What Changed?

[Rufus]

According to Paul, Christ’s atonement is “greater” than the sin of Adam that infected the entire world.

So, the point here is that Christ is the Lamb that takes away the sin of the “whole world.” This doesn’t mean that the entire world is saved because not all believe. However, the point of the atonement is that Christ’s blood is greater than sin itself. Not just your sins or my sins, but all sin. The power of sin and death itself was conquered by the blood of Christ.

Out of time, I’ll respond to the rest later.

Classic DOUBLESPEAK! Christ does take away the sin of each and every person...but at the same time and in the same sense he doesn't!

You Non-Reformed folks are totally oblivious to your hypocrisy. You guys have no qualms appealing to other scriptures, which is what Mr. Chaps implicitly did regarding the general unbelief of the world, to unwittingly make the point that the 'whole world" in Jn 1:29 is at the end of the day really and truly is used in a limited, conditional sense because the "whole world" is really talking only about those who do have faith! IOW, Christ takes away the sin of the "whole world" on the CONDITION that the "whole world" believes in Him. And by definition "conditions" determine limits or set limitations. They restrict or modify So when you NR guys do this, you unwittingly wander into the Reformed camp because Reformed folks understand from the git go that the "whole world" is used in a limited sense due to the context of the entire bible. But when we Reformed appeal to other texts outside the immediate context any any given passage, you NR fellas usually go bonkers and cry "FOUL" on us!

But even what I just stated is not the bottom line either because "world" or "whole world" always means EACH and EVERY person in it to the vast majority of NR professing Christians. So, what Jn 1:29 is really saying according to NR traditions is that [literally] Christ takes away the sin of the EACH and EVERY Person (i.e. the "world" or "whole world"). But this can't be, according Mr. Chaps explanation. How could Christ literally take away the sin of each and every person, while simultaneously not [literally] taking away the sin of each and every person in the same sense and at the same time? We clearly have a violation of the Law of Noncontradiction. Bottom line: In order for the term "world" to be consistently used in the unlimited, universal, distributive sense, there can be NO CONDITIONS (limits) imposed upon the term", as you NR folks must do in order to avoid the more flagrant and obvious heresy of Universal Salvation.

And for your info, Mr. Chaps, Reformed folks believe that Christ's shed blood -- his atoning work is infinitely greater than all sin in the qualitative sense, but not in the quantitative sense since it was never God's intention to save the entire world. When God "came down" to "rescue" his chosen, covenant people (Abraham's descendants) from Egypt, did he rescue the Egyptians, with whom He had no covenant relationship, as well?

Or in the Garden after the Fall, did God rescue (save) Adam, as he did Eve? God reconciled Eve to himself by decreeing that enmity be placed between her and her seed and the seed of the Serpent. Her seed was the godly seed from whom the Ultimate Seed (Christ) would descend to crush the head of the Serpent. Since Adam did not descend from Eve and was not included in God's decree in Gen 3:15, this can only mean that God condemned him.

 

[Cameron143]

I KNOW it is

He who believes is not condemned

he who does not believe is condemned already

This is simply false

 

[Rufus]

You can’t look at the whole and come to your conclusion
you can’t even discuss the bronze serpent or the typology of the salvation was offered to everyone but only those who trusted god recieved.
You’re stuck on one word. And refuse to look at context to see what Jesus meant.

But hey. Keep trying to run. That’s on you

You're also clueless when it comes typology! Read the Numbers account of the Serpent again. The Serpent was NOT offered to everyone in the camp -- only to the LIVING! Many had died already from their snake bites, so they were given NO chance to repent, believe and look to the raised serpent to be saved. The physically living in the account represent God's elect whom he decreed in eternity should live. He did not let them die but actually (NOT potentially) offered them a "salvific" remedy, which apparently they took. And why did the living taking it -- because they were well aware that if they didn't they would go the way of their dead fellow Israelites who had already died from their bites.

P.S. You also don't have a clue on how to exegete scripture! Nor is your knowledge of the bible anything to brag about, in spite of your grandstanding. You still can't come up with the OT passage (s) that Nicodemus should have known. Nor can you connect the dots between Jn 1:13 and 3:8.

You should pull all the logs out of your own eye before pointing to any you perceive to be in mine!

 

[Cameron143]

A kind that kills people

You may want to change your recipe.

 

[Everlasting-Grace]

This is simply false

Whatever, You just proved my point, Your cake is fatal

It is true. To remain in unbeliever is to blaspheme the spirit. Whose Job it is to make the gospel understandable to all.

 

[Everlasting-Grace]

You may want to change your recipe.

Na,, I tasted yours already I got sick, thank God I did not eat it all..

 

[Cameron143]

Whatever, You just proved my point, Your cake is fatal

It is true. To remain in unbeliever is to blaspheme the spirit. Whose Job it is to make the gospel understandable to all.

If you read the passage, blasphemy against the Spirit is to equating Jesus' works to Satan and not the Holy Spirit.

 

[Rufus]

Whatever, You just proved my point, Your cake is fatal

It is true. To remain in unbeliever is to blaspheme the spirit. Whose Job it is to make the gospel understandable to all.

But do all understand and believe? (Rhetorical question!) Since they don't, then whose fault it is: The hearers or the one whose job is to make the gospel understandable "to all"? Think carefully before you answer and embarrass yourself again.

 

[Everlasting-Grace]

If you read the passage, blasphemy against the Spirit is to equating Jesus' works to Satan and not the Holy Spirit.

What do you think people who reject the gospel do?

What do you think those who reject the conviction, the teaching and the judgment of the HS (the gospel). When they reject this work of God. And claim it is the work of someone else?

 

[Everlasting-Grace]

But do all understand and believe? (Rhetorical question!) Since they don't, then whose fault it is: The hearers or the one whose job is to make the gospel understandable "to all"? Think carefully before you answer and embarrass yourself again.

you are a joke man

the people who died because they refused to look at the golden serpent raised By moses died because they refused to listen to God..

Oh wait, you refuse to look at that story.. I am sorry to push it on you again, and force you to once again ignore the words of Jesus

As will everyone else.

You keep embarrassing yourself.. But hey, if you like doing this, then all the luck to you. Just keep talking..

 

[Cameron143]

What do you think people who reject the gospel do?

What do you think those who reject the conviction, the teaching and the judgment of the HS (the gospel). When they reject this work of God. And claim it is the work of someone else?

I believe they are rejecting Christ, not saying that what Jesus did was of Satan.

 

[Rufus]

you are a joke man

the people who died because they refused to look at the golden serpent raised By moses died because they refused to listen to God..

Oh wait, you refuse to look at that story.. I am sorry to push it on you again, and force you to once again ignore the words of Jesus

As will everyone else.

You keep embarrassing yourself.. But hey, if you like doing this, then all the luck to you. Just keep talking..

No. You don't read too swell. AFTER many died, then the living Israelites went to Moses. You're not following the flow of the narrative. The People did not approach Moses until after many died (Num 21:6-7). And assuredly, the dead did not accompany the living to seek Moses' intercession! Therefore, God made no salvific remedy available to those who had already died.

Num 21:6-7
6 Then the LORD sent venomous snakes among them; they bit the people and many Israelites died. 7 The people (those NOT bitten) came to Moses and said, "We sinned when we spoke against the LORD and against you. Pray that the LORD will take the snakes away from us." So Moses prayed for the people.
NIV

I know this narrative does not fit in with your false gospel - but hey..it is what it is. As you will soon see, however, (Lord willin' and the crik doesn't rise) I will demonstrate how the bronze serpent incident totally harmonizes with Reformed Theology.

 

[Chaps]

Classic DOUBLESPEAK! Christ does take away the sin of each and every person...but at the same time and in the same sense he doesn't!

You Non-Reformed folks are totally oblivious to your hypocrisy. You guys have no qualms appealing to other scriptures, which is what Mr. Chaps implicitly did regarding the general unbelief of the world, to unwittingly make the point that the 'whole world" in Jn 1:29 is at the end of the day really and truly is used in a limited, conditional sense because the "whole world" is really talking only about those who do have faith! IOW, Christ takes away the sin of the "whole world" on the CONDITION that the "whole world" believes in Him. And by definition "conditions" determine limits or set limitations. They restrict or modify So when you NR guys do this, you unwittingly wander into the Reformed camp because Reformed folks understand from the git go that the "whole world" is used in a limited sense due to the context of the entire bible. But when we Reformed appeal to other texts outside the immediate context any any given passage, you NR fellas usually go bonkers and cry "FOUL" on us!

That is precisely the opposite of what I said. The whole world talks about the sin of the “whole world” is what I said. Not just believers. Jesus paid the debt of all of humanity. Whether or not individuals accept the payment does not negate the fact that Christ paid the entire debt. I think my explanation makes perfect sense and does not require seeing the “whole world” as not really the whole world but only representatives of all groups in the whole world as others might argue. I only referred to Paul’s statement on the matter is because it specifically addresses this issue and makes clear (at least in my mind) that Christ’s act of righteousness solves the sin issue for ALL of humanity…not just some. Again, God’s provision is different from individuals acceptance of that provision. To illustrate it another way, I can write a check to cover ALL of your debt. If you throw my check in the trash, it doesnt mean that I didn’t provide for all of your debt. It means you didn’t accept that provision. Christs provision is for all sin of the whole world. There is no sin of no person that his blood does not cleanse. However, if someone does not accept his provision, the fault is with them and not Christ’s lack of provision for ALL sin of EVERY person.

But even what I just stated is not the bottom line either because "world" or "whole world" always means EACH and EVERY person in it to the vast majority of NR professing Christians. So, what Jn 1:29 is really saying according to NR traditions is that [literally] Christ takes away the sin of the EACH and EVERY Person (i.e. the "world" or "whole world"). But this can't be, according Mr. Chaps explanation. How could Christ literally take away the sin of each and every person, while simultaneously not [literally] taking away the sin of each and every person in the same sense and at the same time? We clearly have a violation of the Law of Noncontradiction. Bottom line: In order for the term "world" to be consistently used in the unlimited, universal, distributive sense, there can be NO CONDITIONS (limits) imposed upon the term", as you NR folks must do in order to avoid the more flagrant and obvious heresy of Universal Salvation.

Again, it is stating it literally takes away the sin of each and every person. Christ has done all that was needed for every person. He conquered all sin and all death. But as a NR person, I believe humans have agency and God allows us to accept or reject that TOTAL provision. We get a say in the matter. And it seems to me, God is grieved and angered when we do not accept His provision. Which would seem to be strange indeed if God was angry about people’s unbelief if He was not enlightening and empowering them so they they had the capacity to believe.

And for your info, Mr. Chaps, Reformed folks believe that Christ's shed blood -- his atoning work is infinitely greater than all sin in the qualitative sense, but not in the quantitative sense since it was never God's intention to save the entire world. When God "came down" to "rescue" his chosen, covenant people (Abraham's descendants) from Egypt, did he rescue the Egyptians, with whom He had no covenant relationship, as well?

I never said or believed that Reformed folks believed Christ‘s blood was incapable of covering every sin. But it is clear that you feel Christ’s atonement is limited. While I don’t think the Bible supports this claim, I do believe Reformed folks are Christians (obviously). My statement was a simple a defense and explaination of how I, as a NR person, understand how this passage in John is consistent with other passages, namely Romans 5.

Or in the Garden after the Fall, did God rescue (save) Adam, as he did Eve? God reconciled Eve to himself by decreeing that enmity be placed between her and her seed and the seed of the Serpent. Her seed was the godly seed from whom the Ultimate Seed (Christ) would descend to crush the head of the Serpent. Since Adam did not descend from Eve and was not included in God's decree in Gen 3:15, this can only mean that God condemned him.

Well, I dont agree with this in the least. But, I think this discussion would create a bit of a rabbit trail on this thread so I will just leave it at that.

 

[Chaps]

No.

He gave you life because of your belief. You were no longer an unbeliever, so he did not need to forgive you

If you were still an unbeliever you would still be dead.



If he died for unbelief, no one could be condemned for unbelief,, its basic math


Unbelief is blasphemy, And we are told when we do nto believe, it is the HS we are blaspheming, he said he would never forgive that sin in this age or the next.

Blasphemy of the Holy Spirit is not about unbelief. That is not what Jesus is talking about when he warns the Pharisees about blaspheming the Holy Spirit. He is talking about attributing the wonderful miraculous works of the Spirit to Satan. That’s not just unbelief. It is linking the working of the Spirit to the devil.

 

[Rufus]

That is precisely the opposite of what I said. The whole world talks about the sin of the “whole world” is what I said. Not just believers. Jesus paid the debt of all of humanity. Whether or not individuals accept the payment does not negate the fact that Christ paid the entire debt. I think my explanation makes perfect sense and does not require seeing the “whole world” as not really the whole world but only representatives of all groups in the whole world as others might argue. I only referred to Paul’s statement on the matter is because it specifically addresses this issue and makes clear (at least in my mind) that Christ’s act of righteousness solves the sin issue for ALL of humanity…not just some. Again, God’s provision is different from individuals acceptance of that provision. To illustrate it another way, I can write a check to cover ALL of your debt. If you throw my check in the trash, it doesnt mean that I didn’t PROVIDE for all of your debt. It means you didn’t accept that provision. Christs provision is for all sin of the whole world. There is no sin of no person that his blood does not cleanse. However, if someone does not accept his provision, the fault is with them and not Christ’s lack of provision for ALL sin of EVERY person.



Again, it is stating it literally takes away the sin of each and every person. Christ has done all that was needed for every person. He conquered all sin and all death. But as a NR person, I believe humans have agency and God allows us to accept or reject that TOTAL provision. We get a say in the matter. And it seems to me, God is grieved and angered when we do not accept His provision. Which would seem to be strange indeed if God was angry about people’s unbelief if He was not enlightening and empowering them so they they had the capacity to believe.



I never said or believed that Reformed folks believed Christ‘s blood was incapable of covering every sin. But it is clear that you feel Christ’s atonement is limited. While I don’t think the Bible supports this claim, I do believe Reformed folks are Christians (obviously). My statement was a simple a defense and explaination of how I, as a NR person, understand how this passage in John is consistent with other passages, namely Romans 5.



Well, I dont agree with this in the least. But, I think this discussion would create a bit of a rabbit trail on this thread so I will just leave it at that.

The "whole world" is what John said it was in Rev 5:9. Also, look how you just contradicted yourself. Look very carefully what I highlighted above. In one breath you say that Jn 1:29 is saying that God merely PROVIDED! Provided WHAT precisely? Well, the OPPORTUNITY for "free" moral agents to decide if they're going to accept Christ's work.

Then you turn right around and say that Jn 1:29 is stating it literally takes away the sin of each and every person. So, which is it, already!? If God only provided the opportunity for "free" moral agents to cash the check and they decide not to cash, how can it truly be said that God literally wiped out, nullified, canceled, paid their debt when the "free"moral agents chose NOT to have their debt forgiven? The best it can be said of God is that HE OFFERED in good faith to pay their sin debt! But Jn 1:29 does not say what you are saying. It says that Jesus literally took away the sin of each and every person in the world. He didn't merely offer to take it away.

I don't want to sound insulting, Mr. Chaps, but you're thinking here is careless. It's a horrible analogy. In one breath you're really saying that God offered to pay each and every person's sin debt, leaving the final decision to "free" moral agents; but then in the next you say He, nonetheless literally did pay it all for each and every person, even most in the world reject his generous offer. A mere offer is not a literal, actual payment. Not in heaven or here on earth. Period.

 

[Everlasting-Grace]

I believe they are rejecting Christ, not saying that what Jesus did was of Satan.

Another person who needs to go back and read.

Matt 12: 31 “Therefore I say to you, every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven men,

Notice what it says here.

It does not say some sins, Some blasphemies
Itr does not say they MAY or have the POSSIBILITY to be forgiven, it says they WILL be forgiven

but the blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven men. 32 Anyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man, it will be forgiven him; but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit, it will not be forgiven him, either in this age or in the age to come.

And here we have it.. speak a word against Christ, It will be forgiven

But if you Speak against the HS, it will never be forgiven.

Every sin anyone ever commits. no matter who they are. will be forgiven, Jesus paid the sin debt for the whole world. so that whoever believes will be saved..

to reject Jesus is to speak against the HS. because the words Jesus spoke, the things he did, which proved he was from God. and the message concerning him and the gospel were from the HS.

The HS inspired the word of God

To reject the gospel in unbelief is to blaspheme the spirit

He who believes is not condemned,

He who does not believe (the unpardonable sin) is condemned already.

Once again, its not rocket science. But your faulty belief system has you twisted so you can not follow alot of the word..

 

[Everlasting-Grace]

No. You don't read too swell. AFTER many died, then the living Israelites went to Moses. You're not following the flow of the narrative. The People did not approach Moses until after many died (Num 21:6-7). And assuredly, the dead did not accompany the living to seek Moses' intercession! Therefore, God made no salvific remedy available to those who had already died.

Num 21:6-7
6 Then the LORD sent venomous snakes among them; they bit the people and many Israelites died. 7 The people (those NOT bitten) came to Moses and said, "We sinned when we spoke against the LORD and against you. Pray that the LORD will take the snakes away from us." So Moses prayed for the people.
NIV

I know this narrative does not fit in with your false gospel - but hey..it is what it is. As you will soon see, however, (Lord willin' and the crik doesn't rise) I will demonstrate how the bronze serpent incident totally harmonizes with Reformed Theology.

See what you did?

You just made a mockery of yourself and the text.

What did God tell Moses to do?

Did moses do it? yes

What did that serpent represent? Yes Jesus

What did the people HAVE to do to LIVE?

yeah, they had to look at the pole in faith.

I feel bad for you really bad..

 

[Everlasting-Grace]

Blasphemy of the Holy Spirit is not about unbelief. That is not what Jesus is talking about when he warns the Pharisees about blaspheming the Holy Spirit. He is talking about attributing the wonderful miraculous works of the Spirit to Satan. That’s not just unbelief. It is linking the working of the Spirit to the devil.

Matt 12: but the blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven men. 32 Anyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man, it will be forgiven him; but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit, it will not be forgiven him, either in this age or in the age to come.

Unbelief is in essence. speaking a word against the spirit. You are calling the HS a liar.. When someone comes to give you a message, you either believe them, or you reject the message. rejecting the message would be the same as speaking against them, because you claim they are a false witness of the message, and their message is not true

 

[Cameron143]

I agree that it's not rocket science. Rejecting Christ is not the same as saying Jesus operated under the power of Satan. But the clear meaning of the passage doesn't fit with your theology, so you won't accept it. Perhaps this also is blasphemy of the Spirit...not subjecting oneself to His revealed truth. Isn't that also unbelief? Perhaps disbelief. Hmmm.

 

[homwardbound]

Blasphemy of the Holy Spirit is not about unbelief. That is not what Jesus is talking about when he warns the Pharisees about blaspheming the Holy Spirit. He is talking about attributing the wonderful miraculous works of the Spirit to Satan. That’s not just unbelief. It is linking the working of the Spirit to the devil.

Actually this is talking about "Unbelief" that is attributed Jesus's work he has done and does, attributed to the evil of satan.
They would not believe Jesus was sent by God to them, so they attributed Jesus to being evil, and Jesus was never once evil, He did good, God Father's good, led by the Holy Spirit, Father him/herself, God is all and in all for all to choose to believe God or not, each person consciously so.
Therefore, when it is all done and over, the day of judgment comes up on everyone. There shall be no excuse for anyone. For all at that time will have had the conscious chance to choose to beleive God in risen Son or not. All then will be revealed as each person knows in themselves, whether or not they believe God or not (Rom 8:15-16)
Seriously God does just love us all, (1 John 2:1-12) otherwise, God in Son would not have ever gone to that cross and die willingly to take away sin first for us to be able to choose to believe God for not, in belief one does good, god's good through them automatic.
Believe God, stay in belief, no matter what troubles come up, then one will eventually see, might take a lifetime here on earth and might not, the deal is
Believe, receive and see new daily, and learn new daily, this love and mercy is for us all
Romans 2:1-4
In the risen Son, Jesus, God's mercy and truth continue, yet does not in people (the first born person from the womb of woman), whether claim to believe God or not and even those that act as if they do believe, many a times are just out for the self, here on earth for now to get what they need presently
If one does not love all as are loved by God through Son first, who loves us all, then one might not see this amazing grace yet and might become to see it and stand in it, or not.
Believe Eph 1:6-7-13, Phil 1:6. Trust to God that God loves you, will work with you to sort out all fear in you, and then in agreement one changes as new, at least me this I know see and agree God loves us all

Colossians 1:21-23

Authorized (King James) Version

21 And you, that were sometime alienated and enemies in your mind by wicked works, yet now hath he reconciled 22 in the body of his flesh through death, to present you holy and unblameable and unreproveable in his sight: 23 if ye continue in the faith grounded and settled, and be not moved away from the hope of the gospel, which ye have heard, and which was preached to every creature which is under heaven; whereof I Paul am made a minister;

Jesus finished his work, here on the earth, to give new life to those that choose to believe God and himself for us. We, at least I ask God Father for the new life offered in the risen Son, Jesus, Yashua in Hebrew, I stand in trust to be shown truth over errors here in this world, by God in God's Spirit and Truth, not od any other flesh and blood person, yet listen to discern. There is much evil in this world that masquerades as good, you might know this truth too?
We are given this new life to work it out in us, in fear and trembling, trusting Father to sort it all out in us each personally first.
I see to trust God to sort it out, the board in my own eye first, so I can see to reveal truth to my neighbor and then they turn to God too, not me ever, thank you