Are you claiming that all are saved? since all are blessed?
MB
-
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 6.44
- Thread starter Barry Johnson
- Start date
- Status
MB
The Archangel
Well-Known Member
It's quite difficult determining what you believe and where you're going with your elaborate replies when you don't specifically answer the questions raised - this obviously seems straightforward to you but it might help me understand your exact position better if you could provide simply yes/no answers to the following questions that have already been raised.
1. Would you say Abraham is saved? Yes/No
2. Do you hold being saved to be different from receiving eternal life? Yes/No
3. Do you believe all men today, in addition to believing Jesus' death and resurrection, must also believe Jesus is the Son of God to be saved? Yes/No
Obviously, you might have nuances and may want to qualify the above with detailed distinctions - but could you please do so after replying simply yes/no to the above, just to give me a starting framework to even follow where you're heading (we're already so far from the OP having not made much progress). If perchance, as some others do (and this may not be you), you feel tempted to comment vaguely on how it's useless to explain these things to me and quit the conversation, it still wouldn't take you as long to type in single characters(Y/N) per question before you leave. Kindly indulge me. And likewise, I am equally ready to answer any of your qns - I have already replied to your earlier qn on whether I do preach Jn 6:40 today and I say a boolean Yes to that.
I've got a copy of the English language Bible where God says this in Heb 7:4
ESV: See how great this man was to whom Abraham the patriarch gave a tenth of the spoils!
Another's got a different copy of the English language Bible where God says in Heb 7:4,
NASB: Now observe how great this man was to whom Abraham, the patriarch, gave a tenth of the choicest spoils.
Yet another in Young's Literal Translation,
YLT: And see how great this one is, to whom also a tenth Abraham the patriarch did give out of the best of the spoils,
GNB: You see, then, how great he was. Abraham, our famous ancestor, gave him one tenth of all he got in the battle.
And finally,
KJV: Now consider how great this man was, unto whom even the patriarch Abraham gave the tenth of the spoils.
If seeing is not to consider, does that rule out KJV as a faithful translation?
And how exactly are we to see/observe Melchisedec in the simplest sense of the word 'see' - do you not bear any interpretative principles to this? How would you convince someone reading the ESV who insisted that Melchisedec must be visible today because "God has written his words in simple terms"?
The Archangel
Well-Known Member
You should want to be kind and nice because the people here are brothers and sisters in Christ, not "to persuade." Romans 12 tells us "let love be genuine;" it does not say to "be nice" in order to get something. A word to the wise should be sufficient here.
Your comment(s) above show that your issue is Calvinism, not what the text says. If you cannot or will not deal with the text itself and constantly rail against your opponent's system, then you are beholden to your system in the same way you accuse others of being beholden to their system. This is nothing more than projective posturing on your part. You really should argue the text, not the person.
You do realize I have a Master's Degree in this stuff, right? Your statement is an ad hominem and you don't try to refute anything I've said about θεωρέω in John 6--probably because you are ill-equipped to do so. Nevertheless, obfuscation is not a winning tactic.
What is more... It would seem that you are insisting that for anyone else to be "right" they would have to agree with you. While I'm sure you think yourself to be right, agreeing with you would lead me into grave theological error, as well as syntactical, semantic, and grammatical error. It is rather small minded to insist everyone agree with you--especially when you run afoul of what the text itself says. In most circles you cannot refer to a duck as a car and expect sane, rational people to agree with you. It is the same in this instance.
The Archangel
Yes, I will because it is a fair request..
Answer to #1
To the way your question is framed "is saved" yes.He was justified by believing God in the OT and his sins were washed away in the NT. Nobody whose sins are not washed away are saved. Now look, No one who has sin on them are saved and noone who has sin in them can have the indwelling Holy Spirit. These two things amount to salvation, see Titus 3:5 and Re 1:5 and context. The fact that you men do not know that and in fact argue against it is absolutely astounding to me given that you have a copy of the word of God that does not make that ambiguous and is a demonstration of how blind false religion can make someone.
Ex 34:7 Keeping mercy for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, and that will by no means clear the guilty; visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, and upon the children's children, unto the third and to the fourth generation.See numbers 14:8
Don't you know that God would have taken the law away if men could have been perfected some other way than by the blood of Christ?
Gal 3:21 Is the law then against the promises of God? God forbid: for if there had been a law given which could have given life, verily righteousness should have been by the law.
When John introduced Jesus Christ in his gospel, he said that he was the Word, flesh, and God, He said that in him was LIFE. He was not just looking for something to say. He was saying the truth. He is the only man ever born into the world that had LIFE in him.What was that life? It was the Spirit of God. It was then and it is now. The Spirit is life according to Rom 8:9 and other places I could mention.He was the "son " of God. a trinity, soul, body, and Spirit of God. He was not the only son of God like some of the bad translations say, but he was the only begotten son of God. Adam was a son of God and likewise was a soul, body and Spirit when God created him. What does it mean to have eternal life. It means to have the eternal God present with you who has promised he will never leave you or forsake you He says in Eph 4:30 that the Spirit of God seals us as sons of God. He did not say that to Adam and Adam died a spiritual death and all his offspring are absent of God and need to be born of God.All are in his image, soul and body and belongs to his family.If and when a man receives the Spirit of God he becomes a son of God and he has eternal life because the Spirit of God indwells him. This is THE gift of God that he promises to give every man who believes in him. There are two sides to belief. Repentance toward God and faith in Jesus Christ. There is more to know but this should suffice to answer question 2.
John 3:33 He that hath received his testimony hath set to his seal that God is true.
34 For he whom God hath sent speaketh the words of God: for God giveth not the Spirit by measure unto him.
Question #3
The answer is yes. If Jesus is not God come in the flesh we are all in deep, deep trouble because no man has the righteousness to give us. The Spirit of God is called the righteousness of God. He it was who empowered Jesus Christ to live a sinless life in a weak body.
Salvation is acquiring the righteousness that God demands.The wonderful and gracious God made a way to credit righteousness to men who did not have it . He justified believers in what he said to them by imputing their faith FOR righteousness. But that did not take away their sin. It just moved them in a right relationship with God until the blood was shed. Will you please read the whole of Gal chapter 3 right here because that is what it says.I am not making this up.
My text keeps going away and I don't know how this is going to look when I post it.If it does not make sense or looks odd I will fix it at my next opportunity but I am out of time now. I notice that Answer #2 is gone on the screen I am looking at now. The short answer to that question is no. Eternal life and salvation are the same.
I would like to expand on these answers later.
Last edited:
You have John 6:44, the drawing of God of a few as a fundamental, foundational; doctrine of the Christian faith.Do not ask me to compromise on what makes a man a Christian.I do not care how right you are on some non fundamentals but you must believe certain things about Jesus Christ. You cannot get these things wrong.
The Archangel
Well-Known Member
Believing that the Father draws to Christ does not in any way change the nature of Jesus.
The Archangel
The Archangel
Well-Known Member
What, might I ask, is your issue with God drawing people to Christ? Is it that few are drawn or that any are drawn? Furthermore, if one is not drawn (which is a hallmark of both Calvinist and Arminian theology), how does one come to Christ?
The Archangel
Sure The Archangel, you may ask. Except for the fact that it is mentioned one time in an OT setting and in the context of Israel only and except for the fact it is not mentioned under the NT either as relating to the salvation of Israel in the first 7 chapters of Acts, the Samaritans in chapter 8 or the gentiles in the rest of the book and because this is the foundational passage for limited atonement teaching of the Reformed. This teaching supposes that the Father is drawing only previously elected men to come to Christ and be saved.i have proven from the scriptures in previous posts that this cannot be true and I have told the truth about what this drawing was really all about. There are other scriptural proofs of this that I haven’t even mentioned.
This is a great question. I posted a thread when I first arrived here that dealt with how God brings sinners to himself. It has the title “No salvation without the human element” or something close to that. I take God’s side on that subject and present it in my posts. I recommend you read those comments for the answer.
Appreciate your replying. Just for your reference, the reformed view and independently I do believe in the following too -
1. "He(Abraham) was justified by believing God in the OT and his sins were washed away in the NT. Nobody whose sins are not washed away are saved."
2. "This(the Spirit of God) is THE gift of God that he promises to give every man who believes in him. "
3. "The wonderful and gracious God made a way to credit righteousness to men who did not have it . "
Given that we/I have never contested anything against Gal 3, what part of Gal 3 do you think we're opposing? What statement of yours do you think we'd feel you're making up? Again, if you write an entire paragraph on this, it's difficult for me to discern exactly which points we disagree on - since there are several statements in what you write that I do believe myself. Hence, if you could simply write a statement or list out singular points, we could quickly go through which statements have been misunderstood.
Sinners need 1) their sins washed away and 2) the indwelling Holy Spirit to be saved. Are you claiming the reformed view does not uphold this? Where are you getting your facts from? Have you considered that you could be terribly wrong over what a blind false religion is - since these are absolutely fundamental beliefs of both calvinism and arminianism and every other non-heretical denomination.
You seem to be stuck in thinking that somehow, just because the reformed view holds Jn 6 as speaking to us too today, that they're not preaching the true Gospel? The Gospel command to all men is to behold the Son of God, repent of our sinning, believe in Christ's death and resurrection to wash away all our sins and to give us life by His Spirit. What of this do you disagree with as being a false Gospel?Mention specifics. Preaching Jn 6 in no way negates any of this, just as us preaching Gen 12:3 today still upholds the very Gospel message - doesn't Gen 12:3 speak to Christians today as to the work God is doing as part of the Gospel message?
The generation of jews that Jesus came to, did not indeed believe because of their hardness and blindness - we are in agreement on that.
Rom 11:7 What then? Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh for; but the election hath obtained it, and the rest were blinded
Rom 11:8 (According as it is written, God hath given them the spirit of slumber, eyes that they should not see, and ears that they should not hear) unto this day.
Rom 11:9 And David saith, Let their table be made a snare, and a trap, and a stumblingblock, and a recompence unto them:
Rom 11:10 Let their eyes be darkened, that they may not see, and bow down their back alway.
Who has blinded them and given them the spirit of slumber? God.
And who were those who obtained the righteousness of God without being so blinded? The elect jews.
And on what basis were these jews elected? By grace and not works.
How is election assuredly by grace and not works? by electing before any man's good or evil, before they were even born.
These are direct Scriptural citations - which of these do you disagree with? Addressing them each on their own, preferably in short posts or as points, would help not lose the message in the forest. I am vaguely aware of your belief in Christ alone being the true elect and all those in Him being termed the elect after they believe and are placed in Him - but in these passages, we are talking about the effects of election as occurring before and leading to the very seeing and hearing and believing itself. How can the effect logically occur before the cause?
Where does the Bible say Gentiles are elect? and where does it say they are elect by the grace of God?
MB
Reformed proof text for limited atonement is John 6:44. Only those who are preselected before the foundation of the world to be saved will be drawn.This is an accurate assessment of the teaching of the Reformed. This election is a foundational doctrine of the Christian faith. No one will be drawn if they are not elected. Is this not what you believe and teach as a Calvinist? That is not what I teach and it is not the teaching of non reformed Christians.It is a point of contention.I teach that Jesus Christ died for the sin of the world in a one time event at Calvary, that God the Father testified about through men he had chosen for the task, The Holy Spirit placed those who believe into his body by the new birth and God the Father elected them by virtue of having elected Christ before the foundation of the world. A capsule view of this is in 2 Thess 2:13-14. Our Lord Jesus Christ rightly gets the glory for our salvation.
The problem I have with Reformed doctrine of drawing as a fundamental Christian teaching is that it causes men to not believe God in plain statements he makes through his apostles, like "God so loved the world."
Every Calvinist or Reformed I have ever spoken with has said the gift of God is "faith" as per Eph 2:8-9. Why are you different?
I did not cite Gal 3 because I said you disagree with it but to confirm the point I was making.We are in agreement about hardly anything. I state my reasons why it is so.
The subject of the op is John 6:44. Almost everything I have had to say relates to that. Why do you think I have not made singular points about it? Have you read my comments?
That is not my issue. My issue is limited atonement. This is what Reformed doctrine teaches from John 6:44. The Reformed teaches that only those whom the Fathers draws are candidates for salvation and the Father only draws those whom he has preselected in eternity past to save. John 6:44 is the foundation for this thinking. Do you not agree with this? Isn't that what you teach?
If you are a Calvinist then you are engaging in double talk here. A command demands obedience and if the command is to all men, according to your statement. You and I both know that you are not teaching that God says that with the expectation of all men obeying him because he has chosen only a certain few to give the ability to obey him.Your definition of all men is different than mine. Your "all men" are those whom he has preselected.
Why are you distancing yourself from what you actually believe?
atpollard
Well-Known Member
Just to pick a nit, John 6:44 is really more of a proof text for Irresistible Grace than Limited Atonement.
No one can come (Total Inability) unless God draws them (Irresistible Grace) and the Son will raise them up at the last day (Preservation of the Saints).
Preselected is more Romans 8:28-30 and Ephesians 1:3-6.
Limited Atonement is more John 10:14-16.
God bless.
The better question is "when" did he do it and for what purpose.It is in Matt chapter 13 that he begins to speak in parables to the multitude instead of plainly to the Jewish rulers. This is his method of blinding them. Matthew 13 is a transition time near the end of his ministry. The Purpose of his blinding their mind is because of the curse he had placed on that generation of Jewish rulers because they not only would not believe in him but devised a means of killing him. See the parable I am posting at the end of this post.. He would not save them.It will take divine revelation to understand the mysteries he began to expound. That is true for the Jews then and for us today.
The elect Jews are identified as the "remnant according to the election of grace," the few who did believe on Jesus Christ and were born again of his Spirit. The fact of the remnant, a theme of the OT prophets, makes us understand that Jesus Christ was coming at the end of the world and the fullness of time to fulfill the law and the prophets. He had made promises to this nation of people in covenants and declarations.He did not fulfill those promises, except for those concerning his suffering and the sending of his Spirit to Israel. The very fact that his intention was to save the whole nation as a collective "one" under the principle of "promise" but saved only a few on the principle of grace should be very instructive to us all.
By grace and not by works of the Mosaic law. This was written in AD 58. This is 28 years after Jesus Christ had risen from the dead and ascended to heaven. It is 18 years after the first gentiles experienced the grace of God in Acts 10. The history of the NT had unfolded between Acts 1 and Acts 18 when Paul wrote these words. Gentiles had been the object of Jewish evangelism since Acts 10. Paul said this about the remnant of Jews in Rom 9 and the same man who said about those who were saved also said in Rom 10 these words about those who were not saved;
Rom 10:1Brethren, my heart's desire and prayer to God for Israel is, that they might be saved.
He goes on to say they were not saved because they held on to the principle of law for their salvation. He also said this, remembering the time line;
Rom10:21 But to Israel he saith, All day long I have stretched forth my hands unto a disobedient and gainsaying people.
Do you believe that ivdavid? Do you believe God had his arms outstretched to Israel as a father to his son in AD 58?
Election is possible because Jesus Christ took away the sin of the world according to Heb 9:26 and other statements from God and because of which he does not impute sin to men, something the Reformed denies. God was propitiated by the blood of Christ on behalf of all men, he says.
Because he chose Christ before the foundation of the world and we are one with him. He did not choose me as a separate entity.
The works of the Godhead, all in Rom 8
Christ died for sinners
The Father justifies the sinners who believes
The Spirit quickens the sinner whom the Father justifies and places him in Christ..
Lk 14:16 Then said he unto him, A certain man made a great supper, and bade many:
17 And sent his servant at supper time to say to them that were bidden, Come; for all things are now ready.(supper time is at the end of the day)
18 And they all with one consent began to make excuse. The first said unto him, I have bought a piece of ground, and I must needs go and see it: I pray thee have me excused.
19 And another said, I have bought five yoke of oxen, and I go to prove them: I pray thee have me excused.
20 And another said, I have married a wife, and therefore I cannot come.
21 So that servant came, and shewed his lord these things. Then the master of the house being angry said to his servant, Go out quickly into the streets and lanes of the city, and bring in hither the poor, and the maimed, and the halt, and the blind.
22 And the servant said, Lord, it is done as thou hast commanded, and yet there is room.
23 And the lord said unto the servant, Go out into the highways and hedges, and compel them to come in, that my house may be filled.
24 For I say unto you, That none of those men which were bidden shall taste of my supper.
Last edited:
You have spoken plainly here. I agree with you on the errors of leading people to misinterpret basic teachings. What I do disagree with you on is your notion that such misinterpretations prove with certainty such a person is an unsaved unbeliever. I see heavy misinterpretations from the non-calvinist camp too, for instance your rejection of unconditional election (not reprobation) - I am convinced that that is no final indicator of one's standing before God. I find it easy to see a man irrationally holding to some inconsistent beliefs while thinking he's consistent, but all the same being certainly established on the foundational truths of Christ and His Gospel.
I get this a lot. It's amusing you raise the hypothetical "if you are a calvinist" and then affirm with certainty that "you and I both know"
Anyway, to clarify, I am not a calvinist in that I reject predestined unconditional reprobation and condemnation. I do believe that predestined unconditional individual election is biblical. I believe God has offered salvation to ALL men as in all, not just the elect. I believe God did so out of His love for ALL men, not just the elect. His sure mercies of David are sure only for the elect - but they are still available for anyone else, only conditional upon their receiving. There is no lack of intent from God's end - any rejection or condemnation is purely predicated on man's will to disobey in unbelief. Any acceptance by man is evidence of God's grace working it out in him.
Maybe to begin with, I am not strictly calvinist.
Anything received by the grace of God is a gift - it could be righteousness (Rom 5:17), eternal life (Rom 6:23) and the Holy Spirit (Acts 2:38).
Joh 6:64 But there are some of you that believe not. For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were that believed not, and who should betray him.
Joh 6:65 And he said, Therefore said I unto you, that no man can come unto me, except it were given unto him of my Father.
What was to be given to them so that they could believe and come to Jesus? Whatever that was, is by grace, and hence a gift too.
Sai
Well-Known Member
Rom 9:11 (For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth)
How does the purpose of God according to election stand if it is based on what good these jews do after they are born?
Dave G
Well-Known Member
" But neither Titus, who was with me, being a Greek, was compelled to be circumcised:
4 and that because of false brethren unawares brought in, who came in privily to spy out our liberty which we have in Christ Jesus, that they might bring us into bondage:" ( Galatians 2:3-4 ).
" Paul, a servant of God, and an apostle of Jesus Christ, according to the faith of God’s elect, and the acknowledging of the truth which is after godliness;
2 in hope of eternal life, which God, that cannot lie, promised before the world began;
3 but hath in due times manifested his word through preaching, which is committed unto me according to the commandment of God our Saviour;
4 to Titus, [mine] own son after the common faith: Grace, mercy, [and] peace, from God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ our Saviour." ( Titus 1:1-4 ).
Titus was a "Greek", and Paul addressed him according to the faith of God's elect.
" Then came he to Derbe and Lystra: and, behold, a certain disciple was there, named Timotheus, the son of a certain woman, which was a Jewess, and believed; but his father [was] a Greek:" ( Acts of the Apostles 16:1 ).
Timothy was half Jew and half Gentile ( Greek ).
In addition, please see Ephesians 1:1-11, Colossians 2:12-13 and 1 Thessalonians 1:1-4.
Pay careful attention to the words on the page, MB.
They give quite a bit of the information you are looking for.
" who hath saved us, and called [us] with an holy calling, not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began,
10 but is now made manifest by the appearing of our Saviour Jesus Christ, who hath abolished death, and hath brought life and immortality to light through the gospel:
11 whereunto I am appointed a preacher, and an apostle, and a teacher of the Gentiles." ( 2 Timothy 1:9-11 ).
All believers are saved and called with a holy calling, which was not according to our works, but according to His own purpose and grace...
A purpose and grace which was given to us ( those who have believed ), "in Christ Jesus" before the world began.
May God bless you in your studies, sir.
Last edited:
- Status