-
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!
Scriptures calvinists must deal with...
- Thread starter Alive in Christ
- Start date
- Status
I understand and I understand where we differ. I can not speak for you but my understanding is that to you faith is what you are choosing to do/have whereas for me faith was the obedience of faith of Christ dying for the sin of the world. We are saved by grace through faith. Grace was God sending his son and faith was what the son did.
Grace through faith is how salvation was achieved. The Word made flesh was obedient unto death, shed his blood which is obedience of faith but as Paul said in 1 Cor. 15:16-18 if he had not been given life again that obedience would have been for naught. (For if the dead rise not, then is not Christ raised: And if Christ be not raised, your faith [is] vain; ye are yet in your sins. Then they also which are fallen asleep in Christ are perished.) Therefore in Titus 3:5 we see this total picture. He saved us (that he achieved our salvation. How?) by washing (His shed blood cleanses us. When?) of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit. Of regeneration. It is the regeneration that allows his blood to clean us. AS Romans 5:10 says it is through this regenerated life of Christ by which we shall be saved.
His baptism by John shows this very thing. He went down into the water, was suffered = died, came up out of the water resurrected = regenerated given life, the Spirit as a dove lit on him = renewing of the Holy Spirit, voice from heaven saying this is my beloved Son in whom I am well pleased = from Col. 1:18 Jesus Christ who is the beginning the firstborn from the dead.
David Lamb
Well-Known Member
You seem to be saying: "They were not His sheep because they did not believe." Jesus has it the other way around; He says that they did not believe because they were not of His sheep.
John 6.44 states the impossibility of anyone coming to Christ unless the Father draws him. The time and the way in which God calls people is not mentioned in that verse, nor is the matter of choice.
Yes, I agree. As with all the epistles, Ephesians is addressed to Christians. So here, Paul is telling the Christians at Ephesus that they had been dead in trespasses, and it was God Who had raised them from that death. Indeed, in the previous verses, Ephesians 2.1-3, he has told them that by nature, they and he were "children of wrath"
Agreed. We are His workmanship.
In the same way, Calvinists do not have trouble in understanding the verses you quoted in your OP. We just understand them differently. Like you, I must add that there are others who could explain things from this "side" far better and more clearly than I.
But one thing I trust we agree on, as I mentioned in my earlier post, is that sinners can only be accepted by a God Who is perfect and holy, because of our Saviour's perfect sacrifice of Himself.
Last edited by a moderator:
John 12:19- The Pharisees therefore said among themselves, Perceive ye how ye prevail nothing? behold, the world is gone after him.
That was easy!!
And there are more if you like.
Not that you are ACTUALLY objective and ACTUALLY want to know the truth.
You just want to argue for what you believe NO MATTER if the Bible is clearly against it.
Prove me wrong.
God chose the words "all" and "whole world" BECAUSE of the normal usage of those words. The normal usage of those words is most certainly NOT every single person.
To say that God meant "every single person" when he said "all" or "whole word" is to force your view on the Word of God.
The NATURAL reading of the text does NOT lend itself to every single person.
You must FORCE that definition where it does not naturally go.
God speaks OUR language in his word.
"All" and "whole world" in NO language- Greek, Hebrew, English, etc...- usually means every single person in the world.
Dozens of news reports said of the tsunami something to the effect of "The whole world is moved over this catastrophe."
Whole world almost NEVER means every single person.
It is not right for you to try to force it to mean that.
Inspired scripture uses words AS WE USE THEM. Nothing about inspiration means that words are suddenly to be used in UNUSUAL ways.
I got no response so I reposted.
To say that God meant "every single person" when he said "all" or "whole word" is to force your view on the Word of God.
The NATURAL reading of the text does NOT lend itself to every single person.
You must FORCE that definition where it does not naturally go.
God speaks OUR language in his word.
"All" and "whole world" in NO language- Greek, Hebrew, English, etc...- usually means every single person in the world.
Dozens of news reports said of the tsunami something to the effect of "The whole world is moved over this catastrophe."
Whole world almost NEVER means every single person.
It is not right for you to try to force it to mean that.
Inspired scripture uses words AS WE USE THEM. Nothing about inspiration means that words are suddenly to be used in UNUSUAL ways.
I got no response so I reposted.
If God did not mean the whole world, as in all the world, every part of it, then you have just condemned yourself to an eternity apart from God.
(Joh 1:9) That was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world.
(Joh 1:10) He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not.
Did Christ make the whole world of part of it? Twice the word “world” is used in the same sentence; to attempt separate the meanings of word “world” to describe both a narrow sense (Light limited to a "world" of pre-determined creatures) and a broad sense (meaning His creation of the "world" in whole) is a ridiculous notion and a perfect example of:
(Joh 1:10) He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not.
Did Christ make the whole world of part of it? Twice the word “world” is used in the same sentence; to attempt separate the meanings of word “world” to describe both a narrow sense (Light limited to a "world" of pre-determined creatures) and a broad sense (meaning His creation of the "world" in whole) is a ridiculous notion and a perfect example of:
You're kidding right???
Your argument is that because on RARE occasions "whole world" means everybody and everything that is must always mean it???
You can't be serious.
That can't be your argument.
Please tell me you have something else.
Only if Christ died for the entire world could Christ die for your sins as well. If the world is used in a limited sense, as you seem to be saying then how can it be possible that Christ could even be considered to be your Savior 2,000 years after the fact. The world was the world at the time of Christ, and in his small area that he lived, was it not?
Skandelon
<b>Moderator</b>
But to suggest words such as "all" and "whole world" actually mean a very relative select few is far more absurd. To hear God said I love the whole world and take that to mean I love a select few people from all the different nations of the world seems preposterous to any objective reader.
2 Cor. 5:18 All this is from God, who reconciled us to himself through Christ and gave us the ministry of reconciliation: 19 that God was reconciling the world to himself in Christ, not counting men's sins against them. And he has committed to us the message of reconciliation. 20 We are therefore Christ's ambassadors, as though God were making his appeal through us. We implore you on Christ's behalf: Be reconciled to God. 21 God made him who had no sin to be sin for us, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.
Clearly his goal is to provide the means of reconciliation for the whole world and make an appeal to "every creature" to be reconciled. To take this to mean, "God was reconciling a select few from every nation in the world... as though God were making his appeal to the elect ones through us..." is absurd.
And if doesn't mean (in John 3:16, for example) the entire world for all ages, then you have no guarantee that you are one of the elect. That could be one of those verses that confines itself to the world at that time, according to your hermeneutic, and you are lost and condemned to hell. Even then, "the world" if not all the world, could possibly exclude you, if "the world" is not all inclusive.
How could you have missed it, it was even in quotes?!
WHOLE WORLD
You are so adamant to "win" everything you are giving Charlie Sheen a run for his money! Deal with what is actually said instead of trying to hate.
Now again...prove ME wrong that John's use of WHOLE WORLD can mean anything but all of sinful mankind.
Yes, if Jesus did not die for every single man, then no one can know for certain that Jesus died for them. How can a person have faith in Jesus if they do not know his death applied to them? They can't!!
Oh, you might convince and deceive yourself into believeing you are one of the elect, but if Jesus did not die for every single person you have no way of knowing if you are one of the few elect.
Faith means to be certain, to have confidence. You cannot have this if you are not SURE Jesus died for you.
Last edited by a moderator:
My argument should have been clear to you. But to re-state the obvious: I said you are trying to use the word "world" in both a broad and narrow sense from within the same sentence and then I posted your quote to show the hypocrisy in your statement.
Edit, in case you forgot:
Originally Posted by Luke2427
You must FORCE that definition where it does not naturally go.
Last edited by a moderator:
World means people all over the world. That is the normal use of the word "world". It does not represent even a slim majority of people.
When the news reported that the "whole world" is moved for Japan in the wake of this disaster those reporters understood that about 2 billion human beings were too young to understand anything about it.
Another billion were so isolated and poor that they did not even know about it.
A half billion or so were Muslims who were probably glad it happened.
And there are another billion who just did not really care at all.
But the WHOLE WORLD represented the fact that there were people moved in just about every nation in the world.
That is the normal use of the word.
THAT is consistent with Scripture that tells us that in heaven God's elect will be there from every nation, kindred, tribe and tongue.
You're kidding, right?
It is your contention that when JOHN said "THE WHOLE WORLD" is gone after him that that meant that EVERY SINNER on EARTH was following Jesus???????????
You are a mess.
Is it your contention that EVERYONE is God's elect???
If not, are you saying that the only way ANYONE can KNOW that they are God's elect is because Jesus died for EVERYBODY.
That is UTTERLY ridiculous.
Even those passages you people use to support unlimited atonement- I've NEVER heard anybody argue that those passages are the only ones that give Christians assurance of their salvation.
I do not have to believe that he died for everybody in order to know that he died for me.
Not even an ARMINIAN theologian would make such a ridiculous argument.
- Status