Did Jesus Die on The Cross for The Just/Elect/Saved Whose Names Are Written in The Book of Life OR
- Thread starter MerSee
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
I am curious to know what you mean here. I wonder if you believe the natural man has an
inherent ability, without any help from God, to throw over his hostile mindset toward Him.
Since that is an admixture of human viewpoint thinking imposing on what His Word says.
Ephesians 2:8-9
inherent ability, without any help from God, to throw over his hostile mindset toward Him.
Since that is an admixture of human viewpoint thinking imposing on what His Word says.
Ephesians 2:8-9
IMO we live in a time where there is for various reasons a very widespread immaturity/unlearned condition in the Church.
I was speaking in part about the Biblical concept of 'perfection" (and other things Cameron and I touched on) in regard to what I think @Cameron143 and I agree on - that most (if not nearly all) today are not really in pursuit of utilizing all we've been given to become what Christ died to enable us to become.
I had commented on this concept of being perfect as we're commanded by Jesus to be: NET Matthew 5:48 So then, be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect.
As soon as we start talking like this, it's quite usually met with, "Well, we can't be perfect" and "You're teaching sinless perfection" (which I'm not but neither am I arbitrarily limiting how far God in Christ in Spirit will take us) and immediately the command of Jesus Christ gets set aside for some human viewpoint that does not match Scripture.
For some of us, we let Scripture speak and teach us what God means when He uses such words and issues such commands and we seek and are in pursuit of not only Christian maturity (also translated as being perfect) and continuing the pursuit that Paul speaks of as the goal for the prize of the upward call of God in Christ Jesus (Phil3:14) which he says is beyond maturity (perfection) (3:15) and he says is another perfection (3:12).
I found when teaching that few in my few were even familiar with such concepts.
Hope that helps.
-
1
-
1
- Show all
Christ has paid the price for our sins – past, present, and future. I believe that knowing this and trusting that it is true is the only way that we will ever be achieve perfection in this lifetime. We will never be perfect in our own eyes but will be perfect in the Father's eyes because our sins have been put on Christ's head!
Luke 22:61 And the Lord turned and looked at Peter. And Peter remembered the saying of the Lord, how he had said to him, “Before the rooster crows today, you will deny me three times.” Mark 14:72 And he broke down and wept.
How many times do you think in Peter's life did he think back at this event and lower his head in shame!
Luke 22:61 And the Lord turned and looked at Peter. And Peter remembered the saying of the Lord, how he had said to him, “Before the rooster crows today, you will deny me three times.” Mark 14:72 And he broke down and wept.
How many times do you think in Peter's life did he think back at this event and lower his head in shame!
-
1
- Show all
I addressed the mixed multitude in my post.
And I addressed God's omniscience on a few occasions in the past. If God is truly omniscient, as the scriptures teach, then he cannot and does not acquire knowledge. I explained this on previous occasions. You have this concept of omniscience that posits that God acquires or learns and that an eternal God must rely upon his creation of temporal reality to gain knowledge. Conversely, I believe God possesses universal, complete knowledge of all things at once and that what he predicts will come to past precisely because of his decrees. God's awareness, understanding and insight is infinite and transcends his creation of time and space.
And I addressed God's omniscience on a few occasions in the past. If God is truly omniscient, as the scriptures teach, then he cannot and does not acquire knowledge. I explained this on previous occasions. You have this concept of omniscience that posits that God acquires or learns and that an eternal God must rely upon his creation of temporal reality to gain knowledge. Conversely, I believe God possesses universal, complete knowledge of all things at once and that what he predicts will come to past precisely because of his decrees. God's awareness, understanding and insight is infinite and transcends his creation of time and space.
I don't assume anything. I go by what Joshua wrote about the Hebrews in Egypt. But why do you assume that they were "crying out" to God to save their souls, rather than just to extricate them from their physical miseries? Numerous religious people "find" God and "seek" his help from their troubles and miseries in temporal reality when they're up to their armpits in 'gators but care not a whit about living for his glory.
And I would posit that those similarities are deeply profound! God IS a Personal, Rational, Passionate, Moral and Social being. And so is man! (Feel free to consult any secular dictionary for the definitions of the above qualities if you're wondering what I'm talking about.)
Furthermore, when you attribute man's conscience as being the primary cause (as you have implied) for our inability to live sinless lives, then aren't you saying that our conscience is a huge liability to living perfect, pure, holy, righteous lives? That it's our Achilles' Heel to being Good? And wouldn't this make your hypothesis be a self-defeating proposition? You see, you ducked this issue of inability by assigning to man's conscience the ability to do good from time-to-time. But that answer is a total non sequitur because it had nothing to do with the parallels I drew between the Creator and his image-bearers -- a parallel that had to do with absolute inability for both parties -- and not the doing of relative good by man. Furthermore, the Good God performs is never merely relative!
Since God has the inability to sin, then this can only have to do with who and what He IS -- in his Essence, is his Nature. Since God alone is Good, then there is no evil within him -- that is to say, he's 100% Good; there is no Absence or Deprivation of Good within him, which is what Evil is. Conversely, scripture teaches that man IS Evil, which explains how Jesus could say that only God alone is Good. Jesus never thought in relative terms such as you have. He only thought in absolute terms. So the upshot with God is that since he cannot sin, this can only be attributed to all his PERFECTIONS. And this in turn also means that God cannot change who or what he is because if he could change, he was never perfect. Can perfection be improved upon? Or can an imperfect being attain to perfection, as you seem to think?
Since God's good, holy, righteous nature is immutable; then why would we think that man's nature is mutable? Why would any of us think that we have some intrinsic power that our Creator doesn't and that we can actually transform our own nature? Do you know what the Law of Identity is? And do you know that this Law is supported by scripture? What makes you think that inherently bad trees can bear good fruit, which Jesus said isn't possible? What makes you think that the Ethiopian can actually change the color of his skin or the leopard change its spots? And, therefore, that those who live in sin, i.e. "who are accustomed to doing evil" can still do good?
As far as "people in Adam", what was this good that they did and did they do good all the time? And were they inherently righteous? And were they inherently perfect? If so, why would they need to be saved? But if not, then maybe you need to rethink what those passages are really saying. And then I, for one, would certainly be eager to learn what you personally mean by "good", "righteous" and "perfect". How do you interpret those passages in light of the numerous passages that teach that all men are sinners? Should we be understanding such passages to mean that only some or many men are sinners? Is that how you understand Rom 5:12ff., for example? I mean you could be unto something since Jesus clearly said that he did not come into this world to save the righteous but to call sinners to repentance! With your soteriology, why would they need to repent and be saved?
Furthermore, when you attribute man's conscience as being the primary cause (as you have implied) for our inability to live sinless lives, then aren't you saying that our conscience is a huge liability to living perfect, pure, holy, righteous lives? That it's our Achilles' Heel to being Good? And wouldn't this make your hypothesis be a self-defeating proposition? You see, you ducked this issue of inability by assigning to man's conscience the ability to do good from time-to-time. But that answer is a total non sequitur because it had nothing to do with the parallels I drew between the Creator and his image-bearers -- a parallel that had to do with absolute inability for both parties -- and not the doing of relative good by man. Furthermore, the Good God performs is never merely relative!
Since God has the inability to sin, then this can only have to do with who and what He IS -- in his Essence, is his Nature. Since God alone is Good, then there is no evil within him -- that is to say, he's 100% Good; there is no Absence or Deprivation of Good within him, which is what Evil is. Conversely, scripture teaches that man IS Evil, which explains how Jesus could say that only God alone is Good. Jesus never thought in relative terms such as you have. He only thought in absolute terms. So the upshot with God is that since he cannot sin, this can only be attributed to all his PERFECTIONS. And this in turn also means that God cannot change who or what he is because if he could change, he was never perfect. Can perfection be improved upon? Or can an imperfect being attain to perfection, as you seem to think?
Since God's good, holy, righteous nature is immutable; then why would we think that man's nature is mutable? Why would any of us think that we have some intrinsic power that our Creator doesn't and that we can actually transform our own nature? Do you know what the Law of Identity is? And do you know that this Law is supported by scripture? What makes you think that inherently bad trees can bear good fruit, which Jesus said isn't possible? What makes you think that the Ethiopian can actually change the color of his skin or the leopard change its spots? And, therefore, that those who live in sin, i.e. "who are accustomed to doing evil" can still do good?
As far as "people in Adam", what was this good that they did and did they do good all the time? And were they inherently righteous? And were they inherently perfect? If so, why would they need to be saved? But if not, then maybe you need to rethink what those passages are really saying. And then I, for one, would certainly be eager to learn what you personally mean by "good", "righteous" and "perfect". How do you interpret those passages in light of the numerous passages that teach that all men are sinners? Should we be understanding such passages to mean that only some or many men are sinners? Is that how you understand Rom 5:12ff., for example? I mean you could be unto something since Jesus clearly said that he did not come into this world to save the righteous but to call sinners to repentance! With your soteriology, why would they need to repent and be saved?
I understand, especially as the years in Christ accumulate, the thoughts of looking back and being ashamed of things.
Perfection/Maturity and beyond is clearly spelled out and commanded of Christians. The problem is that Christians don't look to see how God explains it and instead insert their own worldly concepts into its meaning and say we won't achieve it.
Perfection/Maturity and beyond is clearly spelled out and commanded of Christians. The problem is that Christians don't look to see how God explains it and instead insert their own worldly concepts into its meaning and say we won't achieve it.
-
1
- Show all
I only see what God has granted me to see in His Scriptures which proclaim that salvation is of the Lord and all of its glory belongs to Him alone and not the choice of men as your idolatry of will worship deceives you into thinking.
Christ said that it was impossible for men to save themselves but you think Christ was mistaken and are perverting His Gospel and robbing Him of His glory and giving it to the clay rather than the Potter.
Christ said that it was impossible for men to save themselves but you think Christ was mistaken and are perverting His Gospel and robbing Him of His glory and giving it to the clay rather than the Potter.
-
1
- Show all
If it looks, sounds and walks like a duck, it is a duck!
Very few people today like having labels attached to them, including yourself, but all of your responses so far seem to definitely make you fit into the Arminian camp if you believe that man cooperates with God for his salvation. Deal with it and if you disagree, please correct me and tell me why you are not an Arminian as defined below.
Very few people today like having labels attached to them, including yourself, but all of your responses so far seem to definitely make you fit into the Arminian camp if you believe that man cooperates with God for his salvation. Deal with it and if you disagree, please correct me and tell me why you are not an Arminian as defined below.
-
2
- Show all
[QuoteRufus said:
I take my meaning from the post-fall narrative. God did what A&E should have done. God didn't run away and hide himself from them, did he? Didn't he go and search for them? Didn't He call out to the man? Isn't that something personal beings do when we search for one another?
My point was that I don't think you are bringing to the discussion any knowledge of what is contained in the phrase "seeking God" other than a basic seek to find concept. If we were to go through all of the occurrences of seek* in the Text, do you think this is the only meaning we will find?
I will tell you that neither the Greek nor the Hebrew word translated mostly as "seek" shows up until Gen9, then only a few times in Gen, once in Ex, once in Lev and then it begins showing up more in Deut. So, though you are inserting the concept into the Garden story, it is not actually there.[/quote]
Immaterial about the Gr. or Heb word "seek" and when it shows up in scripture. I suppose when God called out to Adam, we should not interpret that as Him seeking Adam because that particular Gr. term is not in the Genesis post-fall narrative, right? Again, I use the THREE-FOLD context of ALL scripture to understand any given passage. When A&E sinned, they ran and hid from God because they DIED the moment they sinned. Is not the warp 'n' woof of spiritual death SEPARATION from our Creator who just happens to be the Author and Source of Life? Well, they both ran and hid from their Creator! Didn't they just do what came naturally to them!? Did not their behavior accurately reflect what they had become spiritually in their inner man!? DEAD! Yet, we're not supposed to talk about them not seeking after God after they sinned? Really?
Okay you want a reason: God in his infinite wisdom said it wasn't necessary to explicitly spell out each and every detail because he gave us all reasoning powers to make reasonable and logical inferences from the three-fold context of all scripture.
I know from what I just said from above that a godly, God-fearing person would NOT have reacted as they did! David didn't. And you conveniently ignore the fact that they just piled on to their sin!
Rufus said:
Re your third point, what about numerous other texts that apply to sinners and how they are supposed to respond to God after they sin? How 'bout David's penitential psalms, for example? What are they chopped liver? Those psalms weren't written for all of us as examples to follow? If so, then I'd say those psalms, and a host of other scriptures as well, serve as the general tenor of scripture on the subject and, therefore, strongly support my argument -- and that my argument would not be one from silence at all since I use the three-fold context of all scripture to understand any given passage properly. If the progeny of Adam are required to follow certain spiritual protocols after they sin, then why wouldn't those protocols have also applied to our first parents?
Same answer. And yes you are arguing from silence if you cannot point to Scripture that informs us that A&E and anyone else you want to point to knew what God desired and required of them.[/quote]
No, it's not an argument of silence. You just got done making the point above that A&E had a stupendous, exceptional relationship and experience with their Creator so they should have deduced from that his infinite Goodness and Love for them, no? Furthermore, what if they didn't know how to respond or react to God after they sinned? So what!? Since when is Ignorance blissful? Since when is ignorance a legitimate excuse for not doing the right thing? Does the bible ever speak favorably of Ignorance? And whose fault was it that they became ignorant? Oh...should we just blame the Serpent? Eve did!
And as his wanna-be defense attorney, are you trying to say your client was a God-lover? Methinks Adam quit loving God the moment he sinned! (And by he way what is "RTD" and "UE"?) Are you going to make the case Adam loved God even though he transgressed against him and hid his transgression from him? Didn't Jesus say somewhere, "If you love me, you'll keep my commandments"? |So make your case that Adam was a God-lover. But if you can't, then this means Adam hated God -- as I have defined "hate" previously.
Well, feel free to dismantle (if you think you can) any part of the 16-pt argument. (I did add the Song of Moses later.) I supported it well from scripture.
I take my meaning from the post-fall narrative. God did what A&E should have done. God didn't run away and hide himself from them, did he? Didn't he go and search for them? Didn't He call out to the man? Isn't that something personal beings do when we search for one another?
My point was that I don't think you are bringing to the discussion any knowledge of what is contained in the phrase "seeking God" other than a basic seek to find concept. If we were to go through all of the occurrences of seek* in the Text, do you think this is the only meaning we will find?
I will tell you that neither the Greek nor the Hebrew word translated mostly as "seek" shows up until Gen9, then only a few times in Gen, once in Ex, once in Lev and then it begins showing up more in Deut. So, though you are inserting the concept into the Garden story, it is not actually there.[/quote]
Immaterial about the Gr. or Heb word "seek" and when it shows up in scripture. I suppose when God called out to Adam, we should not interpret that as Him seeking Adam because that particular Gr. term is not in the Genesis post-fall narrative, right? Again, I use the THREE-FOLD context of ALL scripture to understand any given passage. When A&E sinned, they ran and hid from God because they DIED the moment they sinned. Is not the warp 'n' woof of spiritual death SEPARATION from our Creator who just happens to be the Author and Source of Life? Well, they both ran and hid from their Creator! Didn't they just do what came naturally to them!? Did not their behavior accurately reflect what they had become spiritually in their inner man!? DEAD! Yet, we're not supposed to talk about them not seeking after God after they sinned? Really?
Okay you want a reason: God in his infinite wisdom said it wasn't necessary to explicitly spell out each and every detail because he gave us all reasoning powers to make reasonable and logical inferences from the three-fold context of all scripture.
I know from what I just said from above that a godly, God-fearing person would NOT have reacted as they did! David didn't. And you conveniently ignore the fact that they just piled on to their sin!
Rufus said:
Re your third point, what about numerous other texts that apply to sinners and how they are supposed to respond to God after they sin? How 'bout David's penitential psalms, for example? What are they chopped liver? Those psalms weren't written for all of us as examples to follow? If so, then I'd say those psalms, and a host of other scriptures as well, serve as the general tenor of scripture on the subject and, therefore, strongly support my argument -- and that my argument would not be one from silence at all since I use the three-fold context of all scripture to understand any given passage properly. If the progeny of Adam are required to follow certain spiritual protocols after they sin, then why wouldn't those protocols have also applied to our first parents?
Same answer. And yes you are arguing from silence if you cannot point to Scripture that informs us that A&E and anyone else you want to point to knew what God desired and required of them.[/quote]
No, it's not an argument of silence. You just got done making the point above that A&E had a stupendous, exceptional relationship and experience with their Creator so they should have deduced from that his infinite Goodness and Love for them, no? Furthermore, what if they didn't know how to respond or react to God after they sinned? So what!? Since when is Ignorance blissful? Since when is ignorance a legitimate excuse for not doing the right thing? Does the bible ever speak favorably of Ignorance? And whose fault was it that they became ignorant? Oh...should we just blame the Serpent? Eve did!
And as his wanna-be defense attorney, are you trying to say your client was a God-lover? Methinks Adam quit loving God the moment he sinned! (And by he way what is "RTD" and "UE"?) Are you going to make the case Adam loved God even though he transgressed against him and hid his transgression from him? Didn't Jesus say somewhere, "If you love me, you'll keep my commandments"? |So make your case that Adam was a God-lover. But if you can't, then this means Adam hated God -- as I have defined "hate" previously.
Well, feel free to dismantle (if you think you can) any part of the 16-pt argument. (I did add the Song of Moses later.) I supported it well from scripture.
No, my argument presupposes nothing. Man is evil period!
Sorry, but I'll stop at this quote and won't read on. You just asserted a presupposition telling me your argument presupposes nothing.[/quote]
Okay you win. My argument presupposes biblical teaching, as opposed to my own personal, subjective presuppositions.
As far as the midwives were concerned I did acknowledge them and also qualified statements when necessary. But did those two midwives typify the moral/spiritual condition of 600,000+ Hebrews. Joshua didn't seem to think so! So, I don't think the early placement of the midwives in the Exodus narrative is all that significant.
Also, I never said anything about all men not having an interest in religion or God. You're putting words into my mouth. But I do stand by my premise that all unregenerate mankind are God-haters.
Well, just quote me a text that says that men come into this world loving God and the matter will be closed. And if men aren't loving God, if that's not the natural disposition of depraved, wicked, rebellious, prideful, egotistical, deceitful hearts...then they are God-haters, whether you care to accept that or not. I've explained this twice to you previously by showing that there are two kinds of God-haters in this world. ALL unregenerates who don't love God, as stipulated in the Greatest Commandment and Jn 14:15, are God-haters. Period! There is no third option. And if you want an excellent example of a nice, religious, moral, law-keeping, self-righteous person who hated God, look no further than to the Rich Young Ruler who "sought after" Christ! You remember him, don't you? The self-deceived, self-righteous guy who was an idolater because he loved his money more than than he loved God? He fits the mold perfectly of the Second Type of God hater that I described previously.
P.S. Apparently, you're not up to speed on the importance of godly sorrow given your lame defense of Adam. So, I'll share this passage with you:
2 Cor 7:10-11
10 Godly sorrow brings repentance that leads to salvation and leaves no regret, but worldly sorrow brings death. 11 See what this godly sorrow has produced in you: what earnestness, what eagerness to clear yourselves, what indignation, what alarm, what longing, what concern, what readiness to see justice done.NIV
So, since A&E demonstrated no godly sorrow, I'll stand by my evaluation of their dismal spiritual condition and their UNGODLY feelings. I see no hint of remorse or confession in the post-fall narrative, let alone repentance! But I do see a lot of self-justification going on! Can you spell DEAD!? They merely acted out what they became in their ESSENCE after they sinned!
Sorry, but I'll stop at this quote and won't read on. You just asserted a presupposition telling me your argument presupposes nothing.[/quote]
Okay you win. My argument presupposes biblical teaching, as opposed to my own personal, subjective presuppositions.
As far as the midwives were concerned I did acknowledge them and also qualified statements when necessary. But did those two midwives typify the moral/spiritual condition of 600,000+ Hebrews. Joshua didn't seem to think so! So, I don't think the early placement of the midwives in the Exodus narrative is all that significant.
Also, I never said anything about all men not having an interest in religion or God. You're putting words into my mouth. But I do stand by my premise that all unregenerate mankind are God-haters.
Well, just quote me a text that says that men come into this world loving God and the matter will be closed. And if men aren't loving God, if that's not the natural disposition of depraved, wicked, rebellious, prideful, egotistical, deceitful hearts...then they are God-haters, whether you care to accept that or not. I've explained this twice to you previously by showing that there are two kinds of God-haters in this world. ALL unregenerates who don't love God, as stipulated in the Greatest Commandment and Jn 14:15, are God-haters. Period! There is no third option. And if you want an excellent example of a nice, religious, moral, law-keeping, self-righteous person who hated God, look no further than to the Rich Young Ruler who "sought after" Christ! You remember him, don't you? The self-deceived, self-righteous guy who was an idolater because he loved his money more than than he loved God? He fits the mold perfectly of the Second Type of God hater that I described previously.
P.S. Apparently, you're not up to speed on the importance of godly sorrow given your lame defense of Adam. So, I'll share this passage with you:
2 Cor 7:10-11
10 Godly sorrow brings repentance that leads to salvation and leaves no regret, but worldly sorrow brings death. 11 See what this godly sorrow has produced in you: what earnestness, what eagerness to clear yourselves, what indignation, what alarm, what longing, what concern, what readiness to see justice done.NIV
So, since A&E demonstrated no godly sorrow, I'll stand by my evaluation of their dismal spiritual condition and their UNGODLY feelings. I see no hint of remorse or confession in the post-fall narrative, let alone repentance! But I do see a lot of self-justification going on! Can you spell DEAD!? They merely acted out what they became in their ESSENCE after they sinned!
PT wrote:
But Jesus, unlike you, did not qualify what he stated in Mk 10:18. He even was redundant to drive his point home more forcefully!
It seems that so many NR just CANNOT help themselves when trying to disprove the glorious Doctrines of Grace. You have no ability to resist the temptation of twisting and perverting the Word of God in your defense of a man-centered theology. Sad...very sad.
But Jesus, unlike you, did not qualify what he stated in Mk 10:18. He even was redundant to drive his point home more forcefully!
It seems that so many NR just CANNOT help themselves when trying to disprove the glorious Doctrines of Grace. You have no ability to resist the temptation of twisting and perverting the Word of God in your defense of a man-centered theology. Sad...very sad.
-
1
-
1
- Show all