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!
dhk
Prove it, and we shall discuss them !
Joh 3:17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.
--It is odd that you focus on verse 18 but leave out verse 17.
He didn't come to condemn the world, but rather that the world through him might be saved.
God's will is that the world might be saved.
Which world SBM?
The entire world of all ages?
The entire world of the first century?
The elect of the first century?
Which world? How do you know? More importantly, how can you know for sure that you are part and parcel of that world?
Joh 3:17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.
--It is odd that you focus on verse 18 but leave out verse 17.
He didn't come to condemn the world, but rather that the world through him might be saved.
God's will is that the world might be saved.
Which world SBM?
The entire world of all ages?
The entire world of the first century?
The elect of the first century?
Which world? How do you know? More importantly, how can you know for sure that you are part and parcel of that world?
As usual, more evasion !
How is it evasion when he's addressing your point and offering a counter point? That's not evasion. It's called debate. You don't want a debate, or even a discussion. You want a monologue.
Its not addressing my point, its evading it. Since you said that, address my point by first of all proving that you understood the point overall of the post. Show me that you understand the reasoning I used from the scripture to make my point, then we go from there ! Now this thread is entitled condemned already, show me you understand why I made the points I did, even though you may disagree with them ! I will be waiting
Even though you're not interested in any serious discussion, I'll play your game for one post. But if your response to me includes the words "yes or no?" or any variation of "show me you understand my points", the discussion is over.Its not addressing my point, its evading it. Since you said that, address my point by first of all proving that you understood the point overall of the post.
It's not up to us to understand your reasoning. Only to discuss what you said. The reasoning is all in your head. I am not a mind reader. I can only address what you say, not what you think.savedbymercy said:Show me that you understand the reasoning I used
Again, illogical. I don't know, and can't tell you why you made those points. I can only explain why I disagree with them.savedbymercy said:... from the scripture to make my point, then we go from there ! Now this thread is entitled condemned already, show me you understand why I made the points I did,
savedbymercy said:even though you may disagree with them ! I will be waiting
savedbymercy said:When we read Jn 3:18
18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
We read of them being condemned already, and for that to be True, such ones Christ could not have died for, because God in Justice cannot and will not condemned anyone, any sinner for whom Christ died, simply because Christ has already been condemned for them, having had their sins and condemnation charged to Him. Where Rom 5:18 states that condemnation came upon all by one Adam Rom 5:18
18 Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life.
Well, that Judgment unto condemnation came upon Christ instead of them, because He was their Surety !
So now that Justice for them has been served, God would be unjust to have anyone Christ died for under the sentence of condemnation at anytime, that would be equivalent to our double jeopardy laws !
The first part of the sentence is easily understood. Those that believe are not condemned. The second part is where you miss the mark, however. He that doesn't believe is condemned already because he hasn't believed. That word because right there throws a wrench into what you're saying. There is the use of the present tense "believeth", and the continuing present tense of "is condemned". In the current state of unbelief that he is in, he is condemned. That verse in no way states or implies that he is stuck in that state. All men are born condemned. Those that believe then have their condemnation taken from them, and placed on Christ.John 3:18 said:JHe that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
It's not up to us to understand your reasoning.
Now, for the part where I explain what you said.
You are saying that since the non-Elect are already condemned, then Christ could not have died for them, since His death brought condemnation upon Himself, and if He brought condemnation upon Himself it would be charging two people for the same crime to have Christ condemned and the lost condemned.
The first part of the sentence is easily understood. Those that believe are not condemned.
The second part is where you miss the mark, however. He that doesn't believe is condemned already because he hasn't believed. That word because right there throws a wrench into what you're saying.
Because you can't debate someone's reasoning. You can only debate their position.sw
Thats Illogical, then how can you debate my reasoning ?
The very word debate means:
To consider something; deliberate.
2. To engage in argument by discussing opposing points.
sw
No, thats not what I said ! I stated that the condemnation that those who Christ died incurred, that condemnation of theirs was charged to Christ, hence He paid the penalty for it, so for them to be under condemnation at any time is like double Jeopardy ! God is not Unjust to hold condemned the Surety of those Christ died for, and those for whom Christ died for !
Ok, good so far. You're saying that I didn't say what you said. I understand that so far.No, thats not what I said !
Here's where it gets hairy, as that's not even a sentence. "Those who Christ died incurred". You mean "The condemnation of those whose Christ's death incurred"? Or possibly "The condemnation of those who Christ died for incurred"? See, I can't discuss anything with you if what you say doesn't even make grammatical sense, much less logical sense.I stated that the condemnation that those who Christ died incurred, that condemnation of theirs was charged to Christ, hence He paid the penalty for it, so for them to be under condemnation at any time is like double Jeopardy !
Ok, so now you're saying Christ wasn't the Surety. Which, I know you aren't saying on purpose, because you've stated emphatically before that He was. But that sentence right there. You said God wouldn't hold the Surety condemned, but you said before that Christ was condemned for us.God is not Unjust to hold condemned the Surety of those Christ died for, and those for whom Christ died for!
Interesting, that you would say the opposite of what the verse says. The verse says "but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed", and you're saying that he doesn't believe because he is condemned. Interesting. Those two are polar opposites. The verse states that the cause of his condemnation is his unbelief, while you are saying that the cause of his unbelief is his condemnation.sw
No it doesnt, the word because confirms my reasoning, a condemned person cannot believe because their sins have not been paid for, so thats why they believe not.
So which is it?The believing not is the result of being condemned already.
And those two sentences directly contradict each other. So, let me get this straight, those who don't believe shall be condemned because there are condemned and can't believe, so they're going to be condemned because they're condemned. Believe it or not, that is exactly what you just said.Jesus told His disciples that as they preach the Gospel in the world, that those who believe it not shall be condemned ! That is they are showing that they are in a condemned state by their not believing Mk 16:15-16
15 And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.
16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.
That word damned means:
I.to give judgment against, to judge worthy of punishment
A.to condemn
B.by one's good example to render another's wickedness the more evident and censurable
Now this cannot be the case for anyone Christ has already been punsihed and condemned for !
Interesting, that you would say the opposite of what the verse says. The verse says "but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed", and you're saying that he doesn't believe because he is condemned.
And those two sentences directly contradict each other. So, let me get this straight, those who don't believe shall be condemned because there are condemned and can't believe, so they're going to be condemned because they're condemned. Believe it or not, that is exactly what you just said.
And now we're back at the beginning, where you are stating what I already said you stated, but you said you didn't. Christ didn't die for them, because they are condemned. But then there goes the circular reasoning again.