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

[2ndTimothyGroup]

You did quote my response to the Other poster so I was keeping everything related to that. I was only understanding and dealing with your immediate responses. But if you had more to say or to discuss something in detail I am willing to further that notion. I just was going by the original Op that caused you to offer your viewpoint.

I would like to humbly back out. I am tired. To spend so much time offering things I have already offered, and for it to seemingly come to nothing is painful to me, as I could have been studying the Lord's Word instead. I am looking for people like @Magenta, @Evmur and others, who have insights that will help me grow and mature. Anything less than that is heartbreaking (to me).

 

[rogerg]

How do the verses which speak of God's covenant apply to God's people of today. For example: Should the Christian of today take comfort in the fact that their young children are covenant children, and therefore may be treated somewhat differently than the children of non believers?
This could be a topic of it's own!

In terms of salvation, I believe that everyone stands alone before God, with whether they were elected/saved or not being
the only factor of true importance. I would say that I agree with Rufus (above), as long as by baptism, he meant
spiritual, and not water. But based upon prior discussions of his that I've very briefly read, I think that he might mean spiritual baptism,
but I could be wrong.

 

[MerSee]

My friend, I am so sorry that your experience is as it is. Those of us who have had the Love of Christ that the Father has for His Son placed into our hearts . . . these battles are not fun. In fact, they are heartbreaking. Incredibly, I have been told that by backing out of such conversations I am "raging," but in fact, I am not. My heart is broken and bleeds for Christians, perhaps similarly as did Paul's heartbreak and bleeds for his Blessed Jewish brothers and sisters.

As you have discovered, it doesn't matter what we say, even stating that these conversations are terribly wrong and painful, our offenders will actually place the laughing emoji to prove that they enjoy the fact that they cause harm. Such people are not of Christ. They are of the Devil here, masquerading as beacons of light, but in truth, they are imposters bent on causing division amongst the true believers, of which there are very few, both here and at all other forums. In fact, I wonder if some of them are bots, for some show absolutely no emotion in their painful accusations. They show neither pain nor joy in their presentation.

All that I can suggest is that perhaps we create our own forum where such monsters will quickly be shut down and eliminated. A true forum could become popular if it is known as a safe and healthy place for all to come and share, but more importantly, this forum should be safe for new believers. In fact, I would say that new believers should avoid such forums, for there is more evil present in them than anywhere else. This form of evil is not tolerated even in the most corrupt of churches. Yet these forums are filled with evil keyboard-warriors, bent on destroying our unity.

To prove it, watch and see if anyone fives the laughing emoji over what I have offered above. They can't stop themselves from making themselves known, for Satan wants this credit! He wants to hide himself, but so often he cannot!

Who will be the first evil person to find these things funny? Let's wait and see who leaves their mark of advertisement first.

Matthew 25:33
And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on his left.

 

[BillyBob]

In terms of salvation, I believe that everyone stands alone before God, with whether they were elected/saved or not being
the only factor of true importance. I would say that I agree with Rufus (above), as long as by baptism, he meant
spiritual, and not water. But based upon prior discussions of his that I've very briefly read, I think that he might mean spiritual baptism,
but I could be wrong.

God's word when He speaks of His covenant relationship often makes reference to the offspring of His chosen people. See below:
Genesis 6:18 But I will establish my covenant with you, and you shall come into the ark, you, your sons, your wife, and your sons' wives with you.
Deuteronomy 30:6 And the Lord your God will circumcise your heart and the heart of your offspring, so that you will love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul, that you may live.
Deuteronomy 30:19 I call heaven and earth to witness against you today, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and curse. Therefore choose life, that you and your offspring may live

Does this in anyway apply to the offspring of believers today?
I know that this is not always the case – David's own children failed! So, to whom does this apply? Should believers of today take any comfort in the fact that their infants belong to Christ as well as themselves?
I know this is a tough question!

 

[FollowerofShiloh]

It always has to be His Word in immediate and then expanded context to be the decider. All should be willing to get as deep into it as they can and let Him speak. I know it can be a challenge, but this is the process.

Amen!

 

[2ndTimothyGroup]

Matthew 25:33
And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on his left.

The Right Hand and Arm of Salvation, who is Christ.

 

[Rufus]

I have posted below the opening paragraphs taken from an article that consists of excerpts from A.W. Pink's classical work "The Sovereignty of God", of which I have in my own library. The article is long as it is theologically deep, which is why I want to post these opening comments; for I would like for all to see where Pink is going. The see the rest of the article, just click on the link at the bottom of this post. Also, at the bottom are the four sets of queries that Pink addressed in his book and in this article. These four sets of questions are the core objections by detractors to the Five Doctrines of Grace (a/k/a Calvinism).

I ask that if any of you have questions, comments or objections to any specific portion that you address to me, please be specific. Please quote from a specific section and identify the section for me. I have downloaded the entire article and split it up into six sections: The first is the section below, then each set of questions gets its own section and at the end of the 4th question and with the new paragraph that begins with, " In conclusion..." is the 6th section.

INTRODUCTION

Sovereignty of God and Human Responsibility

"Each of us will give an account of himself to God." Romans 14:12

In our last chapter we considered at some length, the much debated and difficult question of the human will. We have shown that the will of the natural man is neither sovereign nor free—but, instead, a servant and slave. We have argued that a right conception of the sinner's will—its servitude—is essential to a just estimate of his depravity and ruin. The utter corruption and degradation of human nature is something which man hates to acknowledge, and which he will hotly and insistently deny—until he is "taught of God." Much, very much, of the unsound doctrine which we now hear on every hand—is the direct and logical outcome of man's repudiation of God's expressed estimate of human depravity! Men are claiming that they are "increased with goods, and have need of nothing," and know not that they are "wretched and miserable and poor and blind and naked!" (Revelation 3:17). They prate about the 'Ascent of Man,' and deny his Fall. They put darkness for light; and light for darkness. They boast of the 'free moral agency' of man when, in fact, he is in bondage to sin and enslaved by Satan, "taken captive by him at his will" (2 Timothy 2:26).

But if the natural man is not a 'free moral agent,' does it also follow that he is not accountable?

'Free moral agency' is an expression of human invention and, as we have said before, to talk of the freedom of the natural man—is to flatly repudiate his total spiritual ruin. Nowhere does Scripture speak of the freedom or moral ability of the sinner; on the contrary, it insists on his moral and spiritual inability.

This is, admittedly, the most difficult branch of our subject. Those who have ever devoted much study to this theme, have uniformly recognized that the harmonizing of God's Sovereignty with Man's Responsibility is the gordian knot of theology. (Gordian knot: 1. An intricate knot tied by King Gordius of Phrygia and cut by Alexander the Great with his sword after hearing an oracle promise that whoever could undo it would be the next ruler of Asia. 2. An exceedingly complicated and unsolvable problem (The American Heritage Dictionary)

The main difficulty encountered, is to define the relationship between God's sovereignty and man's responsibility. Many have summarily disposed of the difficulty by denying the existence of any difficulty. A certain class of theologians, in their anxiety to maintain man's responsibility, have magnified it beyond all due proportions, until God's sovereignty has been lost sight of, and in not a few instances flatly denied. Others have acknowledged that the Scriptures present both the sovereignty of God and the responsibility of man—but affirm that in our present finite condition, and with our limited knowledge it is impossible to reconcile the two truths, though it is the bounden duty of the believer to receive both.

The present writer believes that it has been too readily assumed that the Scriptures themselves do not reveal the several points which show the conciliation of God's sovereignty and man's responsibility. While perhaps the Word of God does not clear up all the mystery (and this is said with reserve), it does throw much light upon the problem, and it seems to us more honoring to God and His Word to prayerfully search the Scriptures for the complete solution of the difficulty, and even though others have thus far searched in vain—that ought only to drive us more and more to our knees. God has been pleased to reveal many things out of His Word during the last century, which were hidden from earlier students. Who then dare affirm that there is not much to be learned yet respecting our present inquiry!

As we have said above, our chief difficulty is to determine the meeting-point of God's sovereignty and man's responsibility. To many, it has seemed that for God to assert His sovereignty, for Him to put forth His power and exert a direct influence upon man, for Him to do anything more than warn or invite—would be to interfere with man's freedom, destroy his responsibility, and reduce him to a mere machine. It is sad indeed to find one like the late Dr. Pierson—whose writings are generally so scriptural and helpful—saying, "It is a tremendous thought that even God Himself cannot control my moral frame, or constrain my moral choice. He cannot prevent me defying and denying Him, and would not exercise His power in such directions if He could, and could not if He would" (A Spiritual Clinique). It is sadder still to discover that many other respected and loved brethren are giving expression to the same sentiments. Sad, because directly at variance with the Holy Scriptures!

It is our desire to face honestly the difficulties involved, and to examine them carefully in what light God has been pleased to grant us. The chief difficulties might be expressed thus:

First, How is it possible for God to so bring His power to bear upon men—that they are prevented from doing what they desire to do, and impelled to do other things they do not desire to do—and yet to preserve their responsibility?

Second, How can the sinner be held responsible for the doing of what he is unable to do? And how can he be justly condemned for not doing what he could not do?

Third, How is it possible for God to decree that men shall commit certain sins, hold them responsible in the committal of them, and judge them guilty because they committed them?

Fourth, How can the sinner be held responsible to receive Christ, and be damned for rejecting Him—when God had foreordained him to condemnation?

We shall now deal with these several problems in the above order. May the Holy Spirit Himself be our Teacher, so that in His light we may see light. (emphases mine)

https://www.monergism.com/gods-sovereignty-and-human-responsibility

 

[Cameron143]

God's word when He speaks of His covenant relationship often makes reference to the offspring of His chosen people. See below:
Genesis 6:18 But I will establish my covenant with you, and you shall come into the ark, you, your sons, your wife, and your sons' wives with you.
Deuteronomy 30:6 And the Lord your God will circumcise your heart and the heart of your offspring, so that you will love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul, that you may live.
Deuteronomy 30:19 I call heaven and earth to witness against you today, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and curse. Therefore choose life, that you and your offspring may live

Does this in anyway apply to the offspring of believers today?
I know that this is not always the case – David's own children failed! So, to whom does this apply? Should believers of today take any comfort in the fact that their infants belong to Christ as well as themselves?
I know this is a tough question!

I've told my children that I believe they are children of promise. I further told them that I expect God will at some point in their lives draw near to them and save them.
You can take comfort in a couple of things:
1. God has already favored them by giving them Christian parents, and
2. It makes sense for God to put children He will save with those who will train them up in the faith.
Hope this encourages you.

 

[Rufus]

Do you believe those not allowed to enter the Promised Land were Saved?
If you don't then you are not Reformed, like he is.

Two questions: First, what was the Promise to Abraham re the Land? And secondly, what did God tell Moses about the Land when He called his servant to confront Pharaoh?

 

[Rufus]

FINALLY!!! I get to have a mature conversation! I am starving for this! But first, I need to run across the street to buy some coffee. I'm so excited I need to drink! lol - brb

Oh no...are you a coffee addict too? We should pray for one another.

 

[2ndTimothyGroup]

Oh no...are you a coffee addict too? We should pray for one another.

Ha! Well, I am getting much better at this drinking problem. It seems like drinking anything but water or pure juice is probably not good for us. I am just so thankful that the Lord had turned my love for alcohol into a hatred for it. I loved it so much that I now hate it, as I had absolute no FREE WILL to refuse it. I was completely controlled by that stuff. So . . . to be drinking Maxwell House instant coffee, the kind that comes with its own creamers and sugars, I feed myself half of their serving size (of the powder) and fill the rest with chocolate milk. - This way, it stains my expensive porcelain "teeth" much less.

 

[Rufus]

I agree. And God always intercedes in the lives of His elect, such as Abraham and Noah and Moses and Jeremiah and Paul. —As you know, even though I certainly believe in election, I‘m not at all sure about TULIP. Thanks, Ruf.

You're quite welcome. Another thing that is fascinating about Issac is that his miraculous birth foreshadowed the miraculous births of all NC born again believers who are not born of natural descent, nor of human decision or a husband's will, but born of God (Jn 1:13). And did Issac have anything to do with his own birth!? NO! God specifically elected him! Issac came into this world solely by God's will.
And so it is with all those whom God has elected in eternity to enter into a personal, loving, covenantal relationship with Him. Issac is a great picture of these truths!

 

[FollowerofShiloh]

I would like to humbly back out. I am tired. To spend so much time offering things I have already offered, and for it to seemingly come to nothing is painful to me, as I could have been studying the Lord's Word instead. I am looking for people like @Magenta, @Evmur and others, who have insights that will help me grow and mature. Anything less than that is heartbreaking (to me).

I completely understand. And even though I am not saying the 2 you have mentioned are or are not guilty of this, but make sure to discuss with someone that most of their views [do not] come from a doctrine. The answers you seek are straight forward Biblical. Doctrine only skews them towards personal rectification. God Bless You

 

[Rufus]

Who among the non-reformed are making that claim? God often moves against people's moral agency in scripture. Jonah for one. Pharaoh for another. I suspect you are not listening to what people are actually saying, but rather are merely repeating accusations you have read or heard against non-reformed believers. Can you give an example of non-reformed believers complaining that "God would be violating the sanctity and integrity of a person's free moral agency if He ever sovereignly moved against that moral agency" ?

A lot of people have made that claim, sir! Many here have said that if WE don't decide to enter the kingdom of God by faith and repentance, and God gets to decide that, then he would be "forcing" us to enter his kingdom -- forcing us against our will. Of course, you are right. The examples of scripture of God "exerting" his sovereign Lordship over his moral creatures are numerous in scripture. But that doesn't stop the detractors of the Doctrines of Grace spouting their usual nonsense.

 

[FollowerofShiloh]

Two questions: First, what was the Promise to Abraham re the Land? And secondly, what did God tell Moses about the Land when He called his servant to confront Pharaoh?

Moses never got the people to the Promised Land. So why devote so much time unless to fulfill a doctrinal garb?
Secondly, the only thing matters is that God got people to the Promised Land and fulfilled portions of the Covenant. The rest of the people were no use to God as they continually rejected Him and He departed from them. They had their opportunity and threw it away. Something your doctrine claims is impossible but here we see it first hand.

 

[Rufus]

I completely understand. And even though I am not saying the 2 you have mentioned are or are not guilty of this, but make sure to discuss with someone that most of their views [do not] come from a doctrine. The answers you seek are straight forward Biblical. Doctrine only skews them towards personal rectification. God Bless You

So now you're anti-doctrine? There are no doctrines in the bible? No dogma in the bible? No teaching? No instruction?

 

[2ndTimothyGroup]

I completely understand. And even though I am not saying the 2 you have mentioned are or are not guilty of this, but make sure to discuss with someone that most of their views [do not] come from a doctrine. The answers you seek are straight forward Biblical. Doctrine only skews them towards personal rectification. God Bless You

Thank you for letting me go easily, but I honestly do not understand the latter part of your post. I am not seeking answers; I am open to discovering new things. But even more, I am hungry to talk about the Bible in a way that will allow me to see things I haven't seen before. Those who painfully ridicule and demean, I want nothing to do with them, just as commanded.

Titus 3:9-11 NLT - "Do not get involved in foolish discussions about spiritual pedigrees or in quarrels and fights about obedience to Jewish laws. These things are useless and a waste of time. If people are causing divisions among you, give a first and second warning. After that, have nothing more to do with them. For people like that have turned away from the truth, and their own sins condemn them."

If more genuine Christians would follow this path, we could, on our own and not with the help of moderators, chase them out of here by Righteously ignoring them.

 

[FollowerofShiloh]

So now you're anti-doctrine? There are no doctrines in the bible? No dogma in the bible? No teaching? No instruction?

Paul refused to Baptize people himself over it might become a doctrine. Proof how evil doctrine can be.

 

[Rufus]

Moses never got the people to the Promised Land. So why devote so much time unless to fulfill a doctrinal garb?
Secondly, the only thing matters is that God got people to the Promised Land and fulfilled portions of the Covenant. The rest of the people were no use to God as they continually rejected Him and He departed from them. They had their opportunity and threw it away. Something your doctrine claims is impossible but here we see it first hand.

Au contraire! Joshua led the second generation of Hebrews in the Land! And the ones who didn't enter were never believers in the first place. Get up to speed on Hebrews 3 someday. God never promised Moses that each and every person he led out of Egypt would actually enter the land.

Ex 3:8
8 So I have come down to rescue them from the hand of the Egyptians and to bring them up out of that land into a good and spacious land, a land flowing with milk and honey — the home of the Canaanites, Hittites, Amorites, Perizzites, Hivites and Jebusites.
NIV

But as far as you're concerned God failed!? Also notice in above passage Who WOULD bring the Israelites into the Land! Do you see Moses' name in this passage?

 

[FollowerofShiloh]

Thank you for letting me go easily, but I honestly do not understand the latter part of your post. I am not seeking answers; I am open to discovering new things. But even more, I am hungry to talk about the Bible in a way that will allow me to see things I haven't seen before. Those who painfully ridicule and demean, I want nothing to do with them, just as commanded.

Titus 3:9-11 NLT - "Do not get involved in foolish discussions about spiritual pedigrees or in quarrels and fights about obedience to Jewish laws. These things are useless and a waste of time. If people are causing divisions among you, give a first and second warning. After that, have nothing more to do with them. For people like that have turned away from the truth, and their own sins condemn them."

If more genuine Christians would follow this path, we could, on our own and not with the help of moderators, chase them out of here by Righteously ignoring them.

You will never find a true discussion about the Bible until you remove the idealisms people have from being taught.
When I post I never use a doctrine. I say I can see truths from all Biblical doctrine views while also seeing where they are dangerous.

Take for example 2 guys having some wings and watching football. There's discussion about the game, other players, trades around the league, but both guys have open views.

Now, if those 2 guys had a doctrine. It would become a discussion about differences. Doctrine minded people are trapped. You already disagree with the Reformed position and just look at how they are. The entire discussion is focused on that doctrine. So you will never get their own truth just the truth they have been persuaded to become.