Is there Room at the Cross?

Dear Sister,
As I see it, the problem is not whether there is room at the Cross. The cross is not the altar over which God has set forth to be a propitiation. That altar is the flesh of Christ, through which He offered His Eternal Deity and Holiness and Righteousness through the Eternal Spirit to complete in one body (his flesh), the reconciliation of man to God.

Now, the question is not whether there is room at the Cross, but to the lost it is rather, does your heart burn within you when you hear the word of God which declares His righteousness revealed in Christ, which declares His having set forth His only Begotten Son as a propitiation (note, both the propitiation, or offering for mercy, our burnt offering, and also the place of propitiation which is now the mercy seat of God rather than the seat of Judgment) over which He will meet and commune with His people.

To present the gospel to the lost is not the error, to present it to them in a way that disables God from accomplishing through Christ (which is the reconciliation, the provision of the place of mercy and that very mercy) is the error.

Tell all the wonderful news,

All that we will see that do come will be only they who are athirst.

Why is this an affront to so many? Why do so many imagine this is what limits the love, mercy and righteousness of God?

Sovereign Grace declares the victory in the shed blood of Christ, In His willingness to submit Himself to the counsel of the will of the Father, anything else, while admitting His victory, declares it fulfilled only in the choice of a sinful creature, who cannot receive nor understand the things of God (John 14:17 1 Cor. 2:12-14).

May God Bless,
Bro. Dallas

 

"Room at the cross" is words of a song. not a theological statement.

The theological problem is overuse of personal pronouns in the NT. The denominations want to restrict application to those who have signed on to the program.

 

Here's another fine example of an objection to Calvinism that is based on what someone thinks the scripture SHOULD say rather than on what it actually says.

Does anyone find the words "room at the cross" in scripture?

How about the words "chosen before the foundation of the world?"

Now which should we believe and hold dear?

 

Here's another fine example of an objection to Calvinism that is based on what someone thinks the scripture SHOULD say rather than on what it actually says.
[/QB][/QUOTE]

 

No Calvinist that I know of denies that Christ's atoning work would be SUFFICIENT for every person.

The real question is whether Christ's work ALONE is sufficient to save. Every Non-Calvinist view that I'm aware of requires man to do something or add something --- its kind of like, "yeah, I'm dead but He can't make me alive until I (pick your poison) allow him, receive him, ask him, trust him, etc & etc"

 

Who is Paul talking about in that verse? Is it the saved or unsaved? It is the saved, and of course their trespasses were nailed to the cross. If the unsaved had their trespasses nailed to the cross...then they would be saved.

 

#1. Why would God sovereignly predestine one of the saved to do such a thing?

#2. Why would God sovereignly predestine that one of the lost be enabled to love the truth and then evangelize others to Christ by telling them about this flaw in Calvinism as if that was really the Gospel message? (i.e. As if the message was "God so loved the FEW that He gave His Son... and you MIGHT be one of the FEW".

In Christ,

Bob

 

Amen to that

 

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
He has made alive together with Him, having forgiven you all trespasses, 14 having wiped out the handwriting of requirements that was against us, which was contrary to us. And He has taken it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Good point. The text says that God "cancelled our certificate of debt consisting of decrees against us having nailed it to the cross"

It does not say "only the certificate of debt for all NON-believers that would ONE day believe".

Neither does John 3:16 say "God so loved BELIEVERS that He gave".

Rather God so loved a WORLD of UNBELIEVERS that He gave!!

In Christ,

Bob

 

Is there room on the cross for the forgiveness of the sins of all mankind or just those pre selected? I see no election in this verse. </font>[/QUOTE]Dear Sister,
I note you use a New Living Translation and also a New King James Version, that is fine, I use a KJV, here is the passage:

Some questions:

</font>

• Who is you and your from vs. 13?
  
  Who is us from vs. 14?
  
  Who/What limits these?
  
  How does Sovereign Grace limit these?</font>

May God Bless,
Bro. Dallas

 

Dear Bro. Bob, and all who have trusted in the arm of their flesh to eternally deliver them into the presence of the holiness of God,

There is no Calvinist, nor any other true preacher or believer of the Doctrines of Grace, ie. the Sovereignty of God, in election, or any other point so believed under that heading that preaches a gospel message of the 'few.'

It is the imagination of the pride of man that cannot stand the truth of scripture that God has set forth Christ to declare HIS righteousness, that HE has become their only hope and place for mercy, that pride having its source in Lucifer himself, and instigated upon the sinful prideful heart of men and women who are imho, otherwise children of God, who have believed the spirit of bondage leading them back into fear that God could possibly not have accomplished this work, therefore, I must validate it in order for it to be effective.

What is being said in the Arminian doctrine/free-will doctrine?

Study the deception of Eve, it is a message no different, just altered in its presentation.

Look at the subtil message...proposing doubts and fears that God's counsel of His own will and purpose is somehow not enough...

Note its development...now it is not, 'ye shall not surely die, but thou has not died o man, Or 'you are not dead, you can make your own choices' The choice God has made is not enough, in it, you his creature are not glorified (thus fulfilling the words of satan to Eve as seen in scripture)...

Note its results...(Cf. with Is. 4:1); this doctrine is good for food and pleasant to the eyes, (no mention of the meat of sound words to the refreshing of the soul or spirit, the focus is always the flesh and its building up by whatsoever means)...speaking always of the right choice (to make one wise) as if the wisdom of God is insufficient for his creatures...and providing for themselves aprons of works as a covering to cover their physical nakedness, yet knowing in the visitation of God, this is insufficient. Note how they must have carefully sewed together these fig leaves; but take care to note how God did not acknowledge this covering providing by fallen man through his own hands.

What is the message of Lucifer to Eve? 'ye shall be as gods knowing good and evil'

What is the message of decisional regeneration?

'ye shall be as gods, only believe, God has made the way possible, but he is helpless to bring you by that way, knowing good and evil in yourself, you must choose the way of good.

Do you see, this doctrine of the flesh limits the redemption in Christ much more than any Sovereign Grace Preacher throughout the history of the world ever has or as long as he remains with scripture, ever will.

This doctrine of the flesh is a deception of satan, not to prevent the saving and calling with a holy calling of the elect, but to create fear and weaken the people of God.

What is the continual message you speak, there is no deliverance apart from your righteousness, this speaks against scripture, it has only served to disrupt the church and hinder those that would come in, knowing they are worthless sinners deserving of the wrath of God, to remain separate from a bunch of self-reformed, self-relying, zealots.

If you really believe Christ has taken the handwriting of ordinances out of the way by nailing them to his cross, then freely preach and teach that and quit preaching and teaching fear, you will receive showers of blessings for the joy uspeakable and full of glory as you declare that God honoring message of the Gospel and see the children of God, humbled in the presence of His visitation crying out to Him for mercy, that they might receive their sight by His will.

Oh how wonderful the day shall be when Christ's appearing shall bring us all into the fulness of His likeness, his joy and into the full knowledge of the peace and reconciliation accomplished through His sinless life, vicarious death and glorious resurrection, to the Praise and Glory of His Grace applied to as many as our Lord shall call.

Bro. Dallas Eaton

 

No disclaimer....
</font>[/QUOTE]All of those whom he was speaking of, those who were dead, were also made alive. This is very clearly stated. This is how we know that they were elect.

He really overcame evil for all who believe.

I really, really do not think you are trying.

 

Andy T.

You posted;

Who is Paul talking about in that verse? Is it the saved or unsaved? It is the saved, and of course their trespasses were nailed to the cross. If the unsaved had their trespasses nailed to the cross...then they would be saved.

Very well done!

Regards, KJB

 

Dear Sister Diane,

Think real seriously about what I am going to say in regards to your statement above.

The Truth is:
According to the statement above, even if only one person is the only human to ever not be saved and suffer the wrath of God , then Christ has failed because He did not 'push aside evil', having lost one.

May God Bless,
Bro. Dallas

BTW, I didn't mean to say you couldn't use other translations, I personally prefer the language of the King James and I think the difficulty in understanding the grammar usage is a blessing that leads me to study harder.

Anyway, be careful of some, my mother-in-law has in her possession a modern translation that is dearly loved by her, although it makes the words of Satan in tempting Christ to be the very word of God at Ps. 91:11 (rather than to render the reading as it is, that satan perverted the word).

 

That is really interesting since in Matt 7 Christ Himself says that it is only the FEW that are on the path of eternal life and the MANY never go there. In that chapter Christ points out that the MANY are those to whom the Father says "Depart from me ye workers of iniquity I never knew you".

I would not be surprised to find an ARMINIAN that does not limit the Gospel (actually downsize it) to the FEW - but the fact that you say that there are actually Calvinists that ALSO would not downsize it to the few is encouraging.

They must be 3 point Calvinists.

I am aware of that group and I praise God for their efforts to reject the notion of a "downsized" gospel to "just the FEW" that go to heaven.

Is this a question for me??

The fall of Adam and Eve and 1/3 of the Angels vs the 2/3's that remain loyal is a good example of free will where those with sinless natures - choose against their nature.

Kinda like sinful mankind who has discord "emnity" supernaturally placed by God between mankind and Satan by Christ according to Gen 3.

</font>[/QUOTE]Satan was trying to "Downsize" and "redefine" the Words of God so that they did not really mean what they appear to mean.

I have seen that tried.

Satan was trying to argue that Eve was taking God too literally and that she was imagining the restriction to be too great. In fact he argues that by second-guessing God she could come out ahead. He appealed to her logic, reason and free will. And God let him.

In the same way that in Job 1 and 2 -- Satan is seen doing the same thing at that heavenly council.

In any case my earlier point remains. When Calvinism employs circular arguments about "God choosing to love only the believers" at a point BEFORE He chooses to GIVE - they suppose a mythical situation where BELIEVERS exist within fallen humanity WITHOUT God FIRST "So LOVING that He GAVE" to accomplish such a thing as "believers".

In Christ,

Bob

 

Since none of that looks like a quote of anything I have said - I am trying to figure out if you are paraphrasing Romans 2.

Is that your point? Are you reading Romans 2 that way and then calling it "error"??

In Christ,

Bob