Alan Gross
Well-Known Member
Yes, IF you take it out of context.
it's just, "all kinds of men", meaning, "not the jews, only", & and "not the rich or powerful, only", etc., clearly taught throughout The Bible and justifiably implied, here.
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!
Yes, IF you take it out of context.
Ah yes...the old God just dropped a strange, wrapped package on the corner and any who choose to take it are saved, theology. Have fun finding that free gift on the corner teaching in the Bible.
Right. The real issue is did God leave salvation to chance or did he actually come and save the ones that he chose? One option is not found in Scripture and leaves Jesus' sacrifice as partially wasted, the other is a true redemption and love story.
it's just, "all kinds of men", meaning, "not the jews, only", & and "not the rich or powerful, only", etc., clearly taught throughout The Bible and justifiably implied, here.
We read the same Bible.Pro 9:1 Wisdom hath builded her house, she hath hewn out her seven pillars:
Pro 9:2 She hath killed her beasts; she hath mingled her wine; she hath also furnished her table.
Pro 9:3 She hath sent forth her maidens: she crieth upon the highest places of the city,
Pro 9:4 Whoso is simple, let him turn in hither: as for him that wanteth understanding, she saith to him,
Pro 9:5 Come, eat of my bread, and drink of the wine which I have mingled.
Isa 55:1 Ho, every one that thirsteth, come ye to the waters, and he that hath no money; come ye, buy, and eat; yea, come, buy wine and milk without money and without price.
Isa 55:2 Wherefore do ye spend money for that which is not bread? and your labour for that which satisfieth not? hearken diligently unto me, and eat ye that which is good, and let your soul delight itself in fatness.
Isa 55:3 Incline your ear, and come unto me: hear, and your soul shall live; and I will make an everlasting covenant with you, even the sure mercies of David.
Act 17:19 And they took him, and brought him unto Areopagus, saying, May we know what this new doctrine, whereof thou speakest, is?
Act 17:20 For thou bringest certain strange things to our ears: we would know therefore what these things mean.
Act 17:21 (For all the Athenians and strangers which were there spent their time in nothing else, but either to tell, or to hear some new thing.)
Act 17:22 Then Paul stood in the midst of Mars' hill, and said, Ye men of Athens, I perceive that in all things ye are too superstitious.
Act 17:23 For as I passed by, and beheld your devotions, I found an altar with this inscription, TO THE UNKNOWN GOD. Whom therefore ye ignorantly worship, him declare I unto you.
Etc. etc. etc.
We read two different Bibles and you and I.
You think humans and their choices are sovereign over God and God's choice.
I think God's choice is Sovereign over all men and mankind does not have the capacity to make themselves children of the King
Nope.Strawman (i.e. intentionally deceitful representation of the other's position) argument.
Strawman (i.e. intentionally deceitful representation of the other's position) argument.
Nope.
You are in denial and attempting to change the subject.
We read the same Bible. You are man-centered toward salvation. I am God-centered toward salvation. I read the Bible in full context. You pluck verses out of context to create a man-centered philosophy of salvation.
Good thing that isn't what I am doingThe truth is what the text says. You can't reinterpret the text because you're worried that "Oh but then that would mean that xyz"; that's not how this works.
Good thing that isn't what I am doing
Glad we agree.But of course not, of course not.
It wouldn't matter if we had a verse that said he died for our sins ,and not for our sins only ,but the sins of the whole world, Calvinsm would still teach limited atonement . It is forced to because of there faulty understanding of salvation.Gladly, although I am a bit surprised that you do not know this.
I believe it was unintended, however I must respectfully disagree that it does not change anything.
Here is the verse as you presented it: "But the gracious gift is not like the offense. For if by the offense of the one the many died, much more did the grace of God and the gift by the grace of the one Man, Jesus Christ, overflow to the many."
Stripping away the clauses to create a simple sentence at the core:
The grace of God and the gift [subject] did overflow [verb] to the many [object clause].
The grace of God and the gift [subject] did overflow [verb] the many [object].
In the first sentence (as it was written) the grace overflowed from Jesus and was provided to the many. It is Jesus that has an excess of grace to give.
In the second sentence (as you unintentionally changed it), the grace flows from Jesus and overwhelms "the many" flowing from them to ... somewhere.
The first reading makes Jesus the source of overflowing grace to me, and the second reading makes Jesus the source of grace and that grace overflows from men.
So it did not change nothing.
"But the gracious gift is not like the offense. For if by the offense of the one the many died, much more did the grace of God and the gift by the grace of the one Man, Jesus Christ, overflow to the many."
Now for your answer:
However, none of this changes the fact that MANY is not ALL. All men are not Children of God, since many are Children of the Devil. God does not live in all men, He only lives in His chosen people.
- Quid pro quo - an EQUAL exchange between the Sin of Adam and the Grace of Christ would be something like "Prevenient Grace". Through Adam, all men inherited a fallen nature, so through Christ that fallen nature is removed. Men are now morally neutral and each is fully capable of choosing to obey the Law of God and live a sinless life, or choose to sin. We are restored to the innocence of Adam in the garden. Even one sin, willfully committed becomes your personal "unpardonable sin". Thus many will die (if not all) because of the sins they choose rather than any sin of Adam.
- much more - Christ set right the "death" inherited from Adam's sin. Not merely restoring man to a position of moral neutrality, but actually saving us from our own sins. That includes restoring us from future sins. The grace (unmerited favor) of the gift (something not earned) goes beyond simple restoration of what was lost ... Adam was a beloved creation, but we are children of God . Adam walked WITH God, but God LIVES IN us.
You are reading that in by your own bias.Don't forget to also point out that you are more humble and more spiritual.
Right. The real issue is did God leave salvation to chance or did he actually come and save the ones that he chose? One option is not found in Scripture and leaves Jesus' sacrifice as partially wasted, the other is a true redemption and love story.
How is escaping sin, avoiding judgment, and seeking eternal life from God not an expression of self-interest? Sorry, I see no difference at all.I would submit he is trying to escape for selfish reasons because he sees what the behavior is doing to him. But is he leaving that sin to seek after God and to follow Him? That's the difference.
You should probably read what I wrote again, because that is not what I said.How is escaping sin, avoiding judgment, and seeking eternal life from God not an expression of self-interest? Sorry, I see no difference at all.
I would submit he is trying to escape for selfish reasons because he sees what the behavior is doing to him. But is he leaving that sin to seek after God and to follow Him? That's the difference.
The natural man is content with his bondage....3. Would it be better for the natural man be content with his bondage, lest he commit more sin (selfishness) by seeking an escape?
I carefully read and quoted what you wrote. The question was whether someone in bondage to sin can have a desire to escape. The answer of course is clearly yes. But you discounted this ability to desire freedom because such motivation is selfish, and then asked "But is he leaving that sin to seek after God and to follow Him?" How is seeking God and following Him not motivated by self-interest? Selfless interest in the glory of God rather than one's own deliverance sounds an awful lot like a human merit contribution to salvation.You should probably read what I wrote again, because that is not what I said.