What's the point of Jesus dying for everyone?

LOVE TO.

Uh... where did you get THAT notion. I didn't say anything of the like. Are you trying to help yourself by making up things again?
Here is what I said:

This does not say I have proof of Exams. quote, but would like to see it myself. I have heard that quote before - I do have Luthers Commentary on Galations which states: - And I gave alot of his Commentary to show context and that his version of world is not your made up version here.

Notice how you neatly bend and sway from Luthers direct quotes, like well trained acrobat. I see you didn't deal with ONE of them.

Still dancing.

and still...

And heres the finale!

No they don't. The vast majority of 4 pointers hold to the biblical defintion of world when in application to men - (lit. Wicked and sinful man)
Your re-vised definition speaks SPECIFICALLY to the fact you don't believe Christ died for the sins of the World.

Luther denies your view. Look again at his OWN WORDS from his OWN Commentary.

Now who is misleading :laugh: You would be an expert at dodge ball.

I don't know. I personally haven't seen it and would like to know where it might be found. But Luther did say:
The world bears the Gospel a grudge because the Gospel condemns the religious wisdom of the world. Jealous for its own religious views, the world in turn charges the Gospel with being a subversive and licentious doctrine, offensive to God and man, a doctrine to be persecuted as the worst plague on earth

As a result we have this paradoxical situation: The Gospel supplies the world with the salvation of Jesus Christ, peace of conscience, and every blessing. Just for that the world abhors the Gospel
Notice world here is not speaking of the elect.
and (the first paragraph is to show what "world" he is speaking of)

and then

The elect casting away salvation, NO WAY!! And if not the elect then to whom did God offer salvation that they COULD cast it away, if it were possible?

AND

He has already established how he is using the term world repeatedly in the first two chapters of Galations via his commentary. He Not ONCE makes a distinction of elect world and sinful wicked world. It maintain it biblical definiton of - wicked sinful mankind in his renderings here.

AND HERE

If you can't say Amen, you need to say "ouch"!

I think we can see who is trying to mislead here.

 

And yet if you would take the time to READ my post, you would see this is the point.
If you cannot produce a proof that the 1st luther quote made by someone else is real, then the rest of your post is worthless, for this was the point. right?

and your post have not shown that that quote is real. For some reason I do not understand, this never matters to you. The truth is the full truth, not part. This would be like me saying..

Allan said...and I quote. "I believe in limited atonement"
If I said this and said it was a quote from you you would get mad. Yet you see no reason you can't do this to others. I could even say...well you said most of it...I only left out a word or two. When what you said was.."I DO NOT believe in limited atonement". Two words makes a big deal....don't they?



now on the other hand, if you want to take up a thread about luthers book, start one and I would be more then glad to join. Just stop the misquotes and i'll be cool.

I understand it was someone else that made the 1st so called luther quote...but you have defend it with NOTHING and you have made such statements before.

Just try to be clean and upfront. no need to mislead

 

indeed....

Then you start in...

what gives?

 

Excuse me? The issue, in part, was the fact that Luther did indeed hold to Christ dieing for the world and not just the elect. Though a person might have quoted incorrectly or inaccurately does not dismiss Luthers own articualted words speaking to that same truth which was spoken (or written) incorrectly.
So, no it does not make "the rest of your post is worthless" because it establishes that Luther DID IN FACT hold to such a view. But I see we are dodging again.

The quote the other person gave might not be real but the ones I gave are, and since you have Luthers Commentaries you should have them readily available for you to view.

This is not about one or two words James, it is that fact that many Calvinists try to claim ALL Reformers held their view of limited atonement and in fact many did not! I have quoted more than a word or two or a sentence or two I have give paragraphs for context to the extent of about 8000 words.

I defended it with Luthers own words, so if you call that nothing then that is you issue with truth not mine.
And in relation to me "making such statements before". If memory serves (and it does) the ONE time you showed that, you only made it to two quotes out of 15 plus and advised me of my error that they (the two) were not direct quotes. I adjusted the error and gave the actual quote and where the statement of concerning unlimited Atonement could be found in the reformers OWN writings. One of them WAS an actual quote you just didn't look in the right place of the authors works. But we spoke of this before on ANOTHER thread but you still could not speak against the direct quotes, just like here regarding Luthers Commentary and Calvins as well.

I just want to keep the record from being slanted, when in fact IT IS.

 

Could it be that you keep saying of me just like Exam. that I am being misleading even though the writters own hand penned his own thoughts in articulate form and concise meaning, you still deny their OWN penned comments.

I can understand about them not saying a specific thing but even if they are paraphrased and the exact quote is given to show this, the paraphrase still holds (or should at least) the main rendering of the passage in question. And therefore the paraphrase is just as valid as the original but only if the original can be confirmed.

 

Allan,

I have said to you many times, I have no problem talking about calvin, luther or whoever you want. I do have a whole lot of problem with misleading others. You however...

well....if you want me to address luther...fine I'll do that. START a thread.

I have not dodged your post, for there was no need to address them, for My point was the misleading part.

 

I have no problem with this. It is part of my own theology.
Though God loves the world, He has a special love for those whom He has chosen.

Of course as it is the appropreation of His life to theirs.
********

If you will note it is to the 7 Churches, which are symbolic of the whole Church body and in that frame of reference it speaks to all beleivers being kings and priests.

Granted

I understand your point but that wasn't a very good verse to use since they (israel) was ALREADY Gods people and had backsliden.

Agreed here as well, but you loose sight of something. Just as there are false professing Jews amongst them when God is speaking to His people Israel, so it is in the physical church bodies. God writes to the redeemed but also addresses those who are not redeemed so as to identify them and command them to repent.

Here I believe you are incorrect. All of these are spiritual things accosiated with believers, and this Church thought they had it all and was wealthy in all things. SO God identifies where they are actually lacking (naked) and then tells in so many words...if you are so great, wealthy, and righteous then buy these thing from Me. In fact they can not, for no man can. THAT is what God is addressing. They didn't have it and didn't have the power nor greatness to attain it much less by it from God. Only one person could pay the price needed to aquire all those things God Himself - Jesus.

To a large extent yes, but since it is to be read in the churches it also deals with those NOT in leadership.
*********

Wrong again. I stated the portion you try to quote as applying to all saints DOES NOT APPLY. It is later on in His speaking He address all.

You see this is the same message through the whole Bible.

It is also said likewise regarding unlimited atonement.

Like this verse..[/QUOTE]
They deal with Limited Redeption

 

"Pot...there's a call for you from kettle on line one"

 

Allan

---The Luther quotes---

It was not taken from an "anti-Calvinist" site, as JArthur assumes. It was taken from a 4-Point Calvinist, Ron Rhodes, and the link was provided for all to see and investigate, though some have chosen not to avail themselves to the link in which the quote was taken. Rhodes defends his position on account from support from the likes of Calvin and Luther.

Luther: "The Gospel supplies the world with the salvation of Jesus Christ, peace of conscience, and every blessing. Just for that the world abhors the Gospel." (http://blueletterbible.org/Comm/martin_luther/Gal/Gal001.html)

Luther: "Why does the world abhor the glad tidings of the Gospel and the blessings that go with it? Because the world is the devil's. Under his direction the world persecutes the Gospel and would if it could nail again Christ, the Son of God, to the Cross although He gave Himself into death for the sins of the world." (http://blueletterbible.org/Comm/martin_luther/Gal/Gal001.html)

Luther: "Isaiah declares of Christ: "The Lord hath laid on him the iniquity of us all." We have no right to minimize the force of this declaration. God does not amuse Himself with words. What a relief for a Christian to know that Christ is covered all over with my sins, your sins, and the sins of the whole world." (http://blueletterbible.org/Comm/martin_luther/Gal/Gal003.html)

Luther: "All the prophets of old said that Christ should be the greatest transgressor, murderer, adulterer, thief, blasphemer that ever was or ever could be on earth. When He took the sins of the whole world upon Himself, Christ was no longer an innocent person. He was a sinner burdened with the sins of a Paul who was a blasphemer; burdened with the sins of a Peter who denied Christ; burdened with the sins of a David who committed adultery and murder, and gave the heathen occasion to laugh at the Lord. In short, Christ was charged with the sins of all men, that He should pay for them with His own blood." (http://blueletterbible.org/Comm/martin_luther/Gal/Gal003.html)

Now some may suggest, "Well when Luther spoke about the world, he meant the whole world of the elect."

If so, then consider this statement: "Here someone may be tempted to call the Christians crazy. Deliberately to court danger by preaching and confessing the truth, and thus to bring upon ourselves the hatred and enmity of the whole world, is this not madness? But Paul does not mind the enmity of the world." (http://blueletterbible.org/Comm/martin_luther/Gal/Gal005.html) Additionally he says: "And this is our glory today with the Pope and the whole world persecuting us and trying to kill us." (http://blueletterbible.org/Comm/martin_luther/Gal/Gal006.html)

Calvin sounds similar to Luther in this respect, and Calvin's quotes are found in abundance on my website. This is not just one or two off-handed references. I'm talking about a library of quotes from Calvin. Ironically, in pet verses where the 5-Pointer raises issues, not only does Calvin not reflect their 5-Point view, but also even refutes them, as Matthew 1:21 particularly comes to mind.

http://www.examiningcalvinism.com/files/Gospels/Matthew1_21.html

 

This is just to silly to address. If you want to know what Calvins teaches was, just read his many books. One small quote is not a true picture. Just as John 3:16 is not the full Bible. Nor is the 9th Chapter of Romans. We have to take all the Bible to understand the full message. We must read a human wrter in order to understand their teaching. Other wise, you will be mislead.

For me, I hardly ever quote a writer, till I have read a few things. I do this for another reason. For me, I do not want to find out later they were some crack pot...and I be quoting them.

I can quote Calvin, for I have read a few books by him. I'm in no way a Calvin expert, nor have I even read most of his books. But what I have read, is not the same Calvin you try to paint him to be. If you do not like the doctirne, fine. No one is holding a gun to your head. But if you find you must quote others, please know what your talking about.

 

Thats, "Mr Pot" to you think you very much.

 

Freudian slip?