The True Gospel of Christ's Saving Death

[DaveXR650]

The gospel is a declaration of finished work of Christ, it is not a offer. God does with His creation according to His purposes, not the other way around.

We disagree. I respect your opinion but you have to admit that a horde of strong, famous Calvinists disagree with you on that. Part of the finished work of Christ includes the proclamation that Jesus saves and pardons and if you hear the message you are included in that. This does not infringe upon God's sovereignty.

 

[37818]

You believe a false doctrine about the propitiatory death of Christ. I believe what the Bible teaches about the propitiatory death of Christ.

How did you before you believed, come to know from the word of God Christ paid for your sins?

 

[KenH]

We disagree.

On what? That God does with His creation according to His purposes, and not the other way around?

a hoard of strong, famous Calvinists disagree with you

Wasn't it already previously established in debating on Baptist Board that I am not a Calvinist?

 

[KenH]

How did you before you believed, come to know from the word of God Christ paid for your sins?

I don't understand what you asking. Can you clarify?

 

[37818]

Like I said earlier, I see how you could have that opinion. I personally have no problem saying to anyone that Christ died for their sins. But I'm telling you that strict Calvinists like Owen, who believed in a strict particular atonement, and had a high level of belief in determinism and predestination and election - also had no problem offering the benefits of Christ to anyone who would come. Owen thought that the only evidence of being "elect" was a changed heart and life so he did not ever try to be the gatekeeper so to speak of who it is that are elect. Calvinists who do that are wrong but that does not mean Calvinists don't believe in a true offer of the gospel.

Ok. But how does it answer my question I pose?

How did you before you believed, come to know from the word of God Christ paid for your sins?

There are two choices. Wrongly presume one's self to be God's sheep, Matthew 7:21-23 where it is impossible to have done God's will. Or failing to believe the general redemption and so not believe, so then calling God a liar, 1 John 5:9-10.

 

[37818]

I don't understand what you asking. Can you clarify?

How did you come to believe Christ paid for your sins, if no Scripture teaches that He did, aka the notion of the general redemption, you seem to be calling a false gospel?

 

[KenH]

How did you come to believe Christ paid for your sins

I have read the source document, the Bible. Furthermore, God placed me under the hearing of the gospel back in mid-2021 and God gave me ears to hear and eyes to see what His Word says, gave me a new heart, and granted me the gifts of repentance toward God and faith toward Christ.

 

[DaveXR650]

On what? That God does with His creation according to His purposes, and not the other way around?

No. On whether there is a bonified "offer" of the gospel. Or whether you are "invited" as well as commanded to come to Christ.

Wasn't it already previously established in debating on Baptist Board that I am not a Calvinist?

I guess. When other Calvinists get frustrated with you because of some of your statements. But your belief system is extreme Calvinism. Wasn't it you who posted the article a while back on a defense of hyper-Calvinism?

 

[37818]

See my post #27 earlier in this thread.

' and even denying the Lord that bought them; not the Lord Jesus Christ, but God the Father; for the word κυριος is not here used, which always is where Christ is spoken of as the Lord, but δεσποτης; and which is expressive of the power which masters have over their servants, and which God has over all mankind; and wherever this word is elsewhere used, it is spoken of God the Father, whenever applied to a divine person, as in Luke 2:29 and especially this appears to be the sense, from the parallel text in Jude 1:4 where the Lord God denied by those men is manifestly distinguished from our Lord Jesus Christ, and by whom these persons are said to be bought: the meaning is not that they were redeemed by the blood of Christ, for Christ is not intended; and besides, whenever redemption by Christ is spoken of, the price is usually mentioned, or some circumstance or another which fully determines the sense; see Acts of the Apostles 20:28 whereas here is not the least hint of anything of this kind: add to this, that such who are redeemed by Christ are the elect of God only, the people of Christ, his sheep and friends, and church, and who are never left to deny him so as to perish eternally; for could such be lost, or deceive, or be deceived finally and totally by damnable heresies, and bring on themselves swift destruction, Christ's purchase would be in vain, and the ransom price be paid for nought; but the word "bought" regards temporal mercies and deliverance, which these men enjoyed, and is used as an aggravation of their sin in denying the Lord; both by words, delivering out such tenets as are derogatory to the glory of the divine perfections, and which deny one or other of them, and of his purposes, providence, promises, and truths; and by works, turning the doctrine of the grace of God into lasciviousness, being disobedient and reprobate to every good work; that they should act this part against the Lord who had made them, and upheld them in their beings and took care of them in his providence, and had followed them with goodness and mercy all the days of their lives; just as Moses aggravates the ingratitude of the Jews in Deuteronomy 32:6 from whence this phrase is borrowed, and to which it manifestly refers: "do ye thus requite the Lord, O foolish people and unwise! is not he thy Father that hath bought thee? hath he not made thee, and established thee?" '

- excerpt from John Gill's Bible Commentary on 2 Peter 2:1

John Gill is not correct here. Jude 1:4 identifies the Lord Jesus Christ as the only Sovereign God. So if Christ is not that Sovereign who bought tem in 2 Peter 2:1, who is he?

 

[37818]

I have read the source document, the Bible. Furthermore, God placed me under the hearing of the gospel back in mid-2021 and God gave me ears to hear and eyes to see what His Word says, gave me a new heart, and granted me the gifts of repentance toward God and faith toward Christ.

You did not answer my question. You really do not know?

 

[DaveXR650]

Ok. But how does it answer my question I pose?

It answers your question if you are really interested in trying to understand what someone else's belief system is. It may not be the answer you want.

There are two choices. Wrongly presume one's self to be God's sheep, Matthew 7:21-23 where it is impossible to have done God's will. Or failing to believe the general redemption and so not believe, so then calling God a liar, 1 John 5:9-10.

That's false logic. Wrongly presuming to be one of the sheep has nothing to do with your theology of a general vs a particular atonement.

 

[KenH]

. On whether there is a bonified "offer" of the gospel. Or whether you are "invited" as well as commanded to come to Christ.

Yes. We totally 100% disagree on your teaching that the gospel of Christ is an offer. That is definitely not Bilbical.

Wasn't it you who posted the article a while back on a defense of hyper-Calvinism?

It may have come up in a debate on lapsarianism. I am a dyed-in-the-wool supralapsarian. Many(vast majority?) of those who call themselves Calvinists are infralapsarians.

 

[37818]

1 John 5:9-13 teaches a general redemption, ". . . the testimony that God has testified concerning His Son. . . ."

 

[KenH]

You did not answer my question. You really do not know?

I guess I am not understanding what your question is searching for.

 

[KenH]

1 John 5:9-13 teaches a general redemption, ". . . the testimony that God has testified concerning His Son. . . ."

 

[37818]

It answers your question if you are really interested in trying to understand what someone else's belief system is. It may not be the answer you want.

That's false logic. Wrongly presuming to be one of the sheep has nothing to do with your theology of a general vs a particular atonement.

How does one know Christ paid for one's sins in order to believe He did? It is either impossible or the general redemption is some how presumed or believed from Scripture. Like Romans 5:8.

 

[37818]

I guess I am not understanding what your question is searching for.

Either the word of God is understood to teach Christ paid for one's sins or one has no reason to believe in Christ.

 

[DaveXR650]

Yes. We totally 100% disagree on your teaching that the gospel of Christ is an offer. That is definitely not Bilbical.

I don't expect to change your opinion on this but for what it's worth I think it just comes down to a view of sovereignty which does not violate a person's free will. The Westminster Confession of Faith takes that approach so it's not my own invention. At the same time, when the gospel is heard some believe and some don't but they were all told that if they come to Christ He would save them. That is an offer in my view. Where I differ from Silverhair and some of the other non-Calvinists on here is that I believe that all those in the group who do come to Christ - did so because the Holy Spirit had drew them and convicted them and yes - maybe even regenerated them before they chose to believe. I see real decisions occurring but I do not see in the Bible anything that shows a puzzlement on God's side of wondering what people's choice will be or of Him having to hope that they will decide for Christ. But the work of the Spirit is on the person's will and when made willing they actually do come on their own. If that violates a person's concept of their own autonomy I can't help it. There are plenty of areas in our own physical lives where we believe things that we did not choose to believe in a totally autonomous way. I bet for instance that Martin likes England better than the USA and I believe he freely does that. But in a sense he was not free to do that - that's his country and his free will in that was totally influenced by things beyond his control. It's no big deal to me that we don't have autonomous free will but the fact is we still are exercising choices. Thus there is an "offer".

 

[KenH]

Either the word of God is unbderstood to teach Christ paid for one's sins or one has no reason to believe in Christ.

Proclaiming the propitiatory sacrifice of Christ, as well as, for example, justification of the ungodly, imputation, the need for a perfect righteousness, man's fallen nature, faith, repentance from dead works, predestination, effectual calling, the Lord opening the hearts of His elect, God making those who are spiritually dead by nature alive in Christ, God preserving His elect, God glorifying His elect, are all part of the proclamation of the gospel of Christ from Genesis 1:1 all the way to Revelation 22:21.

I find it interesting that the Bible begins with creation and ends with grace.

 

[KenH]

I don't expect to change your opinion on this but for what it's worth I think it just comes down to a view of sovereignty which does not violate a person's free will.

Man does not have a "libertarian free will".

maybe even regenerated them

There is not doubt that regeneration precedes both faith and repentance from dead works.