ScottEmerson
Active Member
It is for those who believe that God severely hates the non-elect, as some have expressed. Why would Christ die for these people?
-
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!
John 3:16
- Thread starter tyndale1946
- Start date
Daniel David
New Member
Helen, you so flippantly treat the subject of God's sovereignty.
Shame on you.
Perhaps you should seek to understand this issue. Given your gross misrepresentations, I can only hope it is ignorance and not your firmly held beliefs.
Man is not sovereign, Helen.
Shame on you.
Perhaps you should seek to understand this issue. Given your gross misrepresentations, I can only hope it is ignorance and not your firmly held beliefs.
Man is not sovereign, Helen.
KenH
Well-Known Member
I reject the first part of your sentence.
Isaiah 53:11-12(NASB)
11 As a result of the anguish of His soul,
He will see it and be satisfied;
By His knowledge the Righteous One,
My Servant, will justify the many,
As He will bear their iniquities.
12 Therefore, I will allot Him a portion with the great,
And He will divide the booty with the strong;
Because He poured out Himself to death,
And was numbered with the transgressors;
Yet He Himself bore the sin of many,
And interceded for the transgressors.
Matthew 26:28(NASB)
28 for this is My blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for forgiveness of sins.
Mark 10:45(NASB)
45 “For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life a ransom for many.”
Mark 14:24(NASB)
24 And He said to them, “This is My blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many.
John 10:11,15(NASB)
11 “I am the good shepherd; the good shepherd lays down His life for the sheep.
15 even as the Father knows Me and I know the Father; and I lay down My life for the sheep.
Acts 20:28(NASB)
28 “Be on guard for yourselves and for all the flock, among which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to shepherd the church of God which He purchased with His own blood.
Ephesians 5:25(NASB)
25 Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ also loved the church and gave Himself up for her,
The words "many", "sheep", "church" define and limit the word "all"
Ken
[ November 20, 2002, 06:54 PM: Message edited by: Ken Hamilton ]
Shame on you Preach the Word! YOU flippantly treat the sovereignty, love, justice, AND mercy of God with disrespect
God loved Adam - but He predestined Adam to commit sin - thats real loving
Do you still love your kids when they disobey you? Do you because of your love not punish them
I find it funny that people keep going to John 3:19 and skipping right over it
John 3:16-18 the word kosmos means elect ut not 19 no that word means something else - words do NOT change meaning that fast
and kosmos in John 12:47 is even more fun
dont elieve not judged cause not to judge the elect but to save the elect - but how can the elect e saved if they do not believe? Kosmos is cosmos!
John 2:2 And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world." differentiating between us and the entirety
Kosmos is kosmos
My God is able to let us make our decisions and not only that He is able make His plans happen no matter what we choose - WOW that's sovereignty.
We get to make a choice and thus are responsible - that's justice
God sovereignly acts to provide us a way out and helps us towards that choice without violating our will - Thats mercy
God does all 3 for everyone - THAT IS LOVE all loves excelling
That He would be willing to send His Son to die so that everyman would have the choice - even if He knew that no one would take it.
God loved Adam - but He predestined Adam to commit sin - thats real loving
Do you still love your kids when they disobey you? Do you because of your love not punish them
I find it funny that people keep going to John 3:19 and skipping right over it
John 3:16-18 the word kosmos means elect ut not 19 no that word means something else - words do NOT change meaning that fast
and kosmos in John 12:47 is even more fun
dont elieve not judged cause not to judge the elect but to save the elect - but how can the elect e saved if they do not believe? Kosmos is cosmos!
John 2:2 And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world." differentiating between us and the entirety
Kosmos is kosmos
My God is able to let us make our decisions and not only that He is able make His plans happen no matter what we choose - WOW that's sovereignty.
We get to make a choice and thus are responsible - that's justice
God sovereignly acts to provide us a way out and helps us towards that choice without violating our will - Thats mercy
God does all 3 for everyone - THAT IS LOVE all loves excelling
That He would be willing to send His Son to die so that everyman would have the choice - even if He knew that no one would take it.
God does not save, He does not draw any to salvation through mercy. Mercy is having pity. God does not pity me because I am a sinner. God saves through Grace, Grace draws, Grace saves, Grace is unmerited favor, not pity, therefore, not mercy.
God Bless.
Bro.Dallas
God Bless.
Bro.Dallas
ScottEmerson
Active Member
Would all be many? Of course. Many does not exclude all.
Many does not exclude all.
Many does not exclude all.
Many does not exclude all.
Sheep does not exclude all.
He purchased the church - but the church does not exclude all.
For her does not exclude all.
It would limit it ONLY if the words, "only the many" "only his sheep" and "only the church were found. It is not. These are subsets of all, and you cannot find anything in Scripture that states that the others are excluded, can you?
KenH
Well-Known Member
That's like asking the question, "Have you stopped beating your wife?" I hope you know that a negative cannot be proven.
I've offered the Biblical proof, Scott. If you refuse to accept positive proof and want me to provide you with negative proof, then, I'm sorry, but there's really nothing more I can do for you on this subject.
Hopefully, there will be others who can learn from my posts.
Ken
[ November 20, 2002, 08:06 PM: Message edited by: Ken Hamilton ]
Ken, it's not 'spiritual mud wrestling' -- it's more like anger. That was not a misrepresentation of what was exactly above it in the thread.
In the meantime, Dallas, I'm incredibly grateful God had mercy on me. Call it pity if you like, I don't care.
I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion."
Exodus 33:19
David said to Gad, "I am in deep distress. Let us fall into the hands of the Lord, for his mercy is great; but do not let me fall into the hands of men."
2 Samuel 24:14
Remember me for this also, O my God, and show mercy to me according to your great love.
Nehemiah 13:22
But I, by your great mercy, will come into your house;
in reverence will I bow down toward your holy temple.
Psalm 5:7
O Lord, do not rebuke me in your anger
or discipline me in your wrath,
Be merciful to me, Lord, for I am faint;
O Lord, heal me, for my bones are in agony.
Blessed are the merciful, for they will be shown mercy.
Matthew 5:7
It does not, therefore, depend on man's desire or effot, but on God's mercy.
Romans 9:16
Dallas -- suggest you get a concordance and look up the word 'mercy'. It is used over a hundred times in the Bible and many of them are such as those quoted above. Thank God for His mercy on us!
In the meantime, Dallas, I'm incredibly grateful God had mercy on me. Call it pity if you like, I don't care.
I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion."
Exodus 33:19
David said to Gad, "I am in deep distress. Let us fall into the hands of the Lord, for his mercy is great; but do not let me fall into the hands of men."
2 Samuel 24:14
Remember me for this also, O my God, and show mercy to me according to your great love.
Nehemiah 13:22
But I, by your great mercy, will come into your house;
in reverence will I bow down toward your holy temple.
Psalm 5:7
O Lord, do not rebuke me in your anger
or discipline me in your wrath,
Be merciful to me, Lord, for I am faint;
O Lord, heal me, for my bones are in agony.
Blessed are the merciful, for they will be shown mercy.
Matthew 5:7
It does not, therefore, depend on man's desire or effot, but on God's mercy.
Romans 9:16
Dallas -- suggest you get a concordance and look up the word 'mercy'. It is used over a hundred times in the Bible and many of them are such as those quoted above. Thank God for His mercy on us!
KenH
Well-Known Member
Please point it out, Helen, I just don't see where you got that idea. Are you sure you have not slipped back into attributing a belief to someone based on your own prejudice as many of us(myself included) have been guilty of in the past? There is no reason to place any conclusion like this at the feet of those of us who believe the Bible teaches Definite Atonement. It would be like my side saying that your side believes some, if not most, of the blood that Jesus shed was shed in vain. I am sure you would think that was an unfair accusation, and you would be correct.
You seem to be angry a lot, Helen. And anger is no emotion to have when debating the precious book, the Bible. I learned that myself on the Baptist Board.
Kind regards to you,
Ken
[ November 20, 2002, 08:28 PM: Message edited by: Ken Hamilton ]
You seem to be angry a lot, Helen. And anger is no emotion to have when debating the precious book, the Bible. I learned that myself on the Baptist Board.
Kind regards to you,
Ken
[ November 20, 2002, 08:28 PM: Message edited by: Ken Hamilton ]
Here, Ken:
npetreley wrote:
This is how I happen to see it. IMO, the atoning sacrifice is sufficient to cover all. I don't see why this is a problem for either free-will or election.
Scott Emerson then responded:
It is for those who believe that God severely hates the non-elect, as some have expressed. Why would Christ die for these people?
To which npetreley answered:
You'd have to ask Jesus. If I had to guess, I'd say it would be to demonstrate the all-sufficient magnitude of His mercy.
So the atoning sacrifice was sufficient to cover all.
But it didn't.
(so far I think we all agree if that is also your position)
But the Calvinist position, as expressed above at least, is that the reason it didn't is basically because God didn't want it to. He only elected a few to salvation.
Therefore my comment.
My anger, Ken, is with responses such as Preach gives which are insulting and snide and mocking. I have gotten better manners out of atheist evolutionists. My anger is also with what I see as insulting God's character, which I really believe Calvinism does. It would not matter to me if it did not do that. You folks could go your own way with no nevermind from me. I don't like arguing at all, actually.
But the God I know created every human being in His image. The God I know loves every person He has ever created. The God I know made provision for every person, but also allowed each who reached adult age to choose to accept or reject that provision, which is in Jesus Christ. That does not decrease God's sovereignty! It simply means that our choices are within His sovereignty, not a challenge to it. He is too big for that.
If I can allow my children (or did, when they were young) to make choices and still maintain absolute control in my own home, should I be more in control of my home than God is of the universe and all creation? Hardly!
If a pagan can feel pity for a person who does not know Christ, and simply reach out to help that person, is God any less? Not on your life!
The God that seems to be promoted by Calvinist theology is capricious with His love, choosing this one or that one and not the others simply because that is what He wanted to do.
But when Jesus fed the 5000, He fed everyone there. He is available to everyone. You don't have to eat, but the food is there for the taking.
npetreley wrote:
This is how I happen to see it. IMO, the atoning sacrifice is sufficient to cover all. I don't see why this is a problem for either free-will or election.
Scott Emerson then responded:
It is for those who believe that God severely hates the non-elect, as some have expressed. Why would Christ die for these people?
To which npetreley answered:
You'd have to ask Jesus. If I had to guess, I'd say it would be to demonstrate the all-sufficient magnitude of His mercy.
So the atoning sacrifice was sufficient to cover all.
But it didn't.
(so far I think we all agree if that is also your position)
But the Calvinist position, as expressed above at least, is that the reason it didn't is basically because God didn't want it to. He only elected a few to salvation.
Therefore my comment.
My anger, Ken, is with responses such as Preach gives which are insulting and snide and mocking. I have gotten better manners out of atheist evolutionists. My anger is also with what I see as insulting God's character, which I really believe Calvinism does. It would not matter to me if it did not do that. You folks could go your own way with no nevermind from me. I don't like arguing at all, actually.
But the God I know created every human being in His image. The God I know loves every person He has ever created. The God I know made provision for every person, but also allowed each who reached adult age to choose to accept or reject that provision, which is in Jesus Christ. That does not decrease God's sovereignty! It simply means that our choices are within His sovereignty, not a challenge to it. He is too big for that.
If I can allow my children (or did, when they were young) to make choices and still maintain absolute control in my own home, should I be more in control of my home than God is of the universe and all creation? Hardly!
If a pagan can feel pity for a person who does not know Christ, and simply reach out to help that person, is God any less? Not on your life!
The God that seems to be promoted by Calvinist theology is capricious with His love, choosing this one or that one and not the others simply because that is what He wanted to do.
But when Jesus fed the 5000, He fed everyone there. He is available to everyone. You don't have to eat, but the food is there for the taking.
"(12)But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, to those who believe on His name: (13)who were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God."
- John 1:12-13</font>[/QUOTE]and to whom is this privilege given?
"(12)But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, to those who believe on His name: (13)who were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God."
I guess it depends on what you wish to emphasize, doesn't it?
Helen, please be careful. Others may have taken your comments as "insulting and snide and mocking" as well. You also seem to be saying in this statement that even if "Calvinism" didn't insult God's character (in your opinion) that you wouldn't care whether or not your "Calvinist" brothers and sisters went away from you. That, in reality, is insulting to the work of Christ. He shed His blood to redeem people from every tribe, tongue, people and nation to make us one in Him. He died, and prayed, and rose again, so that we would be one people - His body - His Church - His community of worshipers.
Just a thought: if you don't like "arguing" (debating) and it only just makes you "angry," you may want to consider whether it might be better for you (personally, spiritually, emotionally) to refrain from such discussions.