• Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Who Does God WANT to Save?

agedman

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
In 1John 5, John wrote:
"My little children keep yourselves from idols."
The Jews substituted a golden calf for Jehovah.
You have substituted Yahushua for the Lord Jesus Christ.

Yahushua never offered anything.
Jesus Christ offered himself, one sacrifice for all, and forever.

1 Peter 3:18 For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit:
--It is Christ who offered himself not Yahushua.
The God that you have substituted is another god, a false god. He doesn't exist. He is an idol of your mind.
"Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved."

I am not being critical of anyone on this matter, but wondering if this is related to the "World Last Chance" on the web.

I know nothing of their doctrinal views, and really don't need to take the time to explore their web page.

Perhaps others have, and they will offer insight that we can verify.
 

Luke2427

Active Member
We've heard it over and over again on this thread that God only saves the elect, and that God only WANTED to save the elect. Calvinism notoriously interprets John 3:16 "For God so love the world" as that Jesus was speaking ONLY to the elect.

However, there's a problem with this view. If Calvinism is intent on this kind of exegesis, then it needs to be consistently applied to all of Scripture. You can't limit the audience in John 3:16, and then expand the audience elsewhere. Either John 3:16 was limited to those elect in that context, or the Calvinist must concede that it actually does apply to the whole world (1 John 2:2).

Now if it applies ONLY to those elect in John 3:16, then the Calvinist faces a conundrum in Isaiah 53:5-6

"But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed. All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the Lord hath laid on him the iniquity of us all."

So who is the audience here? ISRAEL. Thus if the Calvinist interpretation of John 3:16 applies only to elect Gentiles, then the same logic of interpretation applied to Isaiah 53 would have the "we" "us" "our" of verses 5-6 limiting the death and atonement of Christ to the Jews.


The elect from Israel and all the world is who will be saved. That is quite OBVIOUSLY who that passage is referring to.

Now where else in the Bible does God state who He desires to save, and to whom is salvation offered?

1 Timothy 2:3-4

"For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour;
Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth."

God's will, like your will- is complex.

You have no desire to see your children feel pain, yet you know that if you teach them to ride a bicycle, at some point, they are going to crash. They will scrape their knee or possibly even break a bone. You do not WILL that for your children, but you know it will happen.

Yet you go ahead and teach them to ride that bike anyway. Why? Because your will is not simple. You can will one thing, but will the very opposite of that one thing even more because the end result of it is what most pleases you. The end result which you are willing to risk your children's pain for is that they obtain the joy of riding a bike.

You will two things- the dead level opposite of one another. You pursue the the thing you will the MOST of the two things that you will.

Do you see? It is not simple. If you need everything to be simple, you'll never get the truth of anything- including soteriology.

God really does will that all men be saved. We are to pray for all men because we pray to a God who cares about all men and really does will that all men be saved.

But he wills something more. He wills for the results that come only from a world in which people perish.

Now, you will say that God never willed for a world where people perish.

Then I will remind you that God did not HAVE to make this world. And he did not have to make this world exactly the way he made it. And I will point out to you that God KNEW- he absolutely KNEW that IF HE MADE THIS WORLD that people would perish- yet he made it anyway.

God willed to make a world in which people would perish because there was something valuable enough to him that he was willing to have people perish to get it.

Now, we can quibble over what that thing is- but both non-cals and Cals agree that God was willing to build a world in which he knew people would perish in order to have this thing.

Arminians say the thing God wanted so much that he was willing to make a world in which people perish was a creature endowed with free will to choose to love him.

Calvinists say that God wanted to glorify his grace and his Son.

But regardless, ALL OF US cannot deny that God built this world KNOWING that if he did people would perish in this world.

Yet God was willing for this world to exist anyway.

Something was valuable enough to God to create people who would perish in order that God might obtain it.

That is an invincible fact.
 

DHK

<b>Moderator</b>
I am not being critical of anyone on this matter, but wondering if this is related to the "World Last Chance" on the web.

I know nothing of their doctrinal views, and really don't need to take the time to explore their web page.

Perhaps others have, and they will offer insight that we can verify.
Good find. Those are some of the exact things he has been posting--some of them word for word.
 
Since I am the author of the OP, and Hebrew is my native language, I promise you that I speak the proper name more on a daily basis in every day conversations with my family and friends and with unbelievers than you. For you to accuse someone that actually speaks that language naturally, when your native language is English is about the funniest thing I've ever heard since the invention of bread ties.

When I am talking to people in English, I CAN'T SAY the names for God in Hebrew because IM NOT SPEAKING HEBREW, I'm speaking ENGLISH.

I offered to speak to you in Hebrew exclusively and you keep responding in English. If you are going to say that "YAH" is the proper name, then you need to say it IN HEBREW because YAH is NOT HEBREW. "YAH" are three ENGLISH LETTERS.

"In the law it is written, With men of other tongues and other lips will I speak unto this people; and yet for all that will they not hear me, saith the Lord." 1 Corinthians 14:21

"For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counseller, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace." Isaiah 9:6

"Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel" Isaiah 7:14


Now either start using the Hebrew name correctly, or don't insult my language by spelling it with English letters.

Ouch! Now, HW, that's what I'd call being taken to the woodshed.

Good post Brother.
 

DrJamesAch

New Member
Like Saul who was knocked off his high horse?

Paul's testimony to Agrippa was "Whereupon, O king Agrippa, I was not disobedient unto the heavenly vision" Acts 26:19

Jesus told Paul it is HARD to kick against the pricks, notice He didn't say it was impossible. Paul kicking against the pricks is a clear indication that he was resisting the Holy Spirit, and then Paul willingly OBEYED. Notice Jesus didn't MAKE Paul ask "what will you have me do Lord?"
 

Edward63

Member
The Scriptures declare who God wants to save, and who Jesus came to save.

“By oppression and judgment he was taken away; and as for his generation, who [among them] considered that he was cut off out of the land of the living for the transgression of my people to whom the stroke [was due]?” (Isa 53:8 ASV)

“And she shall bring forth a son; and thou shalt call his name JESUS; for it is he that shall save his people from their sins.” (Mt 1:21 ASV)

These people were not just the Jews:

“even as the Father knoweth me, and I know the Father; and I lay down my life for the sheep. And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold: them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice: and they shall become one flock, one shepherd.” (Joh 10:15-16 ASV)

“even as thou gavest him authority over all flesh, that to all whom thou hast given him, he should give eternal life.” (Joh 17:2 ASV)
“I pray for them: I pray not for the world, but for those whom thou hast given me; for they are thine:” (Joh 17:9 ASV)

“Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself up for it;” (Eph 5:25 ASV)

Who are Christ's church?

“even as he chose us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blemish before him in love: having foreordained us unto adoption as sons through Jesus Christ unto himself, according to the good pleasure of his will,” (Eph 1:4-5 ASV)

Therefore, God wanted to save those whom the Son came to save and He never fails in what he came to do. God decreed/wanted to save those who are actually saved.
 

The Biblicist

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
You are arguing against a superlapsarian Calvinistic point of view that demands that God decreed an unfallen creatable people to be saved while electing the rest to hell. I am not a superlapsarian. So your argument and intepretations do not apply to my position which is entirely different than a superlapsarian. I do not believe God elected anyone to hell - no need to - as all were condemned already (Jn. 3:18).

My position comes from a sublapsarian position that places election after the fall not before it. Hence, the grounds of universal condemnation already existed prior to being "chosen to salvation" (2 Ths. 2:13) as "vessels of MERCY". "Mercy" presupposes just condemnation and election is "to" salvation which presupposes the fall and just condemnation of all men.

Hence, Divine justice condemns all men equally and God would be glorified in the just condemnation of all sinners as none are righteous, no not one, and all equally not only deserve condemnation equally but all equally freely choose to resist God (Acts 7:51) and are all equally at war with God (Rom. 8:7).

Therefore, election to salvation is not based upon anything found in the elect that is not equally found in the non-elect but election is based purely upon the "good pleasure" of God's will or something found in His purpose of Grace to save an underserving people IN SPITE OF THEMSELVES "to the praise of the glory of His grace." He is therefore EQUALLY glorified in the just condemnation of the non-elect as He is in the salvation of the elect. His justice is glorified in them while his mercy is glorified in the elect - both equally glorify God.

Nothing explains the salvation of the elect except God's unconditional love and amazing grace. Nothing in them makes them any better than those God freely allows to continue in their enmity and justly deserve eternal wrath. Nothing! Their salvation is wholly of Grace and based wholly in God's divine purpose of grace alone.

The New Testament is written from a Jewish background and the Jews believed "salvation is of the Jews" (Jn. 4) and one must become a Jew by circumcision to be saved. The term "world" from a Jewish perspective had one of several different applications:

1. Non-Jews or the Gentiles - Rom. 11:12
2. All mankind without distinction of race, class or gender - 1 Jn. 2:2; Jn. 3:16
3. A system of evil.
4. The physical creation
5. Orderly arrangement
6. hyperbole
7. all mankind without exception

The non-elect are not elected to hell but simply allowed to continue according to their own free will in spite of internal and external revelation/warnings. Hence, they resist all the provisions of prevenient grace.

The elect are saved in spite of themselves, their resistance, their enmity due to pure grace alone.






In all redemptive passages the "us" in both the Old and New Testament refer to the elect. Among the Jews it is the "remnant" elect according to grace (Heb. 11:5) and in the New Testament among the Gentiles it is the "elect" (Rom. 8:29-30; 11:1-28).





In context, Paul precedes this by asking Timothy to pray for "all" men, meaning all classes of men, all kinds of men, all races of men." The term "all" refers to "all" mankind without distinction of class, race, or gender not all mankind without exception as many were suffering the wrath of God already in hell.




He is the only savior under heaven given to all men. No other Savior has been provided by God for the salvation of men. However, according to the purpose of election He is the effectual Savior of them.




"US-wARD" or the elect and none will perish as ALL the Father gives the Son will come to him in faith and "of all" given "I SHALL LOSE NOTHING.




He is writing Jewish believers who have been given the "old" commandment as well as the "new". The "whole world" refers to all classes, races, and genders without distinction. This is something that the Jewish Christians struggled with for the first ten chapters in the book of Acts.



He is talking to a Samaritan woman unto whom he also said "salvation is of the Jews" but not restricted to the Jews but the whole world = every race, class and gender including this woman and so all men without distinction.



The context is talking about TEMPORAL judgement which very soon was unleashed upon Israel by Babylon. God is glorified in the just condemnation of sinners but takes no pleasure in it. God is glorfied in sin (Psa. 76:10) as no sin or evil is permitted except that which God will ultimately work for the good of his people (rom. 8:28 "all things work for good") and for his glory.



Again the immediate context is talking about the "captain" of the seed of Abraham or the elect.



Again, the context is in response to "salvation is of the Jews" and the Jews would have no dealings with Samaritans but Jesus is the Savior of all mankind WITHOUT DISTINCTION of race, class or gender.



This is the superlapsarian position but not my position. I believe in divine reprobation but based upon their own just condemnation and complete freedom of will to continue in their enmity toward God (Rom. 8:7).



He did not have to because the very next verse tells you why- They were condemned ALREADY (v. 18).




Those who "recieved him" did so because they were not born of the will of man but of the will of God (Jn. 1:13). The word "power" represents the Greek word "exousia" or "authority" and this authority is derived from the new birth and the new believing heart given in new birth (Ezek. 36:26). Epheisans 1:13 concludes the Ephesians 1:4-13 passage rather than begins it. Election is TO salvation (2 Thes. 2:13) not because of salvation. You are confusing consequences with cause.



I am glad you brought this verse up as it presents the real problem. Compare this text with Deuteronomy 5:29 and 29:4 and then the solution to both is provided in Ezek. 36:26-27.

Never did get a response from Archer.
 

HisWitness

New Member
I am not being critical of anyone on this matter, but wondering if this is related to the "World Last Chance" on the web.

I know nothing of their doctrinal views, and really don't need to take the time to explore their web page.

Perhaps others have, and they will offer insight that we can verify.

if I were you--I would taker the time and look at all this--youll actually learn the truth about some names :thumbs::thumbs:
 

DHK

<b>Moderator</b>
if I were you--I would taker the time and look at all this--youll actually learn the truth about some names :thumbs::thumbs:
HisWitness,
In light of all the unorthodox posts you have made it has been the decision of the administration that you post in the non-baptist forum only. I hope that you will abide by the rules of the board.
 

Amy.G

New Member
HisWitness,
In light of all the unorthodox posts you have made it has been the decision of the administration that you post in the non-baptist forum only. I hope that you will abide by the rules of the board.
Thank you!!

:applause::applause::applause::applause:
 

HisWitness

New Member
HisWitness,
In light of all the unorthodox posts you have made it has been the decision of the administration that you post in the non-baptist forum only. I hope that you will abide by the rules of the board.

what you are really saying is if I or anyone else doesn't adhere to the set of beliefs and doctrines you propose ---then we aren't true Baptists and are NOT saved in the first place.

There are BAPTISTS that are Universalists.
There are Baptists who believe that you can lose your salvation.
There are Baptists that give Man Glory over YAH with their Arminian views.

Just a small portion of what some Baptists are---so you cant say some of the things I have posted is NOT Baptist Doctrine.

You even allow Arminians to post on the Baptist forums--ALL they do is give the Glory of YAH to Man.

I will abide by your request in respect--BUT let it be known you are Hypocrites in doing so!!! you are only out for yourself and your man-made doctrines which YAH will BURN when you appear before him:tear::tear::tear:
 

RLBosley

Active Member
may Yah have mercy upon thee friend :love2::love2

"Thee"?? Oh good heavens now he is trying to use "1611 English"...

Sorry but that's a pet peeve of mine, we are not King James' subjects don't try to speak like them! I really get annoyed at the "Thee, thou, thine" prayers I've heard so often... :BangHead:

/rant

Continue :wavey:

BTW, DHK thank you and the other admins for finally making this decision.
 
Top