-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
confused about Calvin
- Thread starter psalm40.17
- Start date
First and foremost, I want to apologize for an error I made, that I find objectionable when others do it. I object to the fact that I did it, as well. That happens to be using an incorrect name. I wrongly identified the cartoon strip "Calvin and Hobbes" as 'drawn' by Bil Watterson. That is Bill Watterson. Bil Keane draws "The Family Circus". So apologies to both Bill Watterson and Bil Keane for confusing their first names.
Second, I want to thank Ransom for giving the philosophical reasons to the 'naming' of Calvin and Hobbes. I was unaware of this, but find that it is true, as I checked it out.
As another wrote, I, too, like the strip, finding it humerous. Read no more into that, for it is not there. I will, however, now read a bit more 'out of the strip' knowing this.
BTW, Bill Watterson is living at the age of 47, and is still an artist. He merely does not draw the daily strip any more.
As to the usage of 'Geez', I would prefer it not be used, myself. Some- note I said SOME, of the etymology of this word is from a derivation of 'Jees', a shortened form of Jesus nad used as an oath. But that is not the only derivation and usage, by any means with at least 10 different usages in existence, and more than one as an interjection expressing surprise or annoyance. At least one derivation is a shortened form of 'gee whiz', and another a lengthened form of 'gee'. Maybe sometimes we 'jump the gun' overly. I'll try not to.
In His grace,
Ed
Second, I want to thank Ransom for giving the philosophical reasons to the 'naming' of Calvin and Hobbes. I was unaware of this, but find that it is true, as I checked it out.
As another wrote, I, too, like the strip, finding it humerous. Read no more into that, for it is not there. I will, however, now read a bit more 'out of the strip' knowing this.
BTW, Bill Watterson is living at the age of 47, and is still an artist. He merely does not draw the daily strip any more.
As to the usage of 'Geez', I would prefer it not be used, myself. Some- note I said SOME, of the etymology of this word is from a derivation of 'Jees', a shortened form of Jesus nad used as an oath. But that is not the only derivation and usage, by any means with at least 10 different usages in existence, and more than one as an interjection expressing surprise or annoyance. At least one derivation is a shortened form of 'gee whiz', and another a lengthened form of 'gee'. Maybe sometimes we 'jump the gun' overly. I'll try not to.
In His grace,
Ed
unashamedservant
New Member
So fellows, what were talking about. Let's get back to confused about Calvinism. It is a heated discussion, so let's study the Bible and doctrine. Plus, move on.
Barry
Barry
johnp, I hope you have not put too much money on me for or against, for you may well lose. But I do have a couple of things to answer. You wrote, citing my quote:
" 'Think on these things.'
Is he anything like Homer? Some things Homer teaches are worth thinking on as well."
Since that is a quote from Paul's letter to the Phillipians (the last four words of Ph'lp 4:8)
I would suggest not. You perhaps noticed it was a new sentence and a quote. I will allow that where is was located may have been confusing. Sorry!
In light of the new information re- Calvin and Hobbes, and the personna imbedded, I cannot speak about Thomas Hobbes, for I have read nothing by him. I have read a small bit of John Calvin's ICR, and would agree that some things he taught are worth thinking on.
johnp wrote:
"Why would one wish to bring in a stuffed cartoon character called Calvin into a discussion about Calvinism and Arminianism? One does wonder. "
First, I did not bring the cartoon into the discussion, another did. I merely commented on it.
Second, the 'stuffed character' is Hobbes, not Calvin.
Third, when it comes to bringing something into a discussion, I just reread the first page, and seem to find some of the things mentioned on the last three pages were not mentioned at all either in the opening question to the thread, or even on the first page. So perhaps, someone besides 'yours truly' does this as well. I notice the opening question concerned "the elect" and asked whether this could be "the whole world", which I would equate to some sort of universalism. In a quick reading, granted, I did not find the word elect one time in the last three pages, and that included my own post(s). But I did find some objectionable (to me, anyway) attitudes there, including speaking of another as stupid (This I would ignore were I the target, and just consider the source.), and a suggestion that another was less than equal to the task of 'rightly dividing' Scripture, and a third that spoke of a long dead theologian as being ignorant.
BTW, when I read whole threads, I try to avoid seeing who wrote what, as I'm trying to evaluate an argument on its merits, without having any personality influence me. For all I know, some of my own closest friends and fellow church membeers may be among the members here. I would prefer not to know, as that might well influence my own judgment. And FTR, John Calvin, Arminius, and Spuergeon, to name three, may need no defending, but in any event, are not able to defend themselves any longer, so I try not to attack THEM, myself. The views they may or may not have held are fair game.
Finally, I was not aware that there was a standard size post, as one alluded to mine being "longer than normal". I have made no claim to being normal. I'm not even sure I know what are the qualifications. Guess I don't fit them; I guess we'll just have to run long in the posts; I guess that is why I am not a preacher; and I guess several of you are happy that I'm not. Add one more to the last list. I'm happy I'm not a preacher, as well.
In His grace,
Ed
" 'Think on these things.'
Is he anything like Homer? Some things Homer teaches are worth thinking on as well."
Since that is a quote from Paul's letter to the Phillipians (the last four words of Ph'lp 4:8)
I would suggest not. You perhaps noticed it was a new sentence and a quote. I will allow that where is was located may have been confusing. Sorry!
In light of the new information re- Calvin and Hobbes, and the personna imbedded, I cannot speak about Thomas Hobbes, for I have read nothing by him. I have read a small bit of John Calvin's ICR, and would agree that some things he taught are worth thinking on.
johnp wrote:
"Why would one wish to bring in a stuffed cartoon character called Calvin into a discussion about Calvinism and Arminianism? One does wonder. "
First, I did not bring the cartoon into the discussion, another did. I merely commented on it.
Second, the 'stuffed character' is Hobbes, not Calvin.
Third, when it comes to bringing something into a discussion, I just reread the first page, and seem to find some of the things mentioned on the last three pages were not mentioned at all either in the opening question to the thread, or even on the first page. So perhaps, someone besides 'yours truly' does this as well. I notice the opening question concerned "the elect" and asked whether this could be "the whole world", which I would equate to some sort of universalism. In a quick reading, granted, I did not find the word elect one time in the last three pages, and that included my own post(s). But I did find some objectionable (to me, anyway) attitudes there, including speaking of another as stupid (This I would ignore were I the target, and just consider the source.), and a suggestion that another was less than equal to the task of 'rightly dividing' Scripture, and a third that spoke of a long dead theologian as being ignorant.
BTW, when I read whole threads, I try to avoid seeing who wrote what, as I'm trying to evaluate an argument on its merits, without having any personality influence me. For all I know, some of my own closest friends and fellow church membeers may be among the members here. I would prefer not to know, as that might well influence my own judgment. And FTR, John Calvin, Arminius, and Spuergeon, to name three, may need no defending, but in any event, are not able to defend themselves any longer, so I try not to attack THEM, myself. The views they may or may not have held are fair game.
Finally, I was not aware that there was a standard size post, as one alluded to mine being "longer than normal". I have made no claim to being normal. I'm not even sure I know what are the qualifications. Guess I don't fit them; I guess we'll just have to run long in the posts; I guess that is why I am not a preacher; and I guess several of you are happy that I'm not. Add one more to the last list. I'm happy I'm not a preacher, as well.
In His grace,
Ed
Hello Barry.
I've only heard of Dave Hunt from reading about him on the threads. If you want to use his arguments I'd love to be the one you bounced them off. He might be a major contributer to the confusion.
To be honest I've only read one book by a modern author. All the reformed stuff is free on the web.
john.
Scripture alone. It's our only link to reality all else is darkness.
I've only heard of Dave Hunt from reading about him on the threads. If you want to use his arguments I'd love to be the one you bounced them off. He might be a major contributer to the confusion.
To be honest I've only read one book by a modern author. All the reformed stuff is free on the web.
john.
"GRACE" is "LOVE".
We're made in "God's image", and just as God has the "option" to grant his "GRACE" (love) to us, we have the option to grant our "GRACE" (love) to whom we chose, God/Satan.
Folks understand that "God" is free to grant his grace without "MERIT" to us, but fail to understand that this is the "CHARACTERISTIC" of "GRACE" (love),
It can't be "Commanded from" or "programmed into", God/man.
LOVE (grace) is the "FREE CHOICE" of both God/man.
Calvinism failed in the basic definition of "GRACE/LOVE".
Hello Me4Him.
Love has no option.
Your theology is rubbish ain't it? You are commanded to love God are you not? Answer the question. Your teaching is out of line with scripture and is based on your feelings. You lose again.
James 1:14 but each one is tempted when, by his own evil desire, he is dragged away and enticed. 15 Then, after desire has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and sin, when it is full-grown, gives birth to death. You have evil desires thanks for exposing them for all to see. Giving birth to death just for a laugh is a bit of a downer ain't it?
If you would like to win arguments you will have to do better than this. You can't be a Calvinist though because Calvinists use the word of God alone and words are respected and an effort is made to understand what they mean not make them mean what you want.
DT 11:13 So if you faithfully obey the commands I am giving you today--to love the LORD your God and to serve him with all your heart and with all your soul--
He does command love doesn't He? No answer have you? He does don't He. Yes? He does doesn't He? He commands us to love Him don't He? Isn't 'faithfully obey' including love God? You are commanded are you not to love God no? No? So if you faithfully obey the commands I am giving you today--to love the LORD your God Does that not say we must love God because He commands us to love Him?
john.
And so is hate you say.
No we are not otherwise Christians would not need transforming would they? And we, who with unveiled faces all reflect the Lord's glory, are being transformed into his likeness with ever-increasing glory, which comes from the Lord, who is the Spirit. 2 Cor 3:18. You lose. You're not very good at this are you?
He has no option but to save those chosen.
Love has no option.The options are to love God or to go to Hell. Strange thinking boy.
God can grant His grace without merit? I suppose our grace, and that is the first time I've heard about our grace and surely the first time I've put those two words together, is also without merit? Is it or not?
DT 11:13 So if you faithfully obey the commands I am giving you today--to love the LORD your God and to serve him with all your heart and with all your soul--
Your theology is rubbish ain't it? You are commanded to love God are you not? Answer the question. Your teaching is out of line with scripture and is based on your feelings. You lose again.
I love the smell of a nice wood fire crackling away don't you? How would you know it's not in scripture you don't know what they have said you said? What are you?
You are so consistantly wrong it's uncanny.
James 1:14 but each one is tempted when, by his own evil desire, he is dragged away and enticed. 15 Then, after desire has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and sin, when it is full-grown, gives birth to death. You have evil desires thanks for exposing them for all to see.
Giving birth to death just for a laugh is a bit of a downer ain't it?Now grace means free will! I must say you leave me in awe, oh no! amazement. Calvinism failed in the basic definition of "GRACE/LOVE". Define definition for me please. Then apply the answer to yourself with respect.
If you would like to win arguments you will have to do better than this. You can't be a Calvinist though because Calvinists use the word of God alone and words are respected and an effort is made to understand what they mean not make them mean what you want.
DT 11:13 So if you faithfully obey the commands I am giving you today--to love the LORD your God and to serve him with all your heart and with all your soul--
He does command love doesn't He? No answer have you? He does don't He. Yes? He does doesn't He? He commands us to love Him don't He? Isn't 'faithfully obey' including love God? You are commanded are you not to love God no? No? So if you faithfully obey the commands I am giving you today--to love the LORD your God Does that not say we must love God because He commands us to love Him?
Wrong ain't yer.
john.
Yep, I'm definitely a "Christian", I "HATE" my "father/mother".Originally posted by johnp.:
"GRACE" is "LOVE".
And so is hate you say.
This would be "comical", if the consequences wasn't so serious.
Did we lost the "total image", or only "part of it"???
God loved the whole world, Jesus died for the sins of the whole world that the whole world "might be saved", so how come the whole world "IS NOT SAVED",
if love has no options??
Yes, Calvinism is "Strange thinking" when placed within context of scripture.
"BY FAITH", is the key word here, and "free will choice" defines "LOVE", be it God's love or ours.
So IF YOU faithfully:
Why the "IF YOU", your "rose colored glasses" are affecting your "reading comprehension".
Calvin says God "predestine" them to be sinners, (Ro 9) so he could "show his wrath", therefore their sin is not because of their "OWN LUST", but God's "Sovereign will" to have some to "VENT HIS ANGRY" on.
It's obvious, calvinist doesn't understand the torment of hell and why God doesn't "Will" any to go there.
You would "do well" to follow your own advise.
It appears you don't know that "Commmandments" can be broken, "Sovereign will" can't be broken.
Why issue a "command" for us to keep, "IF" we have "NO CHOICE"???
As I said, the proof will come at the "worse possible time", when we're in front of THE MAN.(Jesus)Wrong ain't yer.
john.
Better not "think" or even "believe", you better "KNOW", and that's only possible with the "SPIRIT" as your teacher, many will believe a "LIE" and be damned.
2Th 2:10 And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish;
because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.
11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:
12 That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.
People will be "JUDGED" according to what "THEY"... "CHOSE" to believe.
I'd suggest taking those "Rose colored glasses off", forgetting about "Denominations" or any other "doctrines", and try finding the "TRUTH".
If you think Satan can't use these things to "BLIND" you, then you're already "Blind".
No it isn't. Who entitled you to change the definitions of words that are inconvenient to your presuppositions?
Grace is the unmerited favor of God. Emphasis on unmerited. It is an act of love but the two are not equal.
Love can be and most often is based on some perception of merit in the object of the love.
That is one of the most unbiblical statements I have read on this board... ever.
God merits all our love. Satan merits none of it. It is not an act of "grace" on our part to "choose" God.
It must be an act of one toward the other without respect to the worthiness of the other... and if it is dependent on man granting "grace" to God then it is most certainly dependent upon man's merit.
It is impossible for man to choose to give grace to God since God is worthy.
You are the one who failed by equating the two. They are related but not the same nor interchangeable.
Hello Me4Him.
RO 2:12 All who sin apart from the law will also perish apart from the law, and all who sin under the law will be judged by the law.
HEB 2:1 We must pay more careful attention, therefore, to what we have heard, so that we do not drift away. 2 For if the message spoken by angels was binding, and every violation and disobedience received its just punishment, 3 how shall we escape if we ignore such a great salvation?
The King of Babylon knew more than you, DA 4:35 All the peoples of the earth are regarded as nothing. He does as he pleases with the powers of heaven and the peoples of the earth. No one can hold back his hand or say to him: "What have you done?"
Are you not certain now?
PR 16:9 In his heart a man plans his course, but the LORD determines his steps.
You believe as He directs you to same as the rest of us.
Or don't you think His will is not done in Heaven as it is not on Earth?
john.
Who are you to talk back to God? What if God prepared some to a greater condemnation than others? Those who do not hear the gospel are not required to believe it thus being saved from a greater condemnation but damned anyway.
RO 2:12 All who sin apart from the law will also perish apart from the law, and all who sin under the law will be judged by the law.
HEB 2:1 We must pay more careful attention, therefore, to what we have heard, so that we do not drift away. 2 For if the message spoken by angels was binding, and every violation and disobedience received its just punishment, 3 how shall we escape if we ignore such a great salvation?
But to this day the LORD has not given you a mind that understands or eyes that see or ears that hear. Dt 29:4. Those were the ones issued with the command. Why does He issue commands that we can't keep? Who do you think you are to question God? He does comes first until then you remain under the cloud. But the answer is He does, what you going to do about it?
The King of Babylon knew more than you, DA 4:35 All the peoples of the earth are regarded as nothing. He does as he pleases with the powers of heaven and the peoples of the earth. No one can hold back his hand or say to him: "What have you done?"
Too late mate. I have the proof now. HEB 11:1 Now faith is being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see. 2 This is what the ancients were commended for.
Are you not certain now?
Very true.
Why don't you get an English bible you have enough trouble understanding today's words today let alone 400 years old ones?
Condemnation comes free with every conception. The deeds of people will be weighed in the balance and punishment exacted accordingly. Jesus took mine. I am a free man because the Son has set me free. My Darling loves me. He'd do anything for me. I have Him and I know what love is. 1CO 13:4 Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. 5 It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. 6 Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. 7 It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres. 8 Love never fails... Praise the Lord. He loves me more than He ever loved Himself.
PR 16:9 In his heart a man plans his course, but the LORD determines his steps.
You believe as He directs you to same as the rest of us.
One only need ask Him. My denomination is Truth and He found me.
Poor old chap gets all the blame don't he? Satan is a tool of God working out His purposes as all of creation obeys His will and jumps to His commands. Didn't Jesus ask the Father that His will be done on Earth as it is in Heaven? Are you saying God said no to Jesus?
Or don't you think His will is not done in Heaven as it is not on Earth?john.
Hello Me4Him.
1 a : to change completely or essentially in composition or structure
What do you think?
He will save His people. You have a problem with the word 'will'.
Because love never fails. In choosing me God locked Himself into a position that He cannot revoke. He set His love on me and since that love is real it is an everlasting love because love never fails.
"Love me or go to Hell." Is a great chat up line. Tell me, For I command you today to love the LORD your God... Is that a command to love God or not? Tell me if you can and I will tell you if God has given you ears to hear with.
http://www.baptistboard.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php/topic/3/3369/8.html
Have you no shame?
I never realised that love is defined by free will? Is this based on your previous error that it is by faith? Eph 2:8. I warn you, this is a very serious thing to do. Don't mess with the word.
A good tactic but catching hold of another argument does not work. The point: God commands that we love Him. Try for an answer next time.
...They stumble because they disobey the message--which is also what they were destined for. 1 Peter 2:8.
You have two problems with the word 'predestine'.
You have the same conclusion as Calvin and also Paul. RO 9:22 What if God, choosing to show his wrath and make his power known, bore with great patience the objects of his wrath--prepared for destruction? 23 What if he did this to make the riches of his glory known to the objects of his mercy, whom he prepared in advance for glory
Amen so be it Lord. 'What if'? What are you going to do about it? HaHa! I'll hold yer coat man. You are in His face. Does not the potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for noble purposes and some for common use? Who are you, O man, to talk back to God? God has mercy on whom he wants to have mercy, and he hardens whom he wants to harden. It does not depend on man's desire or effort, but on God's mercy.
He told them, "The secret of the kingdom of God has been given to you. But to those on the outside everything is said in parables 12 so that, " `they may be ever seeing but never perceiving, and ever hearing but never understanding; otherwise they might turn and be forgiven!' " And the LORD God said, "The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever." Gen 3:22. (Mark 4:11-12.)
Where's the difficulty, the difficulty is God. HaHa! You know that One who weeps over the lost and pleads with man to little avail. The Mighty One who loves everyman who ever lived and is affectionatly known as Sweet Jesus. Well Him who wouldn't hurt a fly said, He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever."
It is a place I was taught not to dwell on. It is not my place. It was a sound teaching.
john.
You have a problem with the word 'transformed' I see.
1 a : to change completely or essentially in composition or structure
What do you think?
You say He died for everybody that ever lived and the word 'world' does not mean that as you know. You are basing your faith on an interpretation of a word you get wrong so your doctrine is wrong. You have a problem with 'world'.
Simply because He did not die for everyman. If He had everyman would be saved. Simple as that. If someone else took my punishment then God will not punish me. You shout loud enough about His justice but you don't mean it do you? If another paid for my sins I have nothing to pay. That is just. If He did not die for everyone that is not unjust. That's why it says He will give His life for His people. Matt 1:21 She will give birth to a son, and you are to give him the name Jesus, because he will save his people from their sins."
He will save His people. You have a problem with the word 'will'.
'Since' do you mean? What? If it has options then to take the option to op-out shows that it was not love to begin with.
Because love never fails. In choosing me God locked Himself into a position that He cannot revoke. He set His love on me and since that love is real it is an everlasting love because love never fails.The point is The options are to love God or to go to Hell. That is the options isn't it? Have you another?
"Love me or go to Hell." Is a great chat up line.
Tell me, For I command you today to love the LORD your God... Is that a command to love God or not? Tell me if you can and I will tell you if God has given you ears to hear with.I've never read any of their "Sermons", so what they taught, I have no idea... posted 28 January, 2006 21:13
http://www.baptistboard.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php/topic/3/3369/8.html
Have you no shame?
The scripture says: For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith...
I never realised that love is defined by free will? Is this based on your previous error that it is by faith? Eph 2:8. I warn you, this is a very serious thing to do. Don't mess with the word.
So IF YOU faithfully: Yes, if you faithfully obey the command to love God. May the Lord bless you and give you what I have. Ears to hear with. Eyes that see the glory of God.
A good tactic but catching hold of another argument does not work. The point: God commands that we love Him. Try for an answer next time.
No he doesn't he says they were predestined. But these men blaspheme in matters they do not understand. They are like brute beasts, creatures of instinct, born only to be caught and destroyed, and like beasts they too will perish. 2 Peter 2:12.
...They stumble because they disobey the message--which is also what they were destined for. 1 Peter 2:8.
You have two problems with the word 'predestine'.
If you spent some time reading what Calvin wrote, like the time you spend trawling the internet for the clincher to throw at Calvinists, then you would understand why the conclusion he draws fits in with scripture.
You have the same conclusion as Calvin and also Paul. RO 9:22 What if God, choosing to show his wrath and make his power known, bore with great patience the objects of his wrath--prepared for destruction? 23 What if he did this to make the riches of his glory known to the objects of his mercy, whom he prepared in advance for glory
Amen so be it Lord. 'What if'? What are you going to do about it? HaHa! I'll hold yer coat man. You are in His face. Does not the potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for noble purposes and some for common use? Who are you, O man, to talk back to God? God has mercy on whom he wants to have mercy, and he hardens whom he wants to harden. It does not depend on man's desire or effort, but on God's mercy.
He told them, "The secret of the kingdom of God has been given to you. But to those on the outside everything is said in parables 12 so that, " `they may be ever seeing but never perceiving, and ever hearing but never understanding; otherwise they might turn and be forgiven!' " And the LORD God said, "The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever." Gen 3:22. (Mark 4:11-12.)
Where's the difficulty, the difficulty is God. HaHa! You know that One who weeps over the lost and pleads with man to little avail. The Mighty One who loves everyman who ever lived and is affectionatly known as Sweet Jesus. Well Him who wouldn't hurt a fly said, He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever."
So you believe in the orthodox Hell. Why'd He create it then? 'Calvinists' you mean? Or Calvin? He must have been willing or He would not have created it would He? You're argument is lost on that, He created it so He must have been willing for some to go there. Simple as that.
It is a place I was taught not to dwell on. It is not my place. It was a sound teaching.
It's the only advice I trust because my Father is always with me.
I asked you 8 times if God commands love and your reply is an answer? "Commmandments" can be broken I know that. But it is a commandment isn't it? Jesus said it was the greatest commandment didn't He? What's the matter? Why tell be the blindingly obvious in the hope I'll forget the point? Good tactic spoilt by inexpert hands.
john.
Joh 3:16 For God so loved the world,
Joh 3:17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn [/b]the world;[/b] but that [/b]the world[/b] through him might be saved.
1Jo 2:2 And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only,(the saved)
but also for the sins of the whole world.(unsaved)
You do have a "SERIOUS" "reading comprehesion" problem.
After 18 pages, I think there's quite a bit, you don't "Realize".
Intrepret that "WITHIN CONTEXT" of God loving/Jesus dying for sins of the "WHOLE WORLD", then tell me, is their condemnation due to "God's will" or "their will" being excercised??
How can God prepared for destruction? anyone, If Jesus didn't come to condemn the world, but that the world might be saved, this contradicts everything God said about his love for the world and the "MISSON" of his Son.
Hell wasn't created for MAN, but "Angels", it must "expand it's borders" to hold mankind.
[/b] Two options here. One, "world" means everyone as you assert and since Jesus was given so that the "world" would not be condemned... no one will be condemned.Originally posted by Me4Him:
Joh 3:16 For God so loved the world,
Joh 3:17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world;[/b] but that [/b]the world[/b] through him might be saved.
1Jo 2:2 And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only,(the saved)
but also for the sins of the whole world.(unsaved)
You do have a "SERIOUS" "reading comprehesion" problem.
Two, you are wrong about the implications of "world". For instance, you might say "I agree with the Baptists. That would not mean that you agreed with every single Baptist.
As a caveat though, Christ death won general grace as well. The world is not destroyed because He accepted the cross. In order for God to redeem the elect, He must show mercy and grace toward the "world" as a whole. The rains fall on the just and the unjust.
How can God prepared for destruction? anyone, If Jesus didn't come to condemn the world, but that the world might be saved, this contradicts everything God said about his love for the world and the "MISSON" of his Son.</font>[/QUOTE] The better question is how do YOU reconcile these scriptures. This is one of the reasons I favor calvinism. It deals with issues like this with reasonable answers without denying either Romans 9 or John 3.
You have backed yourself into a situation where the only way of maintaining your belief is to say that these scriptures contradict one another. You are not arguing against our words at this point but rather the Bible itself.