Good In Bad People?

[SavedByGrace]

Why? I chose to adopt my foster daughter before she was even born, but she is not yet adopted (though we are just weeks away) why do you think that is any different?

We are talking about the Lord not humans. He is not in time

 

[37818]

are you saying, that born again believers, who are already "saved", have not been "adpoted" into the Family of God, and become His children?

I am saying the children of God do not yet have their redeemed bodies per Romans 8:23. Per the meaning and use of that term.

 

[37818]

All these verses, yet no reference to " bodily resurrection" as the adoption.

Only five times is that term used and then only by Paul. If you do not see those other references being related, because I see the term as I explained, I do not see believers as already adopted as you seem to. Ok?

 

[Reformed1689]

We are talking about the Lord not humans. He is not in time

But we ARE humans and we DO live within time. So while God is not bound by time, we most definitely are, and there are some in this current time that will be saved/adopted in the future but have not as of yet and if they were to die today they would go to hell because they have not yet been saved.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

But we ARE humans and we DO live within time. So while God is not bound by time, we most definitely are, and there are some in this current time that will be saved/adopted in the future but have not as of yet and if they were to die today they would go to hell because they have not yet been saved.

Where are you getting that? That’s pure Bullet in the Hole Calvinism. I have to take issue with whole theology

 

[AustinC]

Only five times is that term used and then only by Paul. If you do not see those other references being related, because I see the term as I explained, I do not see believers as already adopted as you seem to. Ok?

I have already addressed this with you. You have closed yourself off to the whole of scripture so that you can create a theology that is narrow and incomplete.
You are free to hold such a narrow view and miss the whole. This issue will not affect our position before our King, therefore it is of little import to me that you reject the fullness of God's adoption of yourself.

 

[Reformed1689]

Where are you getting that? That’s pure Bullet in the Hole Calvinism. I have to take issue with whole theology

Absurd. Based on what?

 

[AustinC]

Where are you getting that? That’s pure Bullet in the Hole Calvinism. I have to take issue with whole theology

On this issue you are correct in your statement. @Reformed1689 has a large inconsistency if he is truly Reformed.

 

[Reformed1689]

On this issue you are correct in your statement. @Reformed1689 has a large inconsistency if he is truly Reformed.

I'm not inconsistent. I have already said, that in God's space, since he is present in future and in past as well as present, yes they are already adopted, in that sense alone, but they are not adopted already in their current reality without conversion and, if they were to die, they would be condemned. Granted, that is an impossibility they would not die before conversion.

 

[37818]

I have already addressed this with you. You have closed yourself off to the whole of scripture so that you can create a theology that is narrow and incomplete.
You are free to hold such a n arrow view and miss the whole. This issue will not affect our position before our King, therefore it is of little import to me that you reject the fullness of God's adoption of yourself.

We disagree on the Biblical view. I ask you to explain your view, and you believe you have made what you understand to be the Biblical view clear, if I understand you.

 

[SavedByGrace]

But we ARE humans and we DO live within time. So while God is not bound by time, we most definitely are, and there are some in this current time that will be saved/adopted in the future but have not as of yet and if they were to die today they would go to hell because they have not yet been saved.

dude, I have said this before. you don't even understand reformed theology!

"there are some in this current time that will be saved/adopted in the future but have not as of yet and if they were to die today they would go to hell because they have not yet been saved"

This means that these who must be the "elect", can be lost and go to hell!

To be "saved and adopted" means that they cannot belong to the "non elect", in reformed theology!

It is clear that you are making it up as you go along

 

[Reformed1689]

dude, I have said this before. you don't even understand reformed theology!

"there are some in this current time that will be saved/adopted in the future but have not as of yet and if they were to die today they would go to hell because they have not yet been saved"

This means that these who must be the "elect", can be lost and go to hell!

To be "saved and adopted" means that they cannot belong to the "non elect", in reformed theology!

It is clear that you are making it up as you go along

It is clear you want to take things out of context. I said IF they were to die. However, I do not believe that is a possibility. You are talking about a hypothetical. But no, they are not adopted BEFORE conversion. Chosen, yes, adopted, no. Paul makes that clear. If you say we are already adopted before conversion you must also say we are sanctified before conversion, justified before conversion, yet Scripture is clear before conversion we are under the wrath of God. So no, I do not agree with @AustinC on this and I definitely do not agree with your strawman arguments.

 

[SavedByGrace]

It is clear you want to take things out of context. I said IF they were to die. However, I do not believe that is a possibility. You are talking about a hypothetical. But no, they are not adopted BEFORE conversion. Chosen, yes, adopted, no. Paul makes that clear. If you say we are already adopted before conversion you must also say we are sanctified before conversion, justified before conversion, yet Scripture is clear before conversion we are under the wrath of God. So no, I do not agree with @AustinC on this and I definitely do not agree with your strawman arguments.

strawman arguments? that's rich coming from you!

It is YOU who said that those who are to be saved in the future, who are also part of the adopted, can die and go to hell, until they are actually saved!

You have been caught out in yet again bad theology, so, instead of manning up and saying you made an error, you try to wriggle out.

 

[Reformed1689]

It is YOU who said that those who are to be saved in the future, who are also part of the adopted, can die and go to hell, until they are actually saved!

You have been caught out in yet again bad theology, so, instead of manning up and saying you made an error, you try to wriggle out.

No, as I have already shown, that is, in fact, not what I was saying. I answered a hypothetical, I have already said it is not a real possibility.

 

[SavedByGrace]

No, as I have already shown, that is, in fact, not what I was saying. I answered a hypothetical, I have already said it is not a real possibility.

Oh PLEASE! We both know what you said and it is faulty theology.

You should just say that you are wrong. It is very Christian to do so

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Absurd. Based on what?

You sure are a “out of the box thinker”

my infant died before ever hearing the gospel… so where is he?

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Oh PLEASE! We both know what you said and it is faulty theology.

You should just say that you are wrong. It is very Christian to do so

I’m never wrong! These Calvinists on the other hand

 

[Reformed1689]

Oh PLEASE! We both know what you said and it is faulty theology.

You should just say that you are wrong. It is very Christian to do so

Why would I say I am wrong? I've already told you my position, and, as usual, you spit back something I do not believe then tell me I need to own up to that as my belief.

 

[Reformed1689]

You sure are a “out of the box thinker”

my infant died before ever hearing the gospel… so where is he?

I am not one that preaches infants automatically go to Heaven. I honestly don't know how to reconcile that. But I would never give false hope that a baby is in heaven since I do not know if that is true.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

I'm not inconsistent. I have already said, that in God's space, since he is present in future and in past as well as present, yes they are already adopted, in that sense alone, but they are not adopted already in their current reality without conversion and, if they were to die, they would be condemned. Granted, that is an impossibility they would not die before conversion.

OK… explain conversion and while you are at it, explain regeneration!