Did Jesus Die on The Cross for The Just/Elect/Saved Whose Names Are Written in The Book of Life OR

[Rufus]

It was by design from Creation like Paul said.

26 And he made from one man every nation of mankind to live on all the face of the earth, having determined allotted periods and the boundaries of their dwelling place,

27 that they should seek God


So it has always been God that leads His Offspring to Him.

On the other hand, Paul also wrote:

Rom 3:10-18
10 As it is written:

"There is no one righteous, not even one;
11 there is no one who understands,
no one who seeks God.
12 All have turned away,
they have together become worthless;
there is no one who does good,
not even one."
13 "Their throats are open graves;
their tongues practice deceit."
"The poison of vipers is on their lips."
14 "Their mouths are full of cursing and bitterness."
15 "Their feet are swift to shed blood;
16 ruin and misery mark their ways,
17 and the way of peace they do not know."
18 "There is no fear of God before their eyes."
NIV

Now to reconcile the two passages: What Paul was telling the Greeks was what God intention for mankind was at the beginning of creation. But God's intention for mankind is one thing but what man actually does is quite another.

Also, why did you quote only a small portion of v.27? The verse reads in full as follows:

Acts 17:27
27 God did this so that men would seek him and perhaps reach out for him and find him, though he is not far from each one of us.
NIV

There's nothing in the passage that even remotely hints that God empowers all men to seek after him. Nor is there anything in the text that suggests that God designed man to inherently desire to seek and find him. Nor does the text say that God actively leads all men to seek him and find him! All the text is saying is that God decreed (determined) that Adam's progeny should fill the entire earth, that he determined man's time of existence and where they will live -- and the purpose for doing those things is so that man would seek Him and PERHAPS reach out and find him. (In fact, Paul is alluding to God's judgment at the Tower of Babel when he scattered all mankind over the face of the earth.) All the things that God did to encourage mankind to seek Him were EXTERNAL to the sons of men. God did nothing internally to the hearts, minds and souls of men to draw all mankind to himself, which of course differs sharply from the way He does actually internally and effectually draw the ELECT to Christ. The fact that the elect must be drawn to Christ in this way clearly shows the inadequacy of any and all external inducements.

 

[FollowerofShiloh]

On the other hand, Paul also wrote:

Rom 3:10-18
10 As it is written:

"There is no one righteous, not even one;
11 there is no one who understands,
no one who seeks God.
12 All have turned away,
they have together become worthless;
there is no one who does good,
not even one."
13 "Their throats are open graves;
their tongues practice deceit."
"The poison of vipers is on their lips."
14 "Their mouths are full of cursing and bitterness."
15 "Their feet are swift to shed blood;
16 ruin and misery mark their ways,
17 and the way of peace they do not know."
18 "There is no fear of God before their eyes."
NIV

Now to reconcile the two passages: What Paul was telling the Greeks was what God intention for mankind was at the beginning of creation. But God's intention for mankind is one thing but what man actually does is quite another.

Also, why did you quote only a small portion of v.27? The verse reads in full as follows:

Acts 17:27
27 God did this so that men would seek him and perhaps reach out for him and find him, though he is not far from each one of us.
NIV

There's nothing in the passage that even remotely hints that God empowers all men to seek after him. Nor is there anything in the text that suggests that God designed man to inherently desire to seek and find him. Nor does the text say that God actively leads all men to seek him and find him! All the text is saying is that God decreed (determined) that Adam's progeny should fill the entire earth, that he determined man's time of existence and where they will live -- and the purpose for doing those things is so that man would seek Him and PERHAPS reach out and find him. (In fact, Paul is alluding to God's judgment at the Tower of Babel when he scattered all mankind over the face of the earth.) All the things that God did to encourage mankind to seek Him were EXTERNAL to the sons of men. God did nothing internally to the hearts, minds and souls of men to draw all mankind to himself, which of course differs sharply from the way He does actually internally and effectually draw the ELECT to Christ. The fact that the elect must be drawn to Christ in this way clearly shows the inadequacy of any and all external inducements.

I said that but it does not take away the fact that God created it so we are to seek Him. It's not like that has ever changed. So there's a sense of responsibility God placed upon His Creation.

 

[Rufus]

Okay, see as you will, and literally you are correct. You might be straining g out gnats and end up swallowing a camel as the first chosen priests did, that Jesus warned them over that literalness.either you do not see the whole picture of Love from god to all or you are a troll
You either believe God from within you or you do not. I leave you in God's hands, have a blessed life, I hope the best for you Rufus

I plan on expounding a little bit more on God's love shortly. I found an ancient post of mine that I made on a secular forum years ago in answer to a pantheist's idea of God's love which virtually mirrors your idea, as well as others here as well. I'm in the process of editing that post due to additional knowledge I gained from divine revelation subsequent to writing that post. Perhaps this will give you additional food for thought.

Meanwhile, though, why don't you reconsider Gen 3:15 and answer the couple of questions I asked the other day?

 

[Rufus]

I said that but it does not take away the fact that God created it so we are to seek Him. It's not like that has ever changed. So there's a sense of responsibility God placed upon His Creation.

Responsibility does not = ability. You have this propensity to conflate the two.

 

[FollowerofShiloh]

Responsibility does not = ability. You have this propensity to conflate the two.

We all have the ability to accept and reject.

 

[Everlasting-Grace]

Responsibility does not = ability. You have this propensity to conflate the two.

if you have no ability,. you can not be held accountable..

 

[Jeraboo]

for the Unjust/Nonelect/Unsaved whose names are not written in The Book of Life?

Revelation 21:27
There shall not enter into it any thing defiled, or that worketh abomination or maketh a lie, but they that are written in the book of life of the Lamb

He gave his life for us while we were yet his enemy

 

[homwardbound]

I plan on expounding a little bit more on God's love shortly. I found an ancient post of mine that I made on a secular forum years ago in answer to a pantheist's idea of God's love which virtually mirrors your idea, as well as others here as well. I'm in the process of editing that post due to additional knowledge I gained from divine revelation subsequent to writing that post. Perhaps this will give you additional food for thought.

Meanwhile, though, why don't you reconsider Gen 3:15 and answer the couple of questions I asked the other day?

Only those born again by God see and know truth, no need to continue, not by me or from me. God just loves you too along with the entire world
1 John 2:1-4 says this truth Christ went to death (Willing) death for us the people to be reconciled as claimed are reconciled by Son in his one time death once for everyone, in that last shedding of blood for anymore sacrifices for anymore sin to be forgiven. It is done by Son (John 19:30) reconciled ( 2.Cor 5:17-20)
Me trusting God to show you, if you decide to believe God and stick to it, thank you

 

[studier]

On the other hand, Paul also wrote:

Rom 3:10-18
10 As it is written:

"There is no one righteous, not even one;
11 there is no one who understands,
no one who seeks God.
12 All have turned away,
they have together become worthless;
there is no one who does good,
not even one."
13 "Their throats are open graves;
their tongues practice deceit."
"The poison of vipers is on their lips."
14 "Their mouths are full of cursing and bitterness."
15 "Their feet are swift to shed blood;
16 ruin and misery mark their ways,
17 and the way of peace they do not know."
18 "There is no fear of God before their eyes."
NIV

Now to reconcile the two passages: What Paul was telling the Greeks was what God intention for mankind was at the beginning of creation. But God's intention for mankind is one thing but what man actually does is quite another.

Also, why did you quote only a small portion of v.27? The verse reads in full as follows:

Acts 17:27
27 God did this so that men would seek him and perhaps reach out for him and find him, though he is not far from each one of us.
NIV

There's nothing in the passage that even remotely hints that God empowers all men to seek after him. Nor is there anything in the text that suggests that God designed man to inherently desire to seek and find him. Nor does the text say that God actively leads all men to seek him and find him! All the text is saying is that God decreed (determined) that Adam's progeny should fill the entire earth, that he determined man's time of existence and where they will live -- and the purpose for doing those things is so that man would seek Him and PERHAPS reach out and find him. (In fact, Paul is alluding to God's judgment at the Tower of Babel when he scattered all mankind over the face of the earth.) All the things that God did to encourage mankind to seek Him were EXTERNAL to the sons of men. God did nothing internally to the hearts, minds and souls of men to draw all mankind to himself, which of course differs sharply from the way He does actually internally and effectually draw the ELECT to Christ. The fact that the elect must be drawn to Christ in this way clearly shows the inadequacy of any and all external inducements.

I'm not taking exception with what you're saying but it does bring some thoughts and questions to mind:

• Acts17:27 as you've identified with "PERHAPS" is only identifying a possibility, even a remote possibility. The language about groping (like a blind man) is seen as speaking of man's (all men including the mentality minded Greeks) sinful condition (mentality included) but also is hitting Greek Philosophy head-on as they were rationalists and considered themselves as having healthy minds. What Paul follows with seems to have pierced some of these unbelieving minds, at least to some degree, as some believed 17:32-34.
  • We seem to be left with having to read election into this.
• Since you started here with Romans:
  • Doesn't Paul tell us that God in fact did design men and His Creation in a fashion whereby men could know of God through His Creation? This would take some internal ability of man. Desire as you say is another thing, but it seems obvious that some are negative and some are positive in response to this general revelation.
  • When Paul deals with this he uses a few different words and phrases to show that negative man is knowingly rejecting God:
    • 1:19 what is known/intelligible of/about God is readily known in/among them.
    • 1:20 God's invisibles - His eternal power and divine nature - are perceived on the basis of careful thought, so men are without excuse [for rejecting God]
    • 1:21 they know/comprehend/are aware of God but do not glorify Him as God and are not thankful to God.
    • 1:28 they did not value having God in their experiential knowledge
    • 1:30 they experientially know God's righteous judgment but don't care.
    • This seems to be language of having made a choice to reject God - having seen no value in knowing Him experientially - IOW God is meaningless to their mental experience by which they live.
  • So, it seems general revelation and the minds of men are designed to interact so men are conscious enough of God to be held responsible for how they respond to this consciousness - this knowledge - they are to consider carefully - and to conclude that having God in their lived out knowledge is valuable - and to glorify and thank Him.
  • Are they without excuse because they are not elect?
  • How does this tie to Rom3:10-18?
    • Are all of these OT references in these verses saying there is no or never a human being that seeks after God?
      • That doesn't seem likely based upon Romans 1 which seems to draw a distinction between some who know and reject and some who know and do not reject.
    • Or is Paul saying that whether Jew or Gentile the issue is something else per the OT references and in line with what Paul has established in Romans 1 and dealt with from thereon?

 

[PaulThomson]

Responsibility does not = ability. You have this propensity to conflate the two.

True. I could give a blind man the responsibility of monitoring security cameras. He would be responsible but not capable.

But blameworthiness does imply ability. Yes or no?

 

[Rufus]

We all have the ability to accept and reject.

If that's case, then why MUST God draw the elect to Christ? Jesus said that "All the Father gives me to me WILL come to me" (Jn 6:37). Notice how different that language is from Act 17: 27 that says that "PERHAPS [men would' reach out for him and find him". Jesus was most emphatic in his statement, whereas in Acts there is no such forceful, decisive language of assurance. No one will ever seek God apart from the power of the Holy Spirit working in that person's heart, mind and soul. Dead people love their spiritual state of blindness and darkness. They have no natural interest in seeking out the Author of Life and being reunited to him. The Spirit of the Living God must CALL such out of their spiritual tombs so that they can come!

 

[FollowerofShiloh]

If that's case, then why MUST God draw the elect to Christ? Jesus said that "All the Father gives me to me WILL come to me" (Jn 6:37). Notice how different that language is from Act 17: 27 that says that "PERHAPS [men would' reach out for him and find him". Jesus was most emphatic in his statement, whereas in Acts there is no such forceful, decisive language of assurance. No one will ever seek God apart from the power of the Holy Spirit working in that person's heart, mind and soul. Dead people love their spiritual state of blindness and darkness. They have no natural interest in seeking out the Author of Life and being reunited to him. The Spirit of the Living God must CALL such out of their spiritual tombs so that they can come!

God is drawing man to Him from day one of Creation. Why is Jesus any different? It wouldn't be. We're ALL still responsible for fulfilling verse 30 The times of ignorance God overlooked, but now he commands all people everywhere to repent

 

[Rufus]

True. I could give a blind man the responsibility of monitoring security cameras. He would be responsible but not capable.

But blameworthiness does imply ability. Yes or no?

While man is totally helpless spiritually he is still morally culpable because we were all in the "loins of Adam", as it were, when he sinned and, UNLIKE us, Adam came into this world with no spiritual handicaps for he was born alive unto God, without any proclivity to sin and without any guilt. But after he sinned and he died, then we inherited his spiritual death. Blameworthiness (or culpability), therefore, can also imply helplessness and when are helpless in the natural things of this world, we know how to cry out for help. But because we are DEAD to God, we cannot see or perceive our miserable, wretched, helpless spiritual estate. Man is too arrogant and proud to humbly cry out to God, which is why God MUST take the initiative in saving us.

 

[Rufus]

[QUOTE="FollowerofShiloh, post: 5301697, member: 328825"]God is drawing man to Him from day one of Creation. Why is Jesus any different? It wouldn't be. We're ALL still responsible for fulfilling verse 30 The times of ignorance God overlooked, but now he commands all people everywhere to repent [/QUOTE]

Prove from scripture what I highlighted in red.

God also commanded all Israel to keep his Covenant of Law. How did that work out for Israel?

Also, if God has been drawing all men to him from day one of Creation, then all men must be saved. How can it be otherwise? Jesus did not say in John 6 that PERHAPS some men, who the Father has given to Him, will come to him.

 

[FollowerofShiloh]

[QUOTE="FollowerofShiloh, post: 5301697, member: 328825"]God is drawing man to Him from day one of Creation. Why is Jesus any different? It wouldn't be. We're ALL still responsible for fulfilling verse 30 The times of ignorance God overlooked, but now he commands all people everywhere to repent

Prove from scripture what I highlighted in red.

God also commanded all Israel to keep his Covenant of Law. How did that work out for Israel?

26 And he made from one man every nation of mankind to live on all the face of the earth, having determined allotted periods and the boundaries of their dwelling place,

27 that they should seek God


It says From ONE MAN Everyone was created in order to seek God.

So if Adam talked about God and his children talked about God and their children and generation after generation would have talked about God they could find God.

 

[Rufus]

26 And he made from one man every nation of mankind to live on all the face of the earth, having determined allotted periods and the boundaries of their dwelling place,

27 that they should seek God


It says From ONE MAN Everyone was created in order to seek God.

So if Adam talked about God and his children talked about God and their children and generation after generation would have talked about God they could find God.

But you can't reconcile your interpretation with Rom 3:11, as I explained earlier. Generations of people talking "about God" did not and could not empower them to actually seek him. You refuse to believe that it takes a supernatural act of God that actually QUICKENS the hearts, minds and souls of men so that they will want to seek him. Nothing EXTERNAL to us has ever saved so much as one person.

And you keep glossing over the fact there there's a huge gulf between what God intended for man and what his permissive or decretive will allowed or decreed, respectively.

And why do continually ignore what v.27 fully says? Yes, God "did this so that men would seek him and PERHAPS reach out for him and find him...". You know....like MAYBE! But most definitely NOT certainly!

So...you need to come up with a proof text that says God has been drawing all mankind to him since Day One.

 

[FollowerofShiloh]

But you can't reconcile your interpretation with Rom 3:11, as I explained earlier. Generations of people talking "about God" did not and could not empower them to actually seek him. You refuse to believe that it takes a supernatural act of God that actually QUICKENS the hearts, minds and souls of men so that they will want to seek him. Nothing EXTERNAL to us has ever saved so much as one person.

And you keep glossing over the fact there there's a huge gulf between what God intended for man and what his permissive or decretive will allowed or decreed, respectively.

And why do continually ignore what v.27 fully says? Yes, God "did this so that men would seek him and PERHAPS reach out for him and find him...". You know....like MAYBE! But most definitely NOT certainly!

So...you need to come up with a proof text that says God has been drawing all mankind to him since Day One.

I need to do no such thing. You just need to accept that God designed it so we would seek him. That's a Biblical fact even if it doesn't happen.


But knowing that Paul tell us humans are offspring to God sheds light that Jesus died for those humans, ALL of them just like God tells ALL of them to Repent in verse 30.

That destroys this sordid doctrine you've been pushing to dust and ashes.

 

[PaulThomson]

While man is totally helpless spiritually he is still morally culpable because we were all in the "loins of Adam", as it were, when he sinned and, UNLIKE us, Adam came into this world with no spiritual handicaps for he was born alive unto God, without any proclivity to sin and without any guilt. But after he sinned and he died, then we inherited his spiritual death. Blameworthiness (or culpability), therefore, can also imply helplessness and when are helpless in the natural things of this world, we know how to cry out for help. But because we are DEAD to God, we cannot see or perceive our miserable, wretched, helpless spiritual estate. Man is too arrogant and proud to humbly cry out to God, which is why God MUST take the initiative in saving us.

You are resorting to the logical fallacy of special pleading. If I demand a blind person be responsible to watch security cam feeds to alert the security staff to intruders, and an intruder sneaks into the building and sets it on fire during their watch, the blind person is not culpable. I am. No one commanded to do something they are incapable of doing is blameworthy in any scenario for not doing what they were commanded.

However, in the one case of calvinist theology, the person becomes blameable on the basis of the theological presuppositions of the calvinist system. Rather than these presuppositions justifying the blameworthiness of the incapable, the attribution of blame to the incapable by the system should be a red flag that the system is broken.

 

[PaulThomson]

If that's case, then why MUST God draw the elect to Christ? Jesus said that "All the Father gives me to me WILL come to me" (Jn 6:37).

It says "Everything (pan) that the Father gives Me will come to me." Everything the Father had given to Jesus was more than the just those who would be eventually chosen to inherit all things with the Son. The Father had given Jesus everything, John 13:3

The reason God needed to draw both the believing and the unbelieving to Christ was because "He had no form or comeliness tht we should desire Him. Jesus, without the Father working and speaking through Him was innocuous and unimpressive. No one would have noticed Him without the father's controversial words and deeds performed through Jesus.

 

[Rufus]

I need to do no such thing. You just need to accept that God designed it so we would seek him. That's a Biblical fact even if it doesn't happen.


But knowing that Paul tell us humans are offspring to God sheds light that Jesus died for those humans, ALL of them just like God tells ALL of them to Repent in verse 30.

That destroys this sordid doctrine you've been pushing to dust and ashes.

Of course, you won't do it! You painted yourself in a corner again with your foolish, outlandish claim that God has been drawing men to him since Day One of Creation. Well, then, answer me this question Einstein: If God has been drawing men to him for all these centuries, then how come the entire world isn't saved? After all, Jesus did say in John 6 that all that the Father gives him WILL come to him. Not Perhaps. Not Maybe. Not Possibly. BUT WILL come!

Maybe you need to ask yourself this tough question about God's design: Why hasn't it happened after all these millennia!? It's not a question of "if it doesn't happen"! The irrefutable fact is: It has never happened! You're so stuck on your Humanism and Naturalism that you have blinded yourself to biblical history. How many people were saved in the Garden after the Fall? Then how many people were saved in the Antediluvian Period of history? Then after after the Tower of Babel how many people became worshipers of YHWH?
If so many people were seeking after God in the Postdiluvian era, how come God used Israel to drive out seven wicked, pagan nations from the land He had promised to Abraham? And I could go on and on with these kinds of questions. Your god who "designed" that men would save themselves by seeking him is a miserable, wretched, unmitigated Failure! His grand plan flopped big time! Quite a stark contrast between your god and the God Jesus talks about in John 6!

I most definitely will stick with Jesus' version of God!