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

[HeIsHere]

You are straw-manning. You are citing others, but are inserting your erroneous and unbiblical definitions of their words into their statements, instead if applying their own biblical definitions of their own words into their statements. If you disagree that someone's definition is unbiblical, you need to offer a persuasive argument for your own definition, and not just declare your definition biblically-based on your presumption of your having some divinely imparted gnosis.

Yes it is at its core gnostic, brought in by Augustine.

Augustine is the first in Christian history to introduce the concepts and idea that for example no one can respond positively to the gospel appeal unless they've been regenerated first this concept/idea that God has to choose you or elect you started in the fifth century.

 

[Rufus]

You just earlier dismissed parabolic comparisons between physical things and spiritual thing as foolish, saying we should compare spiritual only with spiritual. But now, when you do it, you are claiming it reveals the depth of your wisdom and insight. You appear to be setting your pants on fire at both ends.

No, it was Studier reading into the Exodus narrative his version of spiritual truth, instead of drawing spiritual truth out of the narrative itself! That's what Typology is all about: It's learning truths FROM OT historical people and events and then searching to see how those truths taken from physical, temporal reality point to parallel truths in spiritual, eternal reality. Once He began rattling off how much supposed "freedom" the enslaved Hebrews had in Egypt, that told me immediately he was making stuff up on the fly -- reading his ideas into the narrative! For there's nothing in the Exodus narrative itself that even remotely hints how well off those slaves were under Pharaoh in terms of all their other supposed freedoms. They were in bondage and they were miserable (Ex 3:7). Period!

It's obvious Mr. Studier ignored this passage, as well as others for that matter. So, is there any spiritual lesson to be learned from this last statement I made above? That's my question to you. Let's see if you understand how Typology works. Can we learn any spiritual lesson from the Hebrews' physical bondage and their sufferings (miseries)? If so, what? AND give me chapter and verse to back up your answer, just as I backed up all my antitypes in my Exodus study with scripture.

P.S. Parables and Typology are two different forms of teaching.

 

[Rufus]

Yes it is at its core gnostic, brought in by Augustine.

Augustine is the first in Christian history to introduce the concepts and idea that for example no one can respond positively to the gospel appeal unless they've been regenerated first this concept/idea that God has to choose you or elect you started in the fifth century.

Can the physically dead make any natural choices? Can they will themselves back to life? Then why would an straight-thinking, critcally-minded person think the spiritual dead have any ability to make spiritual choices, or that it wouldn't also take supernatural power to bring the spiritual dead back to life, as it does to bring back the physically dead?

Metaphorical language requires that parallels be made.

And when Jesus raised the physical dead, can you point to any passage that says the dead person requested that He bring them back?

 

[Rufus]

Where did I state a human is intrinsically good?

You implied it. Go back and read what you said.

 

[HeIsHere]

Can the physically dead make any natural choices? Can they will themselves back to life? Then why would an straight-thinking, critcally-minded person think the spiritual dead have any ability to make spiritual choices, or that it wouldn't also take supernatural power to bring the spiritual dead back to life, as it does to bring back the physically dead?

Metaphorical language requires that parallels be made.

And when Jesus raised the physical dead, can you point to any passage that says the dead person requested that He bring them back?

We are not talking about physically dead.

As was explained by @cv5 "dead/die" in Genesis means separated.

 

[HeIsHere]

You implied it. Go back and read what you said.

I think you are doing eisegesis again.

 

[Mem]

Ok... so you were born spiritually alive having a human spirit. That is your belief?

Makes sense why I wished to avoid you....
I really had no idea that is what you believed.
Must have simply been spiritual instinct kicking in.

I'm glad to have been of help in building your self-esteem, but it is apparent that we do not speak the same language. There's plenty of room here for you to gather your own following. As a matter of fact, you can try and take as many of mine as you like, just try to keep in mind that they have their own free will, just so you're don't become too disappointed if you fail to lead them away, I mean.

 

[Mem]

FTFY.

Surely, you did not do that for me.

 

[Magenta]

You implied it. Go back and read what you said.

So odd that so many walk in one ditch or another, not able to find the middle ground of truth.

Especially odd given those who think they are great researchers, who fail to properly research.

Not to mention all the Scriptures that must be twisted out of shape and outright denied on the state of the natural man.

One must wonder how they became so attached to a doctrine that is nowhere presented in the Bible.

Augustine is the first in Christian history to introduce the concepts and idea that for example no one can respond positively to the gospel appeal unless they've been regenerated first this concept/idea that God has to choose you or elect you started in the fifth century.

For He says to Moses: “I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.”
So then, it does not depend on man’s desire or effort, but on God’s mercy. For the Scripture says to Pharaoh: “I raised
you up for this very purpose, that I might display My power in you, and that My name might be proclaimed in all the earth.”

 

[Magenta]

I've been reading through some of your discussions today and yesterday. Well done good and faithful servants!

Matthew 25:21

 

[studier]

Spiritual understanding is a GRACIOUS gift of God which he gives FREELY to whom he chooses

Read Romans 1. He gave that gracious gift of knowledge about Himself to all men. If you read a little deeper, you'll also see the conscience of all men referenced in there.

As I said, call it what you will. If you think knowledge about God's eternal power and divinity that He put into all men, which also includes knowledge of His righteous judgment is not something spiritual, then I can see why you're stuck in such an erroneous system of doctrine. You're not competing with me or anyone else here. You're very clearly competing against the Word.

It's kind of odd, actually. Your system argues that God essentially forces some men to believe in His Son. But at the same time doesn't force all men to believe He exists. I would think you'd give up the lost cause of inconsistency. But, I guess such inconsistency is necessary to protect against a real discussion of free will. And then we can see why your system has thrown so much into spiritual death. It ultimately has to go there, so it did. Then it's stuck looking incredibly lacking in the face of Romans 1, which you clearly cannot argue against.

Switching to something more reasonable that you have some true knowledge about, you must have enjoyed the 1960's from what we just read of your history. It is quite the thing that the Gospel of Jesus Christ can break through the Cheech & Chong cloud of smoke, "free love", drugs and rock & roll of that era. No Vietnam?

 

[studier]

But Paul said there was no good thing in his flesh.

While he was battling mentally/spiritually to keep God's Law.

 

[studier]

He simply doesn't want to retain the knowledge of the one true God in his mind

Some don't value having that knowledge, so do choose to reject God. Some choose not to reject His existence. Either way, it's interesting how many function somewhat well according to conscience He has given all men and exist as fairly decent, non [physically] murderous people.

There are some teachers who do a good job delving more deeply into the hypocritical mentality of the so-called atheist and agnostic, believers in other gods, etc. While rejecting the One True God and Creator, they choose and assume to themselves some of His moral requirements and they use the laws of His universe to think and work. They function as the social creatures they were designed as in His image. And so on...

There's way more God Consciousness in men than you're remotely able to acknowledge with your silly view of spiritual death which is actually more akin to non-existence than an imprisoned existence of a creature who cannot actually escape the existence of God no matter how vehemently he rejects Him.

 

[wwjdmichael101]

Augustine is the first in Christian history to introduce the concepts and idea that for example no one can respond positively to the gospel appeal unless they've been regenerated first this concept/idea that God has to choose you or elect you started in the fifth century.

I am new to all this and would like to give my thoughts without being attacked too harshly.
I hold the belief that, unaided, humans cannot naturally come to God. Divine intervention is necessary for anyone to seek a relationship with God. However, I do not subscribe to the notion that regeneration must precede this seeking process. Instead, I understand that God actively influences the human heart, drawing individuals toward salvation. Ultimately, each person has the freedom to accept or reject this transformative work within their hearts.

 

[studier]

Law of Noncontradiction

Like the walking dead? Like Paul saying he (or rhetorically "I") was alive once and when the law came I died and then while dead I struggled between my flesh and my mind, and then while dead and struggling between my flesh and my mind came the epiphany of what Jesus Christ was all about?

Since a slave being free to think according to the mentality God has placed into him is so obscure to you / vital to your inculcated viewpoint, you are sadly quite unable to see what's right in front of you. Your methodology of skipping Scriptures, ignoring and changing definitions, conflating topics, and sticking to your wooden sword is truly a vision of a Christian taken captive. I've laid out 2 or 3 sections of Scripture for you with some context and you've not once addressed them with anything more than that of a child covering his eyes.

Our Text and our God do not speak with the simplistic use of such a "Law" as you attempt to force on it. Seriously, open yourself up to some dimensional reasoning and lose the humanistic viewpoint and erroneous doctrine. You ignore and side-step way too much to even remotely be taken seriously. It shows how once one has a wonderful testimony, things are still in play to get him off course. You have some obvious gifted abilities. You're sadly misapplying them. You might come to understand this if you'd try to stay tighter to the Text - the Word.

 

[MerSee]

2 Timothy 2:10
6 The husbandman, that laboureth, must first partake of the fruits. 7 Understand what I say: for the Lord will give thee in all things understanding. 8 Be mindful that the Lord Jesus Christ is risen again from the dead, of the seed of David, according to my gospel. 9 Wherein I labour even unto bands, as an evildoer; but the word of God is not bound. 10 Therefore I endure all things for the sake of the elect, that they also may obtain the salvation, which is in Christ Jesus, with heavenly glory.

 

[MerSee]

Yes it is at its core gnostic, brought in by Augustine.

Augustine is the first in Christian history to introduce the concepts and idea that for example no one can respond positively to the gospel appeal unless they've been regenerated first this concept/idea that God has to choose you or elect you started in the fifth century.

The concept of the elect is in the Bible before the fifth century.

 

[studier]

Shirely U. Jest. I have all the appreciation in the world! Besides, the bible tells us how God works with fallen human nature: It's called Resurrection or the New Birth.

You seriously have a problem with Rom1 and God Consciousness. You need to conflate it with the final solution to distract from it. You're doing the same thing with the concept of freedom in conflating freedom to choose to accept or reject God Consciousness with ultimate freedom from sin. What a mess.

There are thousands of years of history and process between Gen3 and the advent of the Son of God into human history. No matter how hard you try to dissuade and conflate, some of us do let the Word teach us what He says. Some of us thus do function by not conflating and in turn by rightly dividing.

 

[notmyown]

Faith is not a power.

i was talking about the meaning of the Greek word translated "impossible". it's the alpha privative followed by a cognate of dunatos.

apologies to all for operating on the presumption you can read my mind.

pie and coffee at my house-- everyone's invited.

 

[notmyown]

The scripture does not say that without faith in the gospel, nor dors it say that without faith in Jesus Christ, it is impossible to please God. Clearly those listed in Hebrews were ignorant of the NT gospel and thd life, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ snd yet pleased God with faith.

did the OT saints not know their scriptures? do you think they didn't know God had promised a Redeemer?

every person ever saved has believed that promise.