Two Disparate Rule Books

[Protestant]

A recent post asked the question, “Are Arminianism & Calvinism issues to split over?”

One need only read another post, “How can Jesus make this claim……,” to discern the great gulf fixed between the two.

It should be quite apparent to the unbiased observer that two disparate rule books are in play when interpreting God’s Word.

How can this be if there is but one faith? (Ephesians 4:5).

How can this be if there is but one Holy Spirit (Ephesians 4:4) who guides His people into nothing but truth? (John 16:13).

Furthermore, God is not a God of confusion (1Cor. 14:33).

Confusion is a predominant attribute of Mystery Babylon, the apostate church of confusion.

On the one side, their rule book espouses the power of man’s will to receive and believe spiritual truth, if he so chooses.

Some in this camp admit Holy Ghost help is needed to bring man’s will into equilibrium whereby he may, should he desire, believe Gospel truth.

Others in this camp dismiss the notion of a will absolutely enslaved to sin and Satan, preferring instead to define man’s will as weak because of sin, but certainly not incapable of receiving and believing Gospel truth.

For, in their minds, the call of the Gospel infers and demands man’s ability to respond positively, should he so choose. Otherwise, the Gospel command would be insincere and deceptive.

On the other side, the proponents of original sin – God imputing the guilt of Adam to all humans (Romans 5:12 ff.), making them born spiritually dead in sin and trespasses (Ephesians 2:1), servants of their father, Satan (John 8:42-44), the natural enemies of holy truth, holiness and a Holy God (Ephesians 2:2-3) -- believe the will of unregenerate man is enmity against God (Romans 8:7).

Those in this camp confess their faith is the gift and miraculous work of God (Ephesians 2:8-9; John 6:29), having first raised them from spiritual death, through the gracious, omnipotent resurrecting power of the eternal life-giving Spirit (Ephesians 1:19-20), through no merit of their own (1 Cor. 4:7; Romans 11:6).

Their faith is all of grace.

Thus, we have two irreconcilable anthropological views.

Either (1) both are in error; or (2) one of them is true, the other a lie.

It is impossible both are true, for they contradict each other.

This postulate is confirmed by the Law of Contradiction.

One may now ask, how serious is the discrepancy?

Some professing Christians see no discrepancy.

For other professing Christians the discrepancy is minor.

Yet for many in both camps the discrepancy is major.

This professing Christian believes the discrepancy is critical because as Christians we are to believe God’s truths.

Love of the truth is requisite to salvation (2Thessalonians 2:10).

In conclusion, if man contributes one iota to his gift of faith, he then diminishes the grace of God, perverting the work of God in salvation, crediting himself a righteous co-worker.

I am the LORD; that is my name! I will not yield my glory to another or my praise to idols (Isaiah 42:8).

Nor will He yield His glory and praise to the idol of free-will.

NEXT: John 3:16 Examined

 

[Deacon]

To begin with I have not read any of the post, How can Jesus...
but anyone who studies the Bible realizes that there have been many different ways Scripture has been used and interpreted by holy men throughout history

and so it seems the Holy Spirit does not guarantee proper interpretation,
and neither does varying interpretations mean there is confusion.

Contradictions between varying interpretations also does not mean one interpretation is right and the other interpretation is wrong,
There are other options
It encourages us to seek a solution amendable to the facts from Scripture, sometimes it means thinking outside of the box.

Just some thoughts

Rob

 

[Protestant]

John 3:16 Examined

No professing Christian doubts an essential attribute of God is ‘love.’

However, God’s ‘love’ is too often given a breadth and depth which has no biblical foundation.

For example, a vast number of professing Christians earnestly contend for a universal definition of the ‘world’ which God ‘so loved.’ This would include every human ever born.

Their soteriology demands Jesus’ mission was to give all men the opportunity to be saved, their free-will the deciding factor.

But Jesus’ mission was no such thing.

For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.

Jesus’ mission was to save the world which God so loved (v. 17).

His mission was not to give God’s beloved world an opportunity or chance to be saved.

Rather, His mission was to actually save God’s beloved world (cf. Matthew 1:21; John 10:15-16).

The noun ‘world’ in Greek remains the same in these verses, proving a consistency in John’s teaching. The world Christ was to save is the same world so loved by the Father.

But did God’s ‘beloved world’ consist of those in the Old Testament who never heard God’s plan of salvation through a Messiah who was to come?

How could it be so, since God allowed all nations in the past to walk in their own wicked ways, while turning a blind eye to them, not having revealed Himself or the way of salvation as explained by His holy prophets or Word to any other nation besides Israel? (Acts 14:16, 17:30; Psalm 147:19-20).

Knowledge of the true way of salvation is essential to redemption (1Timothy 2:4).

Yet billions were bereft of such knowledge.

Either God willfully purposed such eternal misfortune to befall these billions, or He did not.

If He did not, then Isaiah lied when he prophesied , Declaring the end from the beginning, And from ancient times things which have not been done, Saying, 'My purpose will be established, And I will accomplish all My good pleasure' (46:10).

Alas, Isaiah did not lie, not did Jesus lie when He declared, Thy word is truth (John 17:17).

So here we have an insurmountable dilemma.

How can one, in good conscience, believe and teach God so loved those who perished in their sins, never having heard the true way of salvation because God purposed their demise coupled with their righteous eternal punishment?

Perhaps our detractors (who deny God’s effectual saving love is solely for His elect sheep) can posit a benevolent and malevolent love to our holy God?

A malevolent love would be evidenced in denying billions knowledge of the true way of salvation guaranteeing them infinite torment.

A malevolent love would be that of His hating Esau (Romans 9:13) whom our detractors view as God loving Esau ‘less’ than He loved Jacob.

The malevolent love of God would also be evidenced in the worldwide flood when He drowned billions, including children, fetuses, elderly and the disabled, both physical and mental.

Thus, when our detractors preach a Gospel which insists God loves you, one must wonder if that love is benevolent or malevolent. For God loves all, they declare, whether those resting joyfully in Heaven or those experiencing unrelenting anguish and pain in Hell.

Some decades ago I asked a Baptist pastor (seminary trained) if God loves those in Hell. His response was immediate: “Of course.” May God have mercy on the souls of his flock.

In conclusion, the world so loved by God did not comprise the OT gentile nations, though there were a few exceptions as recorded in Scripture.

P.S. The Very Reverend Billy Graham thought himself wise beyond what is written when he proposed another Gospel, one in which finding God in nature or doing one’s best to be a moral and upright person (whether Muslim, Buddhist, Atheist) -- despite never hearing or believing the biblical way of salvation – is sufficient and acceptable to our holy God. The profoundly shameful video may be viewed here.

Shuller’s interview with Graham begins 1:20 into the piece.

NEXT: John 3:16, Part 2

 

[Protestant]

To begin with I have not read any of the post, How can Jesus...
but anyone who studies the Bible realizes that there have been many different ways Scripture has been used and interpreted by holy men throughout history

and so it seems the Holy Spirit does not guarantee proper interpretation,
and neither does varying interpretations mean there is confusion.

Contradictions between varying interpretations also does not mean one interpretation is right and the other interpretation is wrong,
There are other options
It encourages us to seek a solution amendable to the facts from Scripture, sometimes it means thinking outside of the box.

Just some thoughts

Rob

Hi Rob: I appreciate the thoughts shared.

What may not be apparent to the professing Christian is the cascading effect of error. One error leads to another which, in turn, leads to another, until it now becomes another Gospel: one which originates in the corrupt minds of sinful men.

If man is not completely powerless to effect any positive motion toward his own salvation (as taught in Scripture), then why have Christ die?

God should have required men simply turn over a new leaf, kick the old habits and start anew.

Christ could have been a perfect role model for them to imitate.

In my latest post, John 3:16 Examined, I expose the cascading effect of error concerning God’s love. In order to substantiate God’s alleged benevolent love for every person ever born, Billy Graham had to preach another Gospel: one which denies Christ.

I realize I will be introducing ideas and concepts in my posts which are readily embraced by much of professing Christianity.

It will be the reader’s decision to accept or reject, though I will only use Scripture as my source of eternal truth.

P.S. You should read How can Jesus…. It is quite eye-opening.

 

[Benjamin]

John 3:16 Examined

No professing Christian doubts an essential attribute of God is ‘love.’

However, God’s ‘love’ is too often given a breadth and depth which has no biblical foundation.

The breadth, depth and greatness of God's Love is vastly beyond our full ability to understand but we should know it is perfect and a love beyond our measure. God is Love by aseity it is His being, a guiding force, whereas we, created in in His likeness and image, greatly desire the power of love but fall short of perfection in both receiving and giving it. I believe love to be God's purpose in creating the world and that it is a divine attribute we should hold as foundational when striving to understand theology. That said, I'll leave the arguments which wish to limit God's love in order to explain their systematic soteriological positions to others, but will say I consider such a task to only have a goal of placing limitations on love and one that I could only best summarized as being willingly unable to see the forest through the trees and therein missing the beauty of its depth.

 

[Dave G]

It should be quite apparent to the unbiased observer that two disparate rule books are in play when interpreting God’s Word.

I agree.





I saw this on a website once, and for some reason it comes to mind.
To me, there are no rule books...one either picks it up and eventually begins to understand it the more work they put into it, or they do not, no matter how much effort is put into it:

" But the anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you: but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in him." ( 1 John 2:27 )

" It is written in the prophets, And they shall be all taught of God. Every man therefore that hath heard, and hath learned of the Father, cometh unto me." ( John 6:45 )

I also see that there are two rule books...the natural mind, and the spiritual mind.
The scary part:

" He that is of God heareth God’s words: ye therefore hear [them] not, because ye are not of God." ( John 8:47 )


The reassuring part for those who read it and still don't seem to understand it:

" Wherefore laying aside all malice, and all guile, and hypocrisies, and envies, and all evil speakings,
2 as newborn babes, desire the sincere milk of the word, that ye may grow thereby:
3 if so be ye have tasted that the Lord [is] gracious." ( 1 Peter 2:1-3 )


" Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth." ( 2 Timothy 2:15 )


May God bless you.

 

[Protestant]

John 3:16, Part 2

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.

19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.

20 For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved.

21 But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God.

These passages of Scripture prove the absolute depraved nature of man……a nature which hates Jesus, the Light of the World, but loves darkness because all men’s works before regeneration are evil (Romans 3:10-12; Romans 7:18).

There is no need for Jesus to condemn the world because it is condemned by God already.

How so?

Through the imputation of Adam’s sin and guilt to all his posterity (Romans 5; Genesis 5:3).

The world of men, including God’s elect, is condemned for Adam’s sin and must pay the penalty of death (Romans 6:23).

The Progression of Original Sin

Original sin naturally progresses to unbelief and hatred of the true God (Romans 1:18-32; Deut. 28:15ff.), as well as unbelief and hatred of His Son (Matt. 27:17ff.), preferring the release of a murderer to the release of innocent Jesus, whom the Jews gladly crucified.

The Good News of the Gospel

However, this is where the Good News of the Gospel turns a hopeless situation hopeful (Ephesians 2:12).

God declares He will use His wisdom, power and grace to justify sinners no matter the depth of unbelief and evil (Romans 4:5).

He is able to do this because it pleases Him to be gracious, merciful and compassionate (Exodus 33:19; Romans 9:15).

Furthermore, the selfless sacrifice of His beloved Son, Jesus, has made this possibility a reality (John 10:11, 28).

For His Son has paid in full the penalty for the sins of many, their sins imputed to Him on the cross, His righteousness imputed to them by faith, thereby saving them from the second death (Romans 3:24-26, 5:17-19; 2 Cor. 5:21; Rev. 20:12-15).

How the Lord Justifies Sinners

In order to efficaciously succeed in justifying sinners, several obstreperous obstacles must be removed.

(1) Man’s stony heart (Ezekiel 36:26).

For it is with the heart man believes and is then declared righteous (Romans 10:10).

But man’s stony heart is naturally hardened against God, His Son and His truth, and must be replaced with a soft heart of flesh in order to effectuate faith. This miracle God performs.

(2) Man is by nature spiritually blind to the things of God (John 3:3; Ephesians 4:18).

The blinding log of sin must be removed before man can see the truth clearly (Matt. 7:5).

It is Jesus who opens the eyes of men born spiritually blind from birth (John 9:39)….who called us out of darkness into His marvelous light (1Peter 2:9).

(3) Man is by nature spiritually dead to the things of God and must be made alive in Christ (Ephesians 2:4-6; Luke 9:60).

This God effectuates by His Spirit (Ezekiel 36:26-27).

The raising of Jesus and Lazarus are prime examples of God’s power to resurrect from the dead (Ephesians 1:19-20).

By putting His Spirit within man, God effects obedience in the regenerated man (ibid; Jeremiah 31:33).

(4) In addition, man is by nature spiritually deaf, spiritually paralyzed, and spiritually mute, unable to hear the Word, come to Christ, or praise the Lord until God does a miraculous work of creation in him called regeneration, quickening or the new birth.

Once these obstacles are removed man now receives God’s gracious gift of faith willingly and enthusiastically (Ephesians 2:8-9). Though Jesus is its author (Hebrews 12:2), the Christian is the possessor and owner (Luke 7:50).

Conclusion: To disregard the clear testimony of Scripture concerning the deserved condemnation of all men (due to the unmitigated hardness and blindness of their hearts) by declaring man has a will free to make holy, righteous and good use of that will if he so chooses, is to place one’s opinion and word above that of our all-wise holy God who cannot lie.

NEXT: Two Worlds

 

[Protestant]

Hi Rob: I appreciate the thoughts shared.

What may not be apparent to the professing Christian is the cascading effect of error. One error leads to another which, in turn, leads to another, until it now becomes another Gospel: one which originates in the corrupt minds of sinful men.

If man is not completely powerless to effect any positive motion toward his own salvation (as taught in Scripture), then why have Christ die?

God should have required men simply turn over a new leaf, kick the old habits and start anew.

Christ could have been a perfect role model for them to imitate.

In my latest post, John 3:16 Examined, I expose the cascading effect of error concerning God’s love. In order to substantiate God’s alleged benevolent love for every person ever born, Billy Graham had to preach another Gospel: one which denies Christ.

I realize I will be introducing ideas and concepts in my posts which are readily embraced by much of professing Christianity.

It will be the reader’s decision to accept or reject, though I will only use Scripture as my source of eternal truth.

P.S. You should read How can Jesus…. It is quite eye-opening.

In re-reading this post I realize I made an unintentional error in my argument which I wish to correct at this time. It should read:

"I realize I will be introducing ideas and concepts in my posts which are readily embraced by much of historic Christianity. These ideas and concepts are readily rejected by much of modern-day professing Christianity."

 

[Protestant]

The breadth, depth and greatness of God's Love is vastly beyond our full ability to understand but we should know it is perfect and a love beyond our measure. God is Love by aseity it is His being, a guiding force, whereas we, created in in His likeness and image, greatly desire the power of love but fall short of perfection in both receiving and giving it. I believe love to be God's purpose in creating the world and that it is a divine attribute we should hold as foundational when striving to understand theology. That said, I'll leave the arguments which wish to limit God's love in order to explain their systematic soteriological positions to others, but will say I consider such a task to only have a goal of placing limitations on love and one that I could only best summarized as being willingly unable to see the forest through the trees and therein missing the beauty of its depth.

Thanks for sharing your thoughts, Benjamin. I am well aware of your firm theological position through the years on this forum.

However, I do not believe you have considered the fact that God's love cannot fail to save those He purposes to save.

Failure is not a word in God's vocabulary.

Mercy and compassion, aspects of saving love and grace, are not owed anyone.

God says as much in both Old and New Testaments.

Justice, however, is owed all.

Because of His grace and love, Jesus paid justice on behalf of His people.

They will glorify the grace of God forever.

God does no evil by denying to many what is not owed them in the first place.

No one deserves grace.

Nor does God do evil by judging many in righteousness.

They will glorify the justice of God forever.

This is God's Word and I believe it.

 

[Protestant]

I agree.


View attachment 2366


I saw this on a website once, and for some reason it comes to mind.
To me, there are no rule books...one either picks it up and eventually begins to understand it the more work they put into it, or they do not, no matter how much effort is put into it:

" But the anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you: but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in him." ( 1 John 2:27 )

" It is written in the prophets, And they shall be all taught of God. Every man therefore that hath heard, and hath learned of the Father, cometh unto me." ( John 6:45 )

I also see that there are two rule books...the natural mind, and the spiritual mind.
The scary part:

" He that is of God heareth God’s words: ye therefore hear [them] not, because ye are not of God." ( John 8:47 )


The reassuring part for those who read it and still don't seem to understand it:

" Wherefore laying aside all malice, and all guile, and hypocrisies, and envies, and all evil speakings,
2 as newborn babes, desire the sincere milk of the word, that ye may grow thereby:
3 if so be ye have tasted that the Lord [is] gracious." ( 1 Peter 2:1-3 )


" Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth." ( 2 Timothy 2:15 )


May God bless you.

Dave, you and I are in sync. Having read most of your posts, I consider you a rarity among those who post on Christian boards. Your arguments are biblically and theologically sound. Furthermore, you discern the gravity of the many errors expressed just as much as I do.

My concern is primarily directed to those who hold positions of spiritual authority. It has been my experience too many shepherds are fleecing the flocks with bad teaching at a minimum to wicked teaching at the farthest end of the spectrum.

I find the Papacy at the wicked end. Those who endorse the Pope are not far behind.

Certainly there is room for growth in learning among young babes in Christ.

However, spiritual leaders are not among the young in Christ.

Thus, I hold them to an infinitely higher standard, as will God when He judges them.

I will not ask God to bless you, as it is too apparent His blessing and favor is all over you!

 

[SovereignGrace]

Thanks for sharing your thoughts, Benjamin. I am well aware of your firm theological position through the years on this forum.

However, I do not believe you have considered the fact that God's love cannot fail to save those He purposes to save.

Failure is not a word in God's vocabulary.

Mercy and compassion, aspects of saving love and grace, are not owed anyone.

God says as much in both Old and New Testaments.

Justice, however, is owed all.

Because of His grace and love, Jesus paid justice on behalf of His people.

They will glorify the grace of God forever.

God does no evil by denying to many what is not owed them in the first place.

No one deserves grace.

Nor does God do evil by judging many in righteousness.

They will glorify the justice of God forever.

This is God's Word and I believe it.

It was just before the Passover Festival. Jesus knew that the hour had come for him to leave this world and go to the Father. Having loved his own who were in the world, he loved them to the end.[John 13:1]

No where can we find a saying that He loves everyone. Oh sure, there's misapplications of John 3:16 that come off quicker than the Sports Illustrated swimsuit edition flies off of shelves. But under the OT economy we can see where God's love was. The Lord did not set his affection on you and choose you because you were more numerous than other peoples, for you were the fewest of all peoples. But it was because the Lord loved you and kept the oath he swore to your ancestors that he brought you out with a mighty hand and redeemed you from the land of slavery, from the power of Pharaoh king of Egypt.[Deuteronomy 7:7,8] He never said this to another nation. Seeing that Israel was a type, a shadow of the NT ekklesia, we see the same thing today. God's love is poured out, lavished out unto His ppl, the vessels of mercy.

 

[Benjamin]

Thanks for sharing your thoughts, Benjamin. I am well aware of your firm theological position through the years on this forum.

However, I do not believe you have considered the fact that God's love cannot fail to save those He purposes to save.

You do realize you are question begging a deterministic view of pre-selection , right?

As per your belief that I have not considered your "facts" , that's kind of a ridiculous statement to make, especially considering I spent over an hour just earlier today studying the origins of the famous argument that we hear so often from Calvinists, "That a General Atonement Means God Failed to Achieve His Goal" as presented by John Owen.

As I studied what Owen said and considered the intentions of God in Christ's death, and the purpose, according to the means, the desire of God and keeping in mind the love of God for the world it merely served to strengthen my argument as I considered the many scriptures which refute your systematic teachings wherein I saw Owen's, and your, logic amounting to little more than starting with a fallacious false dilemma backed by multiple strawman arguments and more question begging.

The rest of your post pretty much reaffirms the typical very apparent fallaciousness I see in your position's views which attempt to support Limited Atonement and as per what motivated me to dig deeper into this subject, how the opposition fails to appreciate the depth of God's love for all His creatures.

Failure is not a word in God's vocabulary.

I am truly sorry that the failure you speak of is on your part concerning the purpose of God's love being for all. I might say the Doctrines of No-Hope for Most is not a word in God's vocabulary.

That said, not only have I considered your views of Limited Atonement but for the sake of argument I've presupposed many Calvinistic premises in my thoughts but have observed your systematic "teachings" of God's limited love fail on every level.

Finally, I must say that I find the enthusiasm of some Calvinists to teach of God's limited love to be very
disconcerting but I really don't care to chase rabbit trails on discussion boards about it, BUT let it be known though that I am very prepared to deal with that argument in person should a Calvinist ever dare to interrupt my "Good News" message to a seeker with the "Bad News" that God doesn't love all.

 

[Protestant]

Two Worlds

For God so loved the world……….(John 3:16).

Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him (1 John 2:15).

God the Father loves the world, yet we are not to love the world. How can this be? Are we not to love what He loves?

The ‘world’ referred to in these Scriptures are two different worlds.

The world so loved by the Father is comprised of those He has purposed to save from their sins by virtue of the satisfaction rendered by His Son.

The world we Christians are not to love is comprised of those who are unregenerate, whose beliefs, values and lifestyles are contradictory to that of the teachings of Christ as well as the fruit of the Holy Spirit.

Although the whole world lies in the power of the evil one (1 John 5:19), Christians are not considered part of that world, though we are still physically in the world (John 17:14-16; 1 Cor. 5:9-10).

Christ has taken us out of this present evil world, spiritually speaking, giving us His Holy Spirit who progressively dominates our lives (1 John 4:4).

1 John 2:2

And he [Christ] is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.

Keeping these two disparate worlds in mind, we may now logically exegete this often misunderstood verse.

Had Christ propitiated -- (made full satisfaction to God’s justice) -- the sins of all men worldwide, then all would be saved.

However, the Apostle is not teaching the heresy of Universalism, rather he is teaching the universal reach of God’s grace in Christ, who loves and purposes to save those who are outside the parameters of John’s immediate audience, who may be living in the far ends of the earth.

Conclusion: A literal interpretation without context and thoughtful exegesis will lead to confusion and false doctrines.

NEXT: The love of the Father and love of the Son are coterminous.

 

[Protestant]

You do realize you are question begging a deterministic view of pre-selection , right?

As per your belief that I have not considered your "facts" , that's kind of a ridiculous statement to make, especially considering I spent over an hour just earlier today studying the origins of the famous argument that we hear so often from Calvinists, "That a General Atonement Means God Failed to Achieve His Goal" as presented by John Owen.

As I studied what Owen said and considered the intentions of God in Christ's death, and the purpose, according to the means, the desire of God and keeping in mind the love of God for the world it merely served to strengthen my argument as I considered the many scriptures which refute your systematic teachings wherein I saw Owen's, and your, logic amounting to little more than starting with a fallacious false dilemma backed by multiple strawman arguments and more question begging.

The rest of your post pretty much reaffirms the typical very apparent fallaciousness I see in your position's views which attempt to support Limited Atonement and as per what motivated me to dig deeper into this subject, how the opposition fails to appreciate the depth of God's love for all His creatures.



I am truly sorry that the failure you speak of is on your part concerning the purpose of God's love being for all. I might say the Doctrines of No-Hope for Most is not a word in God's vocabulary.

That said, not only have I considered your views of Limited Atonement but for the sake of argument I've presupposed many Calvinistic premises in my thoughts but have observed your systematic "teachings" of God's limited love fail on every level.

Finally, I must say that I find the enthusiasm of some Calvinists to teach of God's limited love to be very
disconcerting but I really don't care to chase rabbit trails on discussion boards about it, BUT let it be known though that I am very prepared to deal with that argument in person should a Calvinist ever dare to interrupt my "Good News" message to a seeker with the "Bad News" that God doesn't love all.

Am I the only one on this Forum who notices Benjamin has not one Scriptural authority on which to prove his case?

In every argument of mine I will assert my position using Scripture as my final authority.

Sadly, Benjamin is relying on his own wisdom as the final authority to which we are all to bow down.

How humble and self-righteous of him.

PS Benjamin is yet another detractor who insists all biblical arguments which expose his non-biblical doctrines are either 'question begging' or 'straw men'. He would do us all a great favor by seriously reviewing and studying what these terms actually mean and how they would actually apply to a debate.

 

[Protestant]

The love of the Father and love of the Son are coterminous.

The Father and Son love the same persons, as will be proven shortly.

Both Father and Son are one in purpose and will (John 10:30).

They purposed to save those they love (Ephesians 2:4; Rev. 1:5).

The Father sent the Son to effect that purpose (John 3:16).

The Son does not give His life a ransom for all mankind (Matt. 20:28).

Rather, He gives His life a ransom only for those loved by the Father (Ephesians 1:1-7).

To do otherwise would be to work at cross purposes to the will of God.

Christ would then be a sinner, who would Himself be in need of a Savior.

These truths raise many questions.

Who are the many loved by the Father and Son?

Answer: They are those who were, are and will be part of Christ’s Church, for whom He died (Ephesians 5:25).

Is there only one Church?

Answer: Yes. The one Church is the same one Body of Christ (Ephesians 4:4, 5:23).

Does this Church have a name with a denominational preference, such as First Baptist Church, etc.?

Answer: No, it does not. It has many names, including City of the Living God, Church of the Firstborn, Bride of Christ, and Heavenly Jerusalem. It is comprised of believers worldwide without denominational distinction.

How does Christ manifest the greatest love?

Answer: By laying down His life for His friends (John 15:13).

Who are Christ’s friends?

Answer: They are those who are obedient to His commandments (John 15:14).

Do all obey Christ?

Answer: No. Christ’s crucifixion is prime evidence of man’s hatred of Christ and His commandments. The Great White Throne Judgment describes the punitive end of those God and Christ hating disobedient masses.

Who then obeys Christ?

Answer: Only Christ’s sheep obey (John 10:27).

Does Christ lay down His life for those not His sheep?

Answer: No, He does not (John 10:15).

Is it the will of the Father that Christ lay down His life for those not His sheep?

Answer: No. The Father loves Christ because He is an obedient Son who lays down His life for the beloved sheep and no others (John 10:17).

How does one become a friend of Christ, one of His sheep?

Answer: Christ must know you as such (John 10:14).

Does Christ know all professing Christians as His friends and as sheep of His fold?

No. Matthew 7:21-23 describes many professing baptized Christians who Christ rejects as counterfeit frauds, having a form of godliness but denying the power thereof.

Since we are all born natural enemies of God (Ephesians 2:2-3; James 4:4), how does one become a friend of God in Christ?

Answer: You must be born anew, regenerated by His Spirit, given a new nature; one that loves that which he before hated, one that is obedient, not disobedient, and whose fruit is commensurate with that of the Spirit.

What must one do to be born again?

Answer: It is nothing man can effect. Jesus explains it is similar to one’s fleshly birth. The baby is passive, as is the recipient of God’s gracious regeneration (John 3:4-8). Jesus compares the moving of the Spirit to that of the wind. The wind is the sovereign work of God, as is regeneration.

Please explain further in simple terms.

Answer: In eternity God the Father had chosen those sinners He purposed to save through Christ their Savior (Ephesians 1:3-4). His choice was not determined by the creature in any way. Rather His choice was made by the counsel of His own will of good pleasure (Ephesians 1:5). It pleased God to love them with an everlasting love (Jeremiah 31:3; 1 John 4:19).

Christ was sent to save those chosen by the Father (John 17). He, too, loved them with an everlasting love (John 15:16). Christ succeeded in His mission (John 17:4).

The Holy Spirit regenerates those for whom Christ died, bestowing all spiritual gifts necessary to reach glorification, including the very faith to believe (1 Cor. 2:9-16).

And finally Christ, our High Priest, continually prays for all those given Him by the Father. He does not pray for the majority of mankind (John 17:9).

QUESTION: Can God’s love ever change?

No. Immutability is an attribute of God which Adam did not have. The love of men can wax and wane (Rev. 2:4), but the love of God for His own is the same yesterday, today and forever (Numbers 23:19; Malachi 3:6; Hebrews 13:8).

Conclusion: To teach and preach the love of God for all men equally is to contradict the divine Word of God, cast aspersions on God’s character, power and promises. A love which cannot fulfill its desires and purposes is feckless and futile. The God described in the Bible is neither.

Surely the arm of the LORD is not too short to save, nor his love too dull to woo those He loves.

 

[SovereignGrace]

Am I the only one on this Forum who notices Benjamin has not one Scriptural authority on which to prove his case?

In every argument of mine I will assert my position using Scripture as my final authority.

Sadly, Benjamin is relying on his own wisdom as the final authority to which we are all to bow down.

How humble and self-righteous of him.

PS Benjamin is yet another detractor who insists all biblical arguments which expose his non-biblical doctrines are either 'question begging' or 'straw men'. He would do us all a great favor by seriously reviewing and studying what these terms actually mean and how they would actually apply to a debate.

That's his M.O.

 

[Rockson]

Am I the only one on this Forum who notices Benjamin has not one Scriptural authority on which to prove his case?

In every argument of mine I will assert my position using Scripture as my final authority.

Sadly, Benjamin is relying on his own wisdom as the final authority to which we are all to bow down.

No offense my friend but I'd kindly suggest you merely misapply lots of scripture to make your case.

How humble and self-righteous of him.

Why do you see the need to degrade another's character? I'm not sure but did Benjamin ever do that to you?

PS Benjamin is yet another detractor who insists all biblical arguments which expose his non-biblical doctrines are either 'question begging' or 'straw men'. He would do us all a great favor by seriously reviewing and studying what these terms actually mean and how they would actually apply to a debate.

Well dear friend I'd say you're being quite presumptuous to say that. But any way have a nice day.

 

[Rockson]

Conclusion: To teach and preach the love of God for all men equally is to contradict the divine Word of God, cast aspersions on God’s character, power and promises. A love which cannot fulfill its desires and purposes is feckless and futile. The God described in the Bible is neither.

Sorry you're off with your understanding of what LOVE is. Not saying you're not sincere but sincerely off. LOVE doesn't use force of compulsion over riding people's resistance to be in relationship with himself. You don't force a spouse to marry you, at least I'd hope you wouldn't and neither does God. If God was like you say he would have used irresistible grace on Israel in the OT so they wouldn't have become a harlot. He didn't do so thereby demonstrating LOVE doesn't force things. (see Hosea)

Surely the arm of the LORD is not too short to save, nor his love too dull to woo those He loves.

Why did you clearly change this scripture. Where did you get this "nor his love too dull to woo those He loves", as if to say if God loves you that's a guarantee you're going to be in his fold. As I suggested aren't you misapply things? Seems obvious that you are. Please reconsider your presentation. Thanks.

 

[Revmitchell]

Their soteriology demands Jesus’ mission was to give all men the opportunity to be saved, their free-will the deciding factor.

No one believes this, it is a mischaracterization and a strawman.

 

[Protestant]

Rockson wrote, “Sorry you're off with your understanding of what LOVE is. Not saying you're not sincere but sincerely off. LOVE doesn't use force of compulsion over riding people's resistance to be in relationship with himself. You don't force a spouse to marry you, at least I'd hope you wouldn't and neither does God. If God was like you say he would have used irresistible grace on Israel in the OT so they wouldn't have become a harlot. He didn't do so thereby demonstrating LOVE doesn't force things. (see Hosea).”

Hello, Rockson. I appreciate your need to share your feelings, as well as the courage to do so.

Like our friend, Benjamin, you offered no Scriptural arguments. You simply took the lazy way, asking me to ‘see Hosea.’

The Prophet Hosea does not in any way contradict the truth which I have stated using only Scriptural proofs.

But first I wish to address the main gist of your argument: God does not force anyone to love Him.

My response:

God does not force anyone to hate Him. Yet all mankind hates the true God.

Do you need more proof than the release of Barabbas and the crucifixion of Christ?

Or perhaps in your mind, God erred in not having Rockson & friends there to plead with Pilate to release Christ.

Better yet, perhaps if Rockson was placed in the Garden there would be no need for Christ as Mediator because Rockson’s love for God would never have allowed sin to enter the heart in the first place.

Next, I wish to address your argument using our carnal marriage as the practical role model for Christ’s heavenly marriage.

There is one obvious similarity: The earthly groom does not love all women. His heart is set on one woman whom he freely chooses, or in some cases, his parents have chosen for him.

In like fashion, Christ does not love all people. Nor does He desire to marry all people. Like the carnal spouse, Christ also freely chooses His Bride (John 15:16). Furthermore, His Father is intimately involved in choosing His Bride. Christ constantly refers to those chosen as having been given to Him by the Father (John 17).

On the Day of the Lord many so-called ‘Christians’ will desire to be present at the Marriage Supper of the Lamb, but will be rejected as those who were never – at no time - loved by Him (Matthew 7:21-23). Nor were they given Him by the Father (John 17:1-2).

Another similarity may be found in the intimacy of bride and groom. Christ knows His Bride intimately, as will His Bride know Him (John 10:14).

Now let’s examine the discrepancies when attempting to compare carnal marriage with Christ’s heavenly marriage.

Unlike carnal love which occurs naturally between unregenerate men and women, love of God is not natural to carnal humans. Since the fall of Adam men run from the true God, preferring to worship idols instead (Genesis 3:8); Romans 1, 3:10-18).

But God in His mercy has decreed to love and save many of those who hate Him. They are the Elect destined to marry His Son, whom they at one time freely hated with all their hearts.

Jesus educated the preeminent religious teacher, Nicodemus, by declaring men spiritually blind at birth (John 3:3).

Men cannot see the unparalleled beauty of Christ and His truth.

Moreover, men’s hearts are naturally evil, adverse to that which is holy, at enmity against God (Genesis 6:5, 8:21; Jeremiah 17:9; Romans 8:7; Mark 7:20-23).

But God in His mercy, changes man’s evil heart, opens his blind eyes, to see and love the beauty of Christ and His Word.

A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you: and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you an heart of flesh.

27 And I will put my spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep my judgments, and do them (Ezekiel 36:26-27).

In short, God performs these acts of saving grace because He first loved us (1 John 4:19).

And God’s love never fails to save the objects of His love.

Rockson, please refute what I have written, using Scripture alone.

One’s feelings can fluctuate, change and deceive, but God’s Word stands forever (Isaiah 40:8; Matthew 24:35; 1 Peter 1:25).