Why Do Some Reject While Others Receive Salvation?

In JOhn 3:16 I don't. In 1 John 2:2, when you read it, you see that whatever Jesus did for us, he also did for the world. If that is pay for sin, then he paid for the sin of hte whole world. Yet he clearly did not do that. Some people still go to hell because of their sin. I have already explained that several times.

Typical fallacy ... The same words do not always mean the same thing. World can have several different meanings, including culture, universe, people, ungodly, etc.

Calvinistic "interpretation" is where it goes against the Greek lexicons. I have consulted Ardnt and Gingrich, Thayer, Parkhurst, Robinson, Abbot-Smith, Kittel, and ALL these authorities say that in both places "the human race" is meant. Are they all wrong?[/quote][/qb]I don't really disagree with them. I admit that 1 JOhn 2.2 can refer to the whole human race. Your trying to pick a fight with someone who doesn't really care that much. I lean towards my view, but only slightly. It is simply not a strong proof text for your position. As for the lexicons, if you actually look at them, you can see a variety of explanations. The verses assigned under each meaning is interpretation.

The only point is that the limited atonement view is not without merit in 1 John 2.2.

 

In JOhn 3:16 I don't. In 1 John 2:2, when you read it, you see that whatever Jesus did for us, he also did for the world. If that is pay for sin, then he paid for the sin of hte whole world. Yet he clearly did not do that. Some people still go to hell because of their sin. I have already explained that several times.

Larry, how can you say that Jesus "clearly did not do that", referring to His death on the cross for mankind? Are you yet so hard of understanding the Scriptures? Do you not see when Jesus says: "you shall dies in your sins, for if you believe not, that I am, you shall die in your sins" (John 8:24). And, Luke 13:3, etc, "I say to you, no, but, except you repent, you shall all likewise perish" It is because of mans REJECTION of what Jesus has done on the cross, that they shall be damned. Not because Jesus did not die for them.

Typical fallacy ... The same words do not always mean the same thing. World can have several different meanings, including culture, universe, people, ungodly, etc.

Yes, alwsys to suit your own "interpretation"

Calvinistic "interpretation" is where it goes against the Greek lexicons. I have consulted Ardnt and Gingrich, Thayer, Parkhurst, Robinson, Abbot-Smith, Kittel, and ALL these authorities say that in both places "the human race" is meant. Are they all wrong?</font>[/QUOTE]I don't really disagree with them. I admit that 1 JOhn 2.2 can refer to the whole human race. Your trying to pick a fight with someone who doesn't really care that much. I lean towards my view, but only slightly. It is simply not a strong proof text for your position. As for the lexicons, if you actually look at them, you can see a variety of explanations. The verses assigned under each meaning is interpretation.

Yehm, whatever. You seem to me someone who is somewhat scared of the Truth, and cannt accept what the plain teaching of Scripture really is.

The only point is that the limited atonement view is not without merit in 1 John 2.2. [/QB][/QUOTE]

 

But your explanation is incorrect Larry. People without faith go to hell IN their sins, not because of their sins. If people went to hell because of their sins, there would not be a Christian that passes muster either!

Since the Atonement for sin, the only reason a person goes to hell is because of lack of faith, the sins are merely incidental to the lack of Faith, which is the actual cause of them going to hell.

 

That's not what I said. I said he clearly did not pay for the sins of all mankind. We know that because the Bible says that people go to hell for their sins. If Christ paid for them, and then people go to hell for them, God is unjust. Do you really want to go there?

Not at all. I have clearly explained it many times. You just didn't read closely what I said.

This is true, and their rejection leaves them to pay for their own sins.

No ... to fit what Scripture teaches.

You can "whatever" all you want, but that won't help make any poitn.

No not at all. I am beating my head against the wall trying to explain to you what Scripture says, but you are unwilling to believe. You keep changing it.

Please format your posts correctly.

 

NOt according to the Bible. I have shown you the passagse before.

Not true, because for the Christian, Christ paid for their sins.

You never cease to amaze me. Sins are merely incidental? Not in Scripture. Lack of faith is a sin (as I have said many many times). If Chrsit paid for all sins, then lack of faith must be included. If lack of faith isn't a sin, then why is God sending people to hell for it? Your position is theological nonsense.

 

Get over it Larry! You lose this one too!

The work of the Father you refer to in saying that lack of faith is a sin, is work that the father has already done! Believing and not believing are the only two conditions the human spirit can have when it departs the flesh and neither of those conditions is sin!

The condition of the spirit when separated from the flesh is the result of either righteousness or sin, not the righteousness or sin itself.

 

Christ atoned for all the sins of the world! Not just for those who believe in Him.

He did that so that All the whosoever's, people like you and me could, through our faith in him, have everlasting life...Salvation! He did not atone for the sins of 20 out of 100 people, but for ALL SIN, be it sin of a believer or an unbeliever. He did that so NOTHING could prevent any man from having everlasting life through FAITH IN HIM!

Before you accuse me, NO, I DID NOT SAY HE IS SAVING ALL MANKIND! ONLY that all mankind can through faith in HIM be saved by him. The Salvation decision, "I've laid before you life and death -- Choose life", rests in the individual man!

 

How do I lose?

God commands faith in Christ. Therefore, lack of faith in Christ is disobedience and that is sin. Howw in the world can you possibly deny that?

The bottom line is that Scripture contradicts you, and you won't accept that.

 

God commands faith in Christ, you say. How can He command this is "all have not faith", as Calvinsts teach? Do you see what I mean, unbiblical nonsense.

 

No, I don't see what you mean? Your second sentence (the question) makes no sense.

The command to have faith in Christ is explicit in Scripture. Are you denying that?

 

If as you say, the command is that we have faith, how is it that man is not capable of having faith in God until man is regenerated? That is a command that totally depraved man is not capable of obeying?

How can that which man is not capable of doing be sin?

 

Because of what sin is ... Sin is any lack of conformity to God. Sin is not defined by ability, otherwise Psa 51.3 would be wrong. You have an improper definition of sin that ties it to ability, rather than a definition that ties it to the character of God.

 

Well guess what? If sin is as you define it, no Christian can ever have everlastinglife because no Christian can conform to God. Human's are simply NOT God and we cannot make ourselves OR BE MADE to conform to God! Adam, before he sinned did not conform to God! God made him man, a composit of spirit, soul, and body of flesh. God is spirit! There is no conformity of flesh that resembles spirit, nor can flesh conform to spirit! Flesh can however can be controlled by spirit, and indeed all human flesh is controlled by human spirit!

Sin is what we do . . . Not what we are! Faith is a condition of Spirit not something given to man, and it is FAITH that God seeks in man for man's salvation.

 

You have brought up the great thing about biblical salvation, and the thing that causes me to question your orthodoxy. In biblical salvation, Christ has conformed to God for us. That is the whole point of Romans 5, and numerous other passages. I am righteous in Christ becasue Christ is my righteousness. I don't have to be. I can't be. If I could be righteous without Christ, then Christ died in vain (Gal 2).

 

It appears your motivation for posting this topic was either misguided or faulty. I don't know a single man who thinks or says that Man, rather than God, is sovereign.

The "dumping on" you speak of is those of us who know better attempting to correct the understandings of those who use scripture out of context and make it mean what it does not while in context.

 

Larry,
Any righteousness you perceive you have is the result of your faith in God and nothing more, Just like Abraham!