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

[BillyBob]

Someone was saying a day or so ago (I have been off work sick for more than a week and am generally losing track of the days in my dotage LOL) that being reformed does not necessarily mean Calvinist. Another person who seems to be a dyed-in-the-wool Calvinist agreed with me that God does not make it impossible for any to believe, and yet, according to Calvinism, God has chosen ahead of time who will and who will not believe, which does make it impossible for those not chosen, to accept the offer of salvation, which is not, was not, and cannot be for them. And yet they will be punished for not believing. I have heard Calvinists say that God ordains everything, as if He were making everything happen, which also seems to me like they are ascribing evil to God, as if God causes men to act as they do, as if we are all puppets instead of men being responsible for the choices they make. Perhaps you have also seen me say that I do not believe man's will is free, which some take to mean we are incapable of making choices (which is obviously not what I mean). I say all that wondering where on the spectrum of this label do you rate yourself, if at all? Does saying you are somewhat reformed mean you are a Calvinist in some respects but not all? I am simply curious... I find it interesting also that so many outright reject the notion of total depravity even if they call themselves an Arminian, which also espouses the depravity of man. I do not consider myself either Calvinist or Arminian.

I think that God's elect are the only men/women that will be brought to faith.
There are too many place in scripture which mention the depravity of man and their inability to turn to Christ. So yes, I would look at myself and say I have always been His! He had a plan for me. After I was born it took almost 40 years for me to turn to Him, but that was His plan for me.
This is a mystery that I cannot and will not fully comprehend until glorification, when all will be revealed.

Many will say that God is not fair, that it would not be fair for God to save some and not others. But, we do not think on the same level as God. He even tells us – Have I no right to do what I want with my own? (Matt. 20:1)
God is under no obligation to save any. None of us deserve His mercy. The very fact that we receive it should make us forever thankful.
So, in summary, I believe as most reformed. However, I do not like the term Calvinist.
I think there are many people who do not consider themselves to be God's Elect, they would never consider TULIP to be true. Does that mean that they cannot be saved. NO! God may draw anyone to himself. In fact, I think that more of them may eventually arrive in Heaven than the reformed of this world! However, I do believe that they are God's Elect and just don't know or believe it. Thank God that Heaven is large enough to hold both!

As for free will, I believe that man can choose to do only that which his heart desires. But, we will never make the right choice until our heart is changed, and that will only happen when we brought to faith in Christ and place our trust in Him rather than ourselves.

 

[Rufus]

Might Be Saved means NOT SAVED.

So you are saying the Elect are NOT SAVED!

That definitely matches your false doctrine.

OR..."might be saved" also means "have the ability to "

Matthew wrote:

Matt 1:21
21 And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall [actually] save his people from their sins.
KJV

Then John also wrote:

John 1:29
29 The next day John saw Jesus coming toward him and said, "Look, the Lamb of God, who [actually\] takes away the sin of the world!
NIV

Then Luke wrote:

Acts 3:26
26 When God raised up his servant, he sent him first to you to bless you by [actually] turning each of you from your wicked ways."
NIV

And again Luke wrote:

Acts 5:31
He is the one whom God exalted to His right hand as a Prince and a Savior, to [actually] grant repentance to Israel, and forgiveness of sins.
NASB

And John wrote again:
1 John 3:5
5 But you know that he appeared so that he might take away our sins.
NIV

So, I guess John in the above passage wasn't very confident of either his own salvation or the salvation of the Jewish believers whom he primarily addressed in this epistle? Jesus made his appearance to merely make salvation possible, right? Jesus appeared to only make the removal of sins available to all who freely choose to have those sins removed?

Or do all the above passages harmonize with the correct understanding of Jn 3:17, which is:

John 3:17
17 For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to [actually] save the world through him.
NIV

For me...this is a no-brainer. But for you...not so much, heh? You care not a whit that your heresy presents numerous contradictions in scripture, do you? And I thought we Christians are supposed to be lovers of the truth and rejoice with it... But it appears some of us are quite content to live with our self-made contradictions.

 

[brightfame52]

Well...Arminians would say "all" men = each and every person in the world. So...there is that interpretation.

I know that, but I believe that view is error.

 

[brightfame52]

Might Be Saved means NOT SAVED.

So you are saying the Elect are NOT SAVED!

That definitely matches your false doctrine.

Jn 3:17 and 16 are the elect only or the Sheep or Christs Church in the world and they are the saved

 

[Rufus]

You are a "cherry picker" and completely on purpose skipped passed the important verses.

22 ......but if in any way thou canst, have pity on us and help us.

23 But Jesus said to him: What is this “If thou canst”? All things are possible to him that believes.

The guy never believed to begin with. Look at the real reason Jesus healed the boy.

25 But Jesus, seeing that the multitude was running together, rebuked the unclean spirit, saying to him:


Jesus healed the boy because it was a public display and many people were watching.

Keep guessing. This is fun reading what you think. It reminds me of the lack of Biblical knowledge that you possess

P.S. Erasmus wrote the Textus Receptus/KJV is based off the Latin Vulgate. Nice try

Which in turn was based on the TR.

 

[Rufus]

I know that, but I believe that view is error.

Copy that!

 

[Rufus]

Look at you just letting your mind wander because you don't know the Truth.

My "wandering mind" knows how to view passages critically. Yours not so much. If your error presented 100 contradictions, you would care less.

 

[FollowerofShiloh]

My "wandering mind" knows how to view passages critically. Yours not so much. If your error presented 100 contradictions, you would care less.

If I cared about your opinion to solve the solution to your false prehension I would give you the answer.

 

[Magenta]

I think that God's elect are the only men/women that will be brought to faith.
There are too many place in scripture which mention the depravity of man and their inability to turn to Christ. So yes, I would look at myself and say I have always been His! He had a plan for me. After I was born it took almost 40 years for me to turn to Him, but that was His plan for me.
This is a mystery that I cannot and will not fully comprehend until glorification, when all will be revealed.

Many will say that God is not fair, that it would not be fair for God to save some and not others. But, we do not think on the same level as God. He even tells us – Have I no right to do what I want with my own? (Matt. 20:1)
God is under no obligation to save any. None of us deserve His mercy. The very fact that we receive it should make us forever thankful.
So, in summary, I believe as most reformed. However, I do not like the term Calvinist.
I think there are many people who do not consider themselves to be God's Elect, they would never consider TULIP to be true. Does that mean that they cannot be saved. NO! God may draw anyone to himself. In fact, I think that more of them may eventually arrive in Heaven than the reformed of this world! However, I do believe that they are God's Elect and just don't know or believe it. Thank God that Heaven is large enough to hold both!

As for free will, I believe that man can choose to do only that which his heart desires. But, we will never make the right choice until our heart is changed, and that will only happen when we brought to faith in Christ and place our trust in Him rather than ourselves.

Thank you so much for your very thoughtful reply, BillyBob, as I do appreciate it as always. I wonder how much different our perspectives are having come to Him later in life, than those who believed from a much younger age. I say that because not only have I pondered this question before, but also, there is another thread currently discussing the concept of being chosen, and some have balked at the idea that they were and/or are underserving of the love God lavished on them in drawing each to Himself. Or maybe they never truly experienced it (one even said, "God may have helped some along"), perhaps thinking they somehow managed to surrender their self-will to God's, all on their own, with no help from Him at all. Being lost in the world and living a worldly life surely brings us to our knees one way or another. I say this knowing full well that even the saved experience difficulties, hardships, loss and grief, among other circumstances and situations that may challenge our faith, or highlight our lack of it, but in light of what has been said in the other thread, where people are speaking as if they merit God's favor, or are capable of loving unconditionally, it does cause me to wonder of their life experience and how they know God, or even if they do outside of what is written. I certainly do agree with you that God is under no obligation to save any, and that the exact mechanics of it remain somewhat shrouded in mystery even though some are convinced it always follows some certain specific formula.

I do not care for such terms as Calvinist or Arminian either, but some do label themselves that way, and seem to desire to so label others, even when the greater evidence is against that label being appropriate. I must leave off here for my breakfast is calling, even thinking your response deserves more from me, though some of the things I would wish to say would perhaps better be said in private.

Thank God for giving us new heart desires ..

 

[Rufus]

You are a "cherry picker" and completely on purpose skipped passed the important verses.

22 ......but if in any way thou canst, have pity on us and help us.

23 But Jesus said to him: What is this “If thou canst”? All things are possible to him that believes.

The guy never believed to begin with. Look at the real reason Jesus healed the boy.

25 But Jesus, seeing that the multitude was running together, rebuked the unclean spirit, saying to him:


Jesus healed the boy because it was a public display and many people were watching.

How about Doubting Thomas? Did he come to faith only after his encounter with the post-resurrected Jesus? Your simplistic remark that I highlighted presumes that all Christians' faith is perfect at all times -- that none us ever waver in our faith. Didn't Peter waver in his faith?

You also overlook the fact that the father knew his faith was weak and he cried out to the Lord to increase it! And so Jesus graciously answered! As far as the multitude seeing external signs, wonders and miracles...no one was ever saved by supernatural, external works. It takes more than that to save a person!

 

[FollowerofShiloh]

Jn 3:17 and 16 are the elect only or the Sheep or Christs Church in the world and they are the saved

Here, just so you know what the scholars say about "Might Be Saved"

used to express the possibility that something will happen although not very likely:

That is what you keep placing onto the Elect, they might be saved although not likely.

As I said, You have no clue what you're talking about.

 

[FollowerofShiloh]

How about Doubting Thomas? Did he come to faith only after his encounter with the post-resurrected Jesus? Your simplistic remark that I highlighted presumes that all Christians' faith is perfect at all times -- that none us ever waver in our faith. Didn't Peter waver in his faith?

You also overlook the fact that the father knew his faith was weak and he cried out to the Lord to increase it! And so Jesus graciously answered! As far as the multitude seeing external signs, wonders and miracles...no one was ever saved by supernatural, external works. It takes more than that to save a person!

He believed in Jesus, not the Resurrection.
Major difference.

 

[Rufus]

Thank you so much for your very thoughtful reply, BillyBob, as I do appreciate it as always. I wonder how much different our perspectives are having come to Him later in life, than those who believed from a much younger age. I say that because not only have I pondered this question before, but also, there is another thread currently discussing the concept of being chosen, and some have balked at the idea that they were and/or are underserving of the love God lavished on them in drawing each to Himself. Or maybe they never truly experienced it (one even said, "God may have helped some along"), perhaps thinking they somehow managed to surrender their self-will to God's, all on their own, with no help from Him at all. Being lost in the world and living a worldly life surely brings us to our knees one way or another. I say this knowing full well that even the saved experience difficulties, hardships, loss and grief, among other circumstances and situations that may challenge our faith, or highlight our lack of it, but in light of what has been said in the other thread, where people are speaking as if they merit God's favor, or are capable of loving unconditionally, it does cause me to wonder of their life experience and how they know God, or even if they do outside of what is written. I certainly do agree with you that God is under no obligation to save any, and that the exact mechanics of it remain somewhat shrouded in mystery even though some are convinced it always follows some certain specific formula.

I do not care for such terms as Calvinist or Arminian either, but some do label themselves that way, and seem to desire to so label others, even when the greater evidence is against that label being appropriate. I must leave off here for my breakfast is calling, even thinking your response deserves more from me, though some of the things I would wish to say would perhaps better be said in private.

Thank God for giving us new heart desires ..

I can appreciate your above sentiment, especially since there are multiple soteric views that oppose the Reformed perspective, e.g. Arminianism, Pelagianism, Barthianism, Galatianism, etc., hence my catch-all "NR" label which could just as easily be renamed "Confused" or "Unsure". Since I have not found Reformed Soteriology contradictory to scripture, I am very comfortable with it. The main reason I avoid the label "Calvinism" is because Calvin was confused on some important aspects of the relationship between Grace and Law, so I don't want to identify with him for that reason.

 

[Rufus]

He believed in Jesus, not the Resurrection.
Major difference.

Yeah... Doubting Thomas believed so strongly in Jesus that he decided to eschew the company of the Ten on that first Resurrection evening. And have you forgotten just how strong Thomas' doubts were?

 

[Rufus]

If I cared about your opinion to solve the solution to your false prehension I would give you the answer.

Yeah, right! At least I know what a contradiction is!

 

[FollowerofShiloh]

Yeah... Doubting Thomas believed so strongly in Jesus that he decided to eschew the company of the Ten on that first Resurrection evening. And have you forgotten just how strong Thomas' doubts were?

None of the Disciples believed when Mary M told them. Try acting like you have a concrete grasp on the scriptures before just being a blow hard.

10 She went and told those who had been with him, as they mourned and wept.
11 But when they heard that he was alive and had been seen by her, they would not believe it.

They were just like Thomas, BELIEVED in Jesus not the Resurrection.

I mean dude, LEARN SOMETHING before preaching at me like you got a clue.

 

[FollowerofShiloh]

Yeah, right! At least I know what a contradiction is!

And I know when I am addressing the unlearned who only believes doctrine over the Word of God.

 

[Rufus]

None of the Disciples believed when Mary M told them. Try acting like you have a concrete grasp on the scriptures before just being a blow hard.

10 She went and told those who had been with him, as they mourned and wept.
11 But when they heard that he was alive and had been seen by her, they would not believe it.

They were just like Thomas, BELIEVED in Jesus not the Resurrection.

I mean dude, LEARN SOMETHING before preaching at me like you got a clue.

No, they did NOT believe ALL that Jesus told him about his pending death and resurrection. And Thomas was the worst offender of them all! And not believing God or Jesus is very dangerous ground on which to stand because truth faith consists of actually believing God (Rom 4:3) -- not merely "in" him, as you suggested above. Do you think for a moment that if Jesus had not appeared to them and doubtlessly taught more truth to them over that period of 40 days that the Church would even exist today!? Do you forget how fearful the disciples were after his death!? They were scared to death of what Jews would do to them! Why do you think they locked themselves in a room!? How much did they really love God after Jesus died? There is no fear in love for God, is there!? Isn't perfect love supposed to drive out fear!? Yet, they were filled with fear!

Now...I'm not saying the 10 or Thomas did not have saving faith, per se. But I am saying that their post-Cross faith was very shaky at best! And this also refutes your simplistic, naive take on the father whose faith was also shaky and who apparently knew he was weak. This is why he cried out to Jesus to increase his faith after Jesus mildly rebuked him for his weak faith.

I mean dude, LEARN SOMETHING before preaching at me like you got a clue.

 

[Rufus]

And I know when I am addressing the unlearned who only believes doctrine over the Word of God.

Yeah...just remember, Mr. All-Wise, Mr. Know-it-All, what scripture teaches about who in this world God has chosen (1Cor 1:27-29)

 

[FollowerofShiloh]

No, they did NOT believe ALL that Jesus told him about his pending death and resurrection. And Thomas was the worst offender of them all! And not believing God or Jesus is very dangerous ground on which to stand because truth faith consists of actually believing God (Rom 4:3) -- not merely "in" him, as you suggested above. Do you think for a moment that if Jesus had not appeared to them and doubtlessly taught more truth to them over that period of 40 days that the Church would even exist today!? Do you forget how fearful the disciples were after his death!? They were scared to death of what Jews would do to them! Why do you think they locked themselves in a room!? How much did they really love God after Jesus died? There is no fear in love for God, is there!? Isn't perfect love supposed to drive out fear!? Yet, they were filled with fear!

Now...I'm not saying the 10 or Thomas did not have saving faith, per se. But I am saying that their post-Cross faith was very shaky at best! And this also refutes your simplistic, naive take on the father whose faith was also shaky and who apparently knew he was weak. This is why he cried out to Jesus to increase his faith after Jesus mildly rebuked him for his weak faith.

I mean dude, LEARN SOMETHING before preaching at me like you got a clue.

It would be a difficult thing to follow Someone, who "chose you to follow Him" and you believe is God and He talks about resurrection but did not see His Own Resurrection. Everything else Jesus proved to them and they saw with their own eyes. So it only stands to believe Jesus would make sure the Disciples saw Him Resurrected.

How could you preach DBR without seeing the Resurrection?