The Millions Who Never Had a Choice

[SovereignGrace]

Thanks, RT.

I'm trying to press the logical implications of their beliefs. I certainly know that there are implications of what I believe.

I don't mind debating here all day long, but I want to debate people who are intellectually honest. I want to debate this with people who own their position, and who fully understand mine. And, I want to do all that in a way that avoids name calling and other such nonsense. Call me a dreamer. . .

They...the Arminians...says 'the world' means any and everybody who has ever lived without exception when they quote John 3:16. But then there is....

Do not love the world or anything in the world. If anyone loves the world, love for the Father is not in them. For everything in the world—the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life—comes not from the Father but from the world. The world and its desires pass away, but whoever does the will of God lives forever.[1 Jn. 2:15-17]

The world rarely means any and all who ever lived, but they emphatically state it in that fashion.

 

[steaver]

They...the Arminians...says 'the world' means any and everybody who has ever lived without exception when they quote John 3:16. But then there is....

Do not love the world or anything in the world. If anyone loves the world, love for the Father is not in them. For everything in the world—the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life—comes not from the Father but from the world. The world and its desires pass away, but whoever does the will of God lives forever.[1 Jn. 2:15-17]

The world rarely means any and all who ever lived, but they emphatically state it in that fashion.

And this doesn't change the fact that in John 3:16 Jesus is speaking of the whole world. We know this because of additional scripture confirming Jesus Christ is the propitiation for not only the saved, but for the whole world. (1Jo2:2)

 

[Iconoclast]

Could be. So is this the gospel at that time for them to believe? They certainly new nothing of Jesus Christ crucified and raised again, which is what we generally think of when we hear "gospel". Also, Hebrews points to the Israelites as having been preached the gospel in the desert. Where is this recorded in the OT? Or isn't it?

I think that you start to see why many theological teachers and students have looked at it and because of the very verses you're bringing up in this post have realized ok the gospel in a broader sense means good news so what if any good news was there for Old Testament saints now we know that it is the cross of Christ that saves anyone who ever gets saved but being that revelation is progressive they live in faith of the promises they had at that time .
God looked upon their relationship to the promise through covenant eyes and that's why we keep going back to the language of Covenant over and over not just to have a theological hobby horse
but because that's the structure and language that the scripture dictates to us

 

[Rippon]

Jesus Christ is the propitiation for not only the saved, but for the whole world. (1Jo2:2)

You need to link 1 Jn. 2:2 with John 11:51b-52:
"...Jesus would die for the Jewish nation, and not only for that nation but also for the scattered children of God, to bring them together and make them one."

The Lord purchased people for God from among every tribe, language and people and nation. (Rev.5:9;7:9)

 

[robustheologian]

"O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!" (Matt 23:37)

Those who Jesus talked about gathering were not the ones that were unwilling. Jesus is speaking to the Pharisees on them not letting him gather their children...that's who he was referring to gathering (it's in plain text "children"). This passage doesn't address free will at all. The Jews prevented their children from hearing Christ. Like I said this passage has nothing to do with free will.

"And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world". (1Jo 2:2)

You have a poor understanding of what propitiation is and how that works. If the whole world is atoned for than the whole world is saved. I just don't get how Arminians miss that. That's like a judge declaring all the charges against an ENTIRE gang of 20 members dropped. But then he tells the bailiff to haul 10 of them away. That just makes no sense.

 

[tyndale1946]

Those who Jesus talked about gathering were not the ones that were unwilling. Jesus is speaking to the Pharisees on them not letting him gather their children...that's who he was referring to gathering (it's in plain text "children"). This passage doesn't address free will at all. The Jews prevented their children from hearing Christ. Like I said this passage has nothing to do with free will.


You have a poor understanding of what propitiation is and how that works. If the whole world is atoned for than the whole world is saved. I just don't get how Arminians miss that. That's like a judge declaring all the charges against an ENTIRE gang of 20 members dropped. But then he tells the bailiff to haul 10 of them away. That just makes no sense.

I see a lot of unbelief on this board... Is Christ going to lose any he died for?... Not according to the scriptures, and this is my belief!

Matthew 1:20 But while he thought on these things, behold, the angel of the LORD appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost.

1:21 And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins.
Notice the 3 shalls in verse 21... God the Father says it... God the Son says it, and God the Holy Spirit says it... The saving is ALL a work of Jesus Christ not conditional on what the sinner does or does not do... Lord I believe, help thou mine unbelief... Brother Glen

 

[thatbrian]

Those who Jesus talked about gathering were not the ones that were unwilling. Jesus is speaking to the Pharisees on them not letting him gather their children...that's who he was referring to gathering (it's in plain text "children"). This passage doesn't address free will at all. The Jews prevented their children from hearing Christ. Like I said this passage has nothing to do with free will.


You have a poor understanding of what propitiation is and how that works. If the whole world is atoned for than the whole world is saved. I just don't get how Arminians miss that. That's like a judge declaring all the charges against an ENTIRE gang of 20 members dropped. But then he tells the bailiff to haul 10 of them away. That just makes no sense.

Great job explaining both texts.

 

[SovereignGrace]

And this doesn't change the fact that in John 3:16 Jesus is speaking of the whole world. We know this because of additional scripture confirming Jesus Christ is the propitiation for not only the saved, but for the whole world. (1Jo2:2)

So God loves the WHOLE WORLD and yet hates the wicked who are part of the WHOLE WORLD?? Wishy washy God you have purported mon ami.

 

[SovereignGrace]

Great job explaining both texts.

These are the say guys...DHK, steaver et al who would advocate Lazarus having an ability of saying, 'No, I'm good in this tomb. No thanks!' Then Jesus would leave Lazarus in there because he chose to not obey Jesus' command to come out.

 

[Internet Theologian]

These are the say guys...DHK, steaver et al who would advocate Lazarus having an ability of saying, 'No, I'm good in this tomb. No thanks!' Then Jesus would leave Lazarus in there because he chose to not obey Jesus' command to come out.

I've read what steaver says but will have to check out this dhk man/woman says.

 

[thatbrian]

These are the say guys...DHK, steaver et al who would advocate Lazarus having an ability of saying, 'No, I'm good in this tomb. No thanks!' Then Jesus would leave Lazarus in there because he chose to not obey Jesus' command to come out.

I was once in the same boat, so I'll try not to judge them too harshly.

 

[Internet Theologian]

I was once in the same boat, so I'll try not to judge them too harshly.

Same here. When did you figure out the boat had a leak?

 

[tyndale1946]

These are the say guys...DHK, steaver et al who would advocate Lazarus having an ability of saying, 'No, I'm good in this tomb. No thanks!' Then Jesus would leave Lazarus in there because he chose to not obey Jesus' command to come out.

LAZARUS COME FORTH!... Who is it?... Brother Glen

 

[tyndale1946]

Same here. When did you figure out the boat had a leak?

I know when I figured out my boat had a leak... When I tried to fix it!... In my filthy rags and I bailed as much as I could and it still sunk... Brother Glen

 

[thatbrian]

Same here. When did you figure out the boat had a leak?

I know when I figured out my boat had a leak... When I tried to fix it!... In my filthy rags and I bailed as much as I could and it still sunk... Brother Glen

That's my story as well, Glen. The more I tried to be a "good Christian" the more aware of just how sinful I was. When I saw my own total depravity, then I was able to see God's sovereignty in election.

 

[Internet Theologian]

And this doesn't change the fact that in John 3:16 Jesus is speaking of the whole world. We know this because of additional scripture confirming Jesus Christ is the propitiation for not only the saved, but for the whole world. (1Jo2:2)

The phrase 'the whole world' is used as it would be a shocking statement to the Jews who figured He was solely their God alone. Thus the verse makes an impact by usage of the word 'world'. Not Jews only or exclusively.

 

[righteousdude2]

So God loves the WHOLE WORLD and yet hates the wicked who are part of the WHOLE WORLD?? Wishy washy God you have purported mon ami.

Strange way to address a brother made in the same image of God as you. That which flows from your fingers, is not all too sweet.

 

[Crabtownboy]

These are the say guys...DHK, steaver et al who would advocate Lazarus having an ability of saying, 'No, I'm good in this tomb. No thanks!' Then Jesus would leave Lazarus in there because he chose to not obey Jesus' command to come out.

Your thought does not hold as it is illogical. The dead cannot make a decision of any kind on anything. The living can and do make decisions for which they are responsible.. You have the ability to reply to this post or not to reply. It is your decision, not God's. Your, not God, are responsible for how you reply. You not God are responsible for any and all of your decisions.

 

[steaver]

Strange way to address a brother made in the same image of God as you. That which flows from your fingers, is not all too sweet.

Sadly, we see quite a bit of this language coming from the Calvinist Christian camp. It puzzles me how Calvinist believe they are so dead right about the theology of the bible, how scripture teaches doctrine, yet seem to totally miss the love Jesus Christ taught in the scriptures. It's kinda like the Jews view of the Samaritans, except it is the Calvinist looking down upon anyone non-Calvinist, they are beneath them.

One Calvinist poster here has this for his signature....

""If you can't answer a man's argument all is not lost you can still call him vile names" Elbert Hubbard.

And he lives up to it very well....

 

[steaver]

Those who Jesus talked about gathering were not the ones that were unwilling. Jesus is speaking to the Pharisees on them not letting him gather their children...that's who he was referring to gathering (it's in plain text "children"). This passage doesn't address free will at all. The Jews prevented their children from hearing Christ. Like I said this passage has nothing to do with free will.
.

That would be saying the Pharisees had power over Jesus Christ to stop Christ from saving people. Calvinism likes to talk alot about God's sovereignty. Your exegesis strips Christ of His Sovereignty.

I agree with Matthew Henry on this passage...

"[1.] The favour proposed was the gathering of them. Christ's design is to gather poor souls, gather them in from their wanderings, gather them home to himself, as the Centre of unity; for to him must the gathering of the people be. He would have taken the whole body of the Jewish nation into the church, and so gathered them all (as the Jews used to speak of proselytes) under the wings of the Divine Majesty. It is here illustrated by a humble similitude; as a hen clucks her chickens together. Christ would have gathered them...,

...[3.] Their wilful refusal of this grace and favour; Ye would not. How emphatically is their obstinacy opposed to Christ's mercy! I would, and ye would not. He was willing to save them, but they were not willing to be saved by him. Note, It is wholly owing to the wicked wills of sinners, that they are not gathered under the wings of the Lord Jesus. They did not like the terms upon which Christ proposed to gather them; they loved their sins, and yet trusted to their righteousness; they would not submit either to the grace of Christ or to his government, and so the bargain broke off."