Who are those ALL God has Mercy On ?

[steaver]

Matthew 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... There is the limited atonement... Who are they?... Only God knows that!... Brother Glen

The sheep are those who hear and receive Jesus Christ as Lord and Saviour. The number of sheep is limited only in the sense that God has foreknowledge of who they all are. This does not make the atonement limited for the atonement is sufficient enough for the sins of the whole world.

 

[steaver]

'Limited' is an unfortunate word to use for the atonement, for the Great Crowd that no one can number is just as big under Calvinism as Arminianism. 'Particular' is much better although TUPIP isn't quite as catchy as TULIP.

Christ lays down His life for His sheep. His sheep hear His voice and follow Him. He gives them eternal life and they shall never perish. They are those whom the Father predestined from the foundation of the world and gave to the Son to redeem. Christ will not lose even one of them.

Amen! As is Total depravity, Unconditional election, Irresistible grace. I don't really have a problem with saying Perseverance of the saints seeing how one is a new creature with a new heart joined as one with Christ once saved.

 

[savedbymercy]

The sheep are those who hear and receive Jesus Christ as Lord and Saviour. The number of sheep is limited only in the sense that God has foreknowledge of who they all are. This does not make the atonement limited for the atonement is sufficient enough for the sins of the whole world.

They are Christ sheep before they hear and receive Christ !

Jn 10:16

16 And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold: them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice; and there shall be one fold, and one shepherd.

 

[steaver]

They are Christ sheep before they hear and receive Christ !

Jn 10:16

16 And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold: them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice; and there shall be one fold, and one shepherd.

Only in the mind of God's foreknowledge. One has to exist first!

 

[savedbymercy]

Only in the mind of God's foreknowledge. One has to exist first!

Jesus said that other Sheep I have [present tense] and they shall hear [future tense], so does Christ possess His Sheep before they hear and believe ? Yes or No ?

That word have is the greek word ἔχω and means:

I have, hold, possess

Again the word hold is in the present tense !


so does Christ possess His Sheep before they hear and believe ? Yes or No ?

 

[steaver]

Jesus said that other Sheep I have [present tense] and they shall hear [future tense], so does Christ possess His Sheep before they hear and believe ? Yes or No ?

That word have is the greek word ἔχω and means:

I have, hold, possess

Again the word hold is in the present tense !


so does Christ possess His Sheep before they hear and believe ? Yes or No ?

Who is speaking? Jesus Christ. Of course He knows all the sheep that will ever be. Not all sheep existed yet, but God in His foreknowledge can indeed call them all (past present and future) His sheep. Even though they all have not yet been born and born-again. Jesus knows all His sheep that will ever be, so in that sense, yes, they are sheep before they receive Jesus Christ.

 

[savedbymercy]

Who is speaking? Jesus Christ. Of course He knows all the sheep that will ever be. Not all sheep existed yet, but God in His foreknowledge can indeed call them all (past present and future) His sheep. Even though they all have not yet been born and born-again. Jesus knows all His sheep that will ever be, so in that sense, yes, they are sheep before they receive Jesus Christ.

So does Christ possess/hold His Sheep before they hear and believe ? Yes or No ?

 

[Van]

Even a person headed for destruction, 2 Peter 2:1, has been bought with the blood of Christ. He died for those saved or would be saved and those unsaved and would remain unsaved, as in 2 Peter 2:1.

So it seems someone is attempting to deny that bringing swift destruction upon themselves does not mean they were "headed for destruction." Or perhaps denying that the Master who bought them was Christ. Or perhaps denying Christ made the purchase with His blood.

No matter what, it is an effort to nullify yet another scripture that teaches limited atonement as defined by Calvinism is mistaken.

SBM denies that the false teachers were bought with the blood of Christ. No alternate coin of the realm has been presented.

So by the numbers,
1) Christ bought the false teachers with a price.
2) 2 Peter 2:1 does not say what the price was.
3) Christ gave His life as a ransom for all.
4) Thus Christ bought the false teachers with His life, or figuratively, with His blood.

It is a lock folks.

 

[Van]

According to 2 Tim 1:9 When was the Purpose and Grace given them in Christ Jesus?

The grace was given or granted them when the individuals were placed in Christ and not before. And as John 17:20-21 demonstrates future believers are not yet in Christ, so the Calvinist view is untenable.

 

[savedbymercy]

The grace was given or granted them when the individuals were placed in Christ and not before. And as John 17:20-21 demonstrates future believers are not yet in Christ, so the Calvinist view is untenable.

You didn't answer the question!

 

[Van]

You didn't answer the question!

Personal incredulity is the last refuge of scripture deniers.

Even a person headed for destruction, 2 Peter 2:1, has been bought with the blood of Christ. He died for those saved or would be saved and those unsaved and would remain unsaved, as in 2 Peter 2:1.

So it seems someone is attempting to deny that bringing swift destruction upon themselves does not mean they were "headed for destruction." Or perhaps denying that the Master who bought them was Christ. Or perhaps denying Christ made the purchase with His blood.

No matter what, it is an effort to nullify yet another scripture that teaches limited atonement as defined by Calvinism is mistaken.

SBM denies that the false teachers were bought with the blood of Christ. No alternate coin of the realm has been presented.

So by the numbers,
1) Christ bought the false teachers with a price.
2) 2 Peter 2:1 does not say what the price was.
3) Christ gave His life as a ransom for all.
4) Thus Christ bought the false teachers with His life, or figuratively, with His blood.

It is a lock folks.

 

[savedbymercy]

Even a person headed for destruction, 2 Peter 2:1, has been bought with the blood of Christ. He died for those saved or would be saved and those unsaved and would remain unsaved, as in 2 Peter 2:1.

So it seems someone is attempting to deny that bringing swift destruction upon themselves does not mean they were "headed for destruction." Or perhaps denying that the Master who bought them was Christ. Or perhaps denying Christ made the purchase with His blood.

No matter what, it is an effort to nullify yet another scripture that teaches limited atonement as defined by Calvinism is mistaken.

SBM denies that the false teachers were bought with the blood of Christ. No alternate coin of the realm has been presented.

So by the numbers,
1) Christ bought the false teachers with a price.
2) 2 Peter 2:1 does not say what the price was.
3) Christ gave His life as a ransom for all.
4) Thus Christ bought the false teachers with His life, or figuratively, with His blood.

It is a lock folks.

What scripture says that even a person headed for destruction has been bought by the blood of Christ?

 

[Don]

What scripture says that even a person headed for destruction has been bought by the blood of Christ?

If 2 Pet 2:1 is not talking about the blood of Christ, then what is it talking about?

 

[Martin Marprelate]

Oh dear! I thought we'd put this to bed.
Van, are you quite sure that Despotes refers to Christ?
Are you quite sure that agorazo means to purchase with blood?
Are you quite sure that your interpretation does not contradict other, clearer portions of the word of God?

To resolve this is going to take some more detailed analysis that I've given so far. I'll try to come back later
.

Personal incredulity is the last refuge of scripture deniers.

Even a person headed for destruction, 2 Peter 2:1, has been bought with the blood of Christ. He died for those saved or would be saved and those unsaved and would remain unsaved, as in 2 Peter 2:1.

So it seems someone is attempting to deny that bringing swift destruction upon themselves does not mean they were "headed for destruction." Or perhaps denying that the Master who bought them was Christ. Or perhaps denying Christ made the purchase with His blood.

No matter what, it is an effort to nullify yet another scripture that teaches limited atonement as defined by Calvinism is mistaken.

SBM denies that the false teachers were bought with the blood of Christ. No alternate coin of the realm has been presented.

So by the numbers,
1) Christ bought the false teachers with a price.
2) 2 Peter 2:1 does not say what the price was.
3) Christ gave His life as a ransom for all.
4) Thus Christ bought the false teachers with His life, or figuratively, with His blood.

It is a lock folks.

 

[Don]

Martin - the point is SBM being able to answer these questions.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

I'm aware that it seems to be open season on poor old Savedbymercy. Perhaps there is a reason for this, but having been away from the forum for some time, I don't know what it is. This is the 'Calvinism vs Arminianism' forum, so it seems reasonable to me for him to raise the points he has and for people to answer him. If he lacks knowledge then others should supply that knowledge without poking fun at him.

What I do know is that Van has commandeered the thread away from the O.P. to 2 Peter 2:1, and is trying to present it as some sort of refutation of Calvinism.

 

[savedbymercy]

If 2 Pet 2:1 is not talking about the blood of Christ, then what is it talking about?

This thread is about what I started about with the OP, If you want to know the things I believe, read my threads . My point otherwise was does 2 Pet 2:1 say that they were bought with the blood of Christ, yes or no ! I am not interested in discussing that verse ! I am interested in discussing the OP !

 

[Don]

I'm aware that it seems to be open season on poor old Savedbymercy. Perhaps there is a reason for this, but having been away from the forum for some time, I don't know what it is. This is the 'Calvinism vs Arminianism' forum, so it seems reasonable to me for him to raise the points he has and for people to answer him. If he lacks knowledge then others should supply that knowledge without poking fun at him.

What I do know is that Van has commandeered the thread away from the O.P. to 2 Peter 2:1, and is trying to present it as some sort of refutation of Calvinism.

The problem, Martin, is that many--both calvinist and otherwise--have discussed his opening posts with him. Archangel, a cavinist, has presented thorough refutations of points SBM has made; only to be told by SBM that Archangel is evading the points. The very fact that SBM refuses to discuss the meaning of 2 Peter 2:1, which would put the matter to rest so that more discussion of the OP could occur, should be a warning signal to you instead of "oh, they're just picking on this guy."

 

[BrotherJoseph]

I'm aware that it seems to be open season on poor old Savedbymercy. Perhaps there is a reason for this, but having been away from the forum for some time, I don't know what it is. This is the 'Calvinism vs Arminianism' forum, so it seems reasonable to me for him to raise the points he has and for people to answer him. If he lacks knowledge then others should supply that knowledge without poking fun at him.

What I do know is that Van has commandeered the thread away from the O.P. to 2 Peter 2:1, and is trying to present it as some sort of refutation of Calvinism.

Brother Martin,

I agree. Several posters on this forum have treated brother SavedbyMercy in a very unchristian like manner.

Brother Joe

 

[steaver]

I'm aware that it seems to be open season on poor old Savedbymercy. Perhaps there is a reason for this, but having been away from the forum for some time, I don't know what it is. This is the 'Calvinism vs Arminianism' forum, so it seems reasonable to me for him to raise the points he has and for people to answer him. If he lacks knowledge then others should supply that knowledge without poking fun at him.

What I do know is that Van has commandeered the thread away from the O.P. to 2 Peter 2:1, and is trying to present it as some sort of refutation of Calvinism.

I would seem as though sbm is getting picked on unless you have been here the past few months reading his mo.

He refuses to debate any of his own OPs. All who have tried, both Cal and non Cal, only get stone walled with stupid comments like "do you understand my points, rehearse them back to me". So, he hasn't been treated unChristlike at all. But he has been admonished.

Go ahead Martin, try to disagree with anything he posted and see what answer you get.....