of you to to refuse to acknowledge that the theology you follow has errors. But your denial does not change the reality of the situation does it. Putting your head in the sand is just a foolish action from you. You are the one that said you support the DoG yet you now claim they are not your beliefs. Your inconsistent.

No, it just shows you don't understand the doctrines of grace.

 

[Reformed1689]

Glad @Silverhair is calling himself out finally.

 

[AustinC]

Since God is just He would have provided a way for anyone to be saved, and He actually did.

Being just (a legal judge) does not require or obligate the judge to pardon all lawbreakers. God is under no obligation to pardon even one sinner. He does not have to make a way for anyone to be saved.

Your assertion shows us how you place yourself above God and demand he do what you think he should do.

If God chose to pardon just one sinner, that would be incredible, amazing grace. The fact that God chooses to save millions of people is astounding and mind boggling, amazing grace.
Grace: God giving to us what we do not deserve.

Silverhair, your post shows us that you do not want grace at all. You just want God to open the gate of the prison and then let you run out on your own to your own image of what freedom means to you.

This thread has done an excellent job of revealing your man-centered philosophy, which you demand that God take his subjective spot below you.

Silverhair, you do not know grace.

 

[37818]

sigh.... we have been over this, we already know in these events that when Jesus says "you" he is not giving the promise to everyone present, namely Judas.

Your unbelief.

 

[37818]

Without the general redemption no one who has not yet believed in Christ has any basis to believe.

 

[Reformed]

The fact remains, some how those who came believe in Christ, believed Christ died for them prior to believing. Effectively being a general redemption, even if not professed as such. This is inescapable.

The "somehow" is the work of the Holy Spirit in regeneration, making the heart able to believe. This is where these discussions take a fork in the road and usually end in both sides jumping into their respective foxholes. The Calvinist understands scripture to teach that the sinner is unable and unwilling to believe. That creates a condition wherein the sinner has to be made able and desirous of believing. This is why Calvinists believe that regeneration precedes faith.

 

[37818]

The "somehow" is the work of the Holy Spirit in regeneration, making the heart able to believe. This is where these discussions take a fork in the road and usually end in both sides jumping into their respective foxholes. The Calvinist understands scripture to teach that the sinner is unable and unwilling to believe. That creates a condition wherein the sinner has to be made able and desirous of believing. This is why Calvinists believe that regeneration precedes faith.

Belief in the general redemption is the work of the Holy Spirit and His teaching.

Matthew 20:28, ". . . Even as the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many. . . ."
Matthew 22:14, ". . . For many are called, but few are chosen. . . ."

 

[Campion]

The "somehow" is the work of the Holy Spirit in regeneration, making the heart able to believe. This is where these discussions take a fork in the road and usually end in both sides jumping into their respective foxholes. The Calvinist understands scripture to teach that the sinner is unable and unwilling to believe. That creates a condition wherein the sinner has to be made able and desirous of believing. This is why Calvinists believe that regeneration precedes faith.

Thankfully we have the example of Cornelius to refute this Calvinist concept.

 

[Silverhair]

No, it just shows you don't understand the doctrines of grace.

Actually what it shows is that you do not understand the DoG. Simple logic points out the errors of that view. But you will continue to defend it.

 

[Silverhair]

Glad @Silverhair is calling himself out finally.
View attachment 6190

How is my saying you will not even defend your failed view, calling myself out. I have posted the scriptures three times now and you have just twisted and dodged rather than answer. So it would seem you are the one being called out.