If you want to start a thread in the Cal/Arm forum, I am willing to discuss it.
But yes, revmwc has dug himself in a bad hole, a big hole.
-
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!
The Children whom God hath given me
- Thread starter Iconoclast
- Start date
- Status
If you want to start a thread in the Cal/Arm forum, I am willing to discuss it.
But yes, revmwc has dug himself in a bad hole, a big hole.
I do. Perhaps with some variants, but for the most part I do.
The variants IMO would be in the details of the leading of the Spirit.
Problem being so little revealed in detail concerning the Spirit's activities in the OT.
HankD
They were already regenerated but were translated from the kingdom of Israel to the Kingdom of the Son of God..
Colossians 1:10
12 Giving thanks unto the Father, which hath made us meet to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light:
13 Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son:
HankD
Here's something for you to read, revnwc.
http://www.shmoop.com/native-american-history/religion.html
A little excerpt:
This is eerily familiar with what you are advocating, mon ami.
http://www.shmoop.com/native-american-history/religion.html
A little excerpt:
This is eerily familiar with what you are advocating, mon ami.
Last edited by a moderator:
Do you believe they were indwelt with the Spirit?
You, however, are not in the realm of the flesh but are in the realm of the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God lives in you. And if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, they do not belong to Christ.[Rom. 8:9]
The above is the OP that we have drifted from. But the time limit on this thread is just about up anyway.
What about John 14:6?
Am I to pit your philosophy against the words of Christ?
I will go with the words of Christ every time.
The only way to heaven is through Christ. Was he lying?
BrotherJoseph
Well-Known Member
Brother Sovereign,
Good idea. I'll start a thread on it on Tuesday. I will have more time than to discuss. I will be on the boards only sparingly tomorrow and Monday.
Brother Joe
BrotherJoseph
Well-Known Member
Brother DHK,
I believe all the elect will know who Jesus is and of his resurrection and will believe upon him and further the only reason one gets to heaven is because of the atonement alone. I also believe all the elect who hear the gospel preached by the preacher will respond and believe it. Further, I do not believe anyone who believes in a different God other than Jesus will get to heaven. Show me a quote of mine in which I denied either these things? Why are you accusing me falsely?
Now, that I answered your question, please answer my questions. If one is damned for the sole reason of rejecting the gospel, why preach the gospel as by this theology everyone would get to heaven if the gospel was never preached, wouldn't they? Also, how do the mentally handicap, the aborted, and children dying in infancy get to heaven in your system as they cannot hear, understand, and believe the gospel preacher? Is it though a different way, and if a different way what scripture do you have to support that way? It can't be a different way because as we both affirm Christ is the only way.
Hi SG,
At least some apparently were indwelt:
1 Peter 1
10 Of which salvation the prophets have enquired and searched diligently, who prophesied of the grace that should come unto you:
11 Searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow.
Personally I equate circumcision of the heart with having been born again (Lit. born from above) in OT nomenclature.
I also believe there was some ministerial difference of the Spirit among the OT regenerate as opposed to the NT regenerate. I'm still pondering that area of thought.
HankD
We all believe all the elect will go to heaven. That is a given.
The question concerns the atonement. Is it limited or unlimited. A proper exegesis of 2Pet.2:1 shows very clearly that there is no limited atonement and to deny unlimited atonement is a "damnable heresy."
Of course there are scores of verses that describe how Christ died for the world, the sins of the world, is not willing that any should perish, that whosoever should believe on him should be saved, etc.
The NT is rife with such scriptures so that it becomes impossible to deny an unlimited atonement.
This is a given. IT needs not to be said. It is like saying I know every child born of a woman is a baby.
You are simply saying "the elect will be saved." Isn't that a bit redundant?
Change the statement.
Allow it to read: "I believe that all the unsaved who hear the gospel preached will have the opportunity to believe and be saved. See the difference?
Where did I address you of saying anything different? Where did I accuse you of anything?
I said "Salvation is through Jesus Christ."
Is there another way? When you bring up different scenarios out of your own philosophy or reasoning, does that change the meaning of the Word of God?
Is there any other way, but through Christ, to heaven?
Same answer. John 14:6. Christ is the only way.
We have a command enshrined in the Great Commission. It is our obligation to get that message by whatever means possible to our world. If we fail then we have failed in our responsibility to God and will be held accountable to God for such.
Is it possible that their blood will be upon our hands? Yes.
The truth of the Great Commission has never been rescinded.
I justify all through the Word of God.
Jesus is the only way to heaven. (John 14:6).
I also know that God is merciful and Abraham said "Shall not the God of all the earth do right?"
To that end I can answer your questions.
What about those who died in South America the same day Christ died? How about those who died there during the three nights and days our blessed Savior's body was lying in the tomb? Who preached the gospel to them during those days? Where is there documented proof descendants of Jacob/Israel travelled there to tell them about the coming Messiah?
What philosophy? Where did those South Americans hear the gospel preached unto them through one of the descendants of Jacob/Israel? Surely you don't believe no one was living there during the life of Christ here on earth?
None on here do the contrary. We may view, approach them from differing views/angles, but we go with His words every time.
Where has any one stated to the contrary?
:wavey:
Also in Daniel 6 Now Daniel so distinguished himself among the administrators and the satraps by his exceptional qualities that the king planned to set him over the whole kingdom.[vs 3] The KJV uses because an excellent spirit was in him. I think all believers were indwelt because But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.[Rom. 8:9]
Exactly.
Yes!!!! That is where people butcher By this he meant the Spirit, whom those who believed in him were later to receive. Up to that time the Spirit had not been given, since Jesus had not yet been glorified.[Jn. 7:39] The Spirit had not been given in His plenitude, but He has ever dwelt among and in His peoples.
First, I can only answer questions about which I have information about. I have no information about ancient South American history.
Second, are we speaking of Christianity or Israel? I believe they are two distinct entities. The Great Commission was not given to Israel. It was given to "the church". It is a direct command to the Apostles and then passed down to local churches to carry out.
If you want to start a thread about Israel and her failures then that is another topic. Let's confine this one to Pentecost and onward. Our obligation is to carry out the Great Commission as per Mat.28:19,20: Mark 16:15; Acts 1:8.
Abraham said: Shall not the God of all the earth do right?
We are not messengers for the OT. That is past history.
all right.
As soon as you begin to say:
What about....
What if...
without regard to the clear teaching of Christ, who said: "I am the way, the truth, and the life..."
then, yes, you have said what is contrary to Christ--that there is another way, or at least inferred it.
What about the South Americans? Are you inferring that there is another way but Christ. If not, then why ask?
Fair enough. I like your honest answer.
Now we can make some headway here. There have been peoples inhabiting this world for centuries. In Gen. 11 we see The Lord said, “If as one people speaking the same language they have begun to do this, then nothing they plan to do will be impossible for them. Come, let us go down and confuse their language so they will not understand each other.” So the Lord scattered them from there over all the earth, and they stopped building the city.[vss6-8] Now, I don't think He took them and transplanted them to their countries they dwelled in, but they migrated there. Could He have done this? Sure. But I am not convinced that is the case. Peoples have inhabited North America, Central America, South America, Africa, even the deepest, darkest regions, Cuba, Guam, American Samoa, Russia, what would become Alaska, what would become Hawaii, &c. I am hard pressed to believe that each and every person who has lived has heard the gospel and knew who Jesus is. The native Indians of North America did not even have a bible until the mid-1600's when John Eliot went there as a missionary. People come to Christ this way It is written in the Prophets: ‘They will all be taught by God.’ Everyone who has heard the Father and learned from him comes to me.[Jn. 6:45] How do they learn about Christ? This right here How, then, can they call on the one they have not believed in? And how can they believe in the one of whom they have not heard? And how can they hear without someone preaching to them?[Rom. 10:14] Now those through the centuries that never heard the gospel, never knew anything about Christ, He being the only Way, they have died and went to hell due to their sins, and not rejecting the One they never knew the One.
I never stated those qualifiers. Revmwc stated the God coulds.
Huh? I never inferred no such a thing. I am just showing you that those who died in South America at the time of Christ, if they died w/o knowing about Him and hearing the gospel, they died and went to hell due to their sins, and not by rejecting Christ.
BrotherJoseph
Well-Known Member
Brother DHK,
You and I have debated 2
eter 2:1 before. I am posting my same reply to that verse I gave you several months ago.This passage is not the death nail to limited atonement. The following is from a commentary article on this verse titled "2 Peter 2:1 and Universal Redemption" by Simon Escobedo III. If interested, the whole article can be found here http://vintage.aomin.org/2PE21.html
"To summarize this argument, then: in the thirty New Testament occurrences, where the Greek term agorazo is used (this is the greek word for the word "bought" in the verse), only five texts are clearly and indisputably redemptive (2 Peter 2:1 being the lone exception). Furthermore, in these five instances, there are seemingly three undeniable contingencies or features that strengthen the redemptive contexts. Namely, a) the purchase price or its equivalent is stated in the text (i.e., the blood, the Lamb; cf., 1 Cor. 6:20; 7:23; and Rev. 5:9), or the purchase price is implicit in the immediate context (Rev. 14:3, 4); b) redemptive markers or language is used, and b) in every case the context is restrictive to believers (cf. 1 Cor. 6:20; 7:23; 5:9; and 14:3, 4). None of these features or contingencies are to be found in 2 Peter 2:1.
It has been demonstrated that the term “Master” (despotes) refers to an owner in a master- slave relationship. The meaning here is not of Christ as Savior or Mediator (despotes is never used as a redemptive title), but to Christ (or the Father) as Sovereign. It has also been demonstrated that the term “bought” (agorazo) in the New Testament is most frequently used in non-redemptive contexts. When used redemptively there are specific pointers that are conspicuously absent in 2 Peter 2:1 (such as the purchase price, believers as the lone object, or the presence of other mediatorial or redemptive features). Since this is so, it of necessity eliminates the assumed non-Reformed interpretation, at the very least, as the only viable interpretation of 2 Peter 2:1
In Conclusion
We are left then with two possible understandings to the text:
1. The term is being used redemptively. Hence these were men who were bought by Christ (purchased, redeemed) but lost their salvation when they became apostate.
2. The term is being used non-redemptively; hence Peter is not addressing the extent of the atonement, but is providing an OT example (similar to Deut. 32:5-6) of a sovereign master (despot) who had purchased slaves and on that basis commanded their allegiance. "
Brother Joe
BrotherJoseph
Well-Known Member
Brother DHK,
Here is the answer to your word "world" argument.
"Scriptures which refer to God loving the world or to Christ being given to the world (Jn 3:16, 1Jn 2:2) do not encompass all people without exception. Instead, such scriptures are intended to teach that God's love extends beyond the bounds of the Jewish people unto every nation, kindred, people and tongue (Rev 7:9). The term world is used repeatedly in the scriptures in a limited sense; however, this fact seldom receives proper recognition. In the Gospel of John alone there are such usages in: Jn 6:33, Jn 8:12, Jn 8:26, Jn 12:19, Jn 14:19, Jn 15:18, Jn 16:20, Jn 17:9, Jn 17:14, Jn 18:20. It is unfortunate that the few texts which are misinterpreted as teaching universal atonement are not interpreted in light of the many texts which describe Christ's work as being for a special group of people (Mt 1:21, Jn 10:11, Jn 11:51, Jn 15:13, Jn 17:1, Rom 8:32-33, Eph 5:25, Tit 2:14, Heb 9:15)."
http://www.pbpage.org/html/abstract.htm
Brother Joe
BrotherJoseph
Well-Known Member
Brother DHK,
I bought up separate classes of people such as infants dying in infancy, the mentally handicap, and aborted infants and I believe these are all atoned for and born again in the same manner as everyone. "But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even as they." (Acts 15:11). For example, I have no problem with the scripture that John the Baptist had the Holy Ghost from his mothers womb. However as you believe in gospel regeneration, how do you believe these people (infants dying in infancy, the mentally handicap, etc) are born again? Aren't you the one who thus has to invent a "different way" or do you believe these people can understand and believe a gospel preacher, if so, what scripture do you have to prove this?
Brother Joe
BrotherJoseph
Well-Known Member
Brother DHK,
Now if rejecting Jesus is the only thing that damns one to hell, but the preacher didn't get to all nations, kindred, tribe, tongues (e.g. American Indians before Columbus how can these people be dammed if the only reason one goes to hell is rejecting the gospel and they never heard it? Wouldn't this logically lead you to conclude they go to hell for something else (i.e. their sin)? And if that is so, that means Christ didn't atone, pay ransom, etc for their sins, does it?
- Status