By Nature Children of Wrath as others !

[Fastfredy0]

Is what I am saying so confusing you can not follow it all, but only twisting to what I have said.

I can follow it. Some of your opinions contradict reality IMO or are dependent upon implicit interpretation that fit your Christian views. See below:

The Bible says that Jesus died for all; therefore, Jesus died for all.

This is true. But ALL is an ambiguous term. The definition on Google is: used to refer to the whole quantity or extent of a particular group or thing. You use ALL to mean whatever fits your theology. When God says He died for ALL it could mean 'everyone without exception' as you propose .... or ALL could mean a 'particular group'...like for Jews and Gentiles being one of many examples.
The empirical evidence proves you wrong to say Christ died for everyone without exception:
Premise1: Faith cometh by hearing the gospel
Permise2: Faith is required to go to heaven
Permise3: Billions of people have died not hearing the gospel (you can do a google search)
Conclusions:

1. Either Christ did not did for everyone without exception (referring to the word ALL) or
2. Christ died for everyone without exception, but he died in vain for the most part or
3. Christ died for ALL and ALL refers to 'group(s)' as I pointed out in the dictionary

God is rational (I assume you agree) ... so take your pick or discredit the syllogism.
Consider: Jill says, "All motorcycles have 2 wheels. " Greg responds, "That's ridiculous. A single motorcycle has two wheels. And there are of 200,000,000 motorcycles in the world. Therefore, all motorcycles would have over 400,000,000 wheels. Thus the word ALL is ambiguous and often construed by one's bias.

John 1:29, "The next day he saw Jesus coming to him, and said, 'Behold, the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world!'"

The word WORLD is ambiguous. If by WORLD you mean everyone with exception then hallelujah, we are all saved for all our sins are taken away. I've always voted for universal salvation.

John 3:16, "For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish, but have eternal life."

Same argument as above. WORLD is ambiguous. You use it to suit your doctrine. The syllogism above proves God did not die for everyone (or He died in vain).... or perhaps you can give me a scripture of even one person in the Bible that we know is in Hell that Jesus specifically said He loved. Like, Judas Iscariot, I love you .... or anyone you can find.
Why did Christ not say "Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated [and loved].
Why does Christ hate so many people he loves?
Psalm 5:4 For You are not a God who takes pleasure in wickedness; No evil [person] dwells with You. 5 The boastful and the arrogant will not stand in Your sight; You hate all who do evil. 6 You destroy those who tell lies; The Lord detests and rejects the bloodthirsty and deceitful man. By saying God loves everyone without exception you are saying God loves evil for evil is NOT a thing as it cannot exist on its own ... it must have a host and that host is man. You contend that a holy God loves evil men. (How do you define HOLY?)

John 4:42, "and they were saying to the woman, 'It is no longer because of what you said that we believe, for we have heard for ourselves and know that this One is indeed the Savior of the world.'"

LOL.... your theology surely relies on the ambiguous word WORLD. Maybe WORLD means planet, though I admit that does agree with other scripture. But if you can isolate scripture for your purposes, why shouldn't I say WORLD means the planet, though I don't so contend.
“Behold, the world is gone after Him” (John 12:19) .... using your definition of WORLD in this verse means there were 400 million people (Google est. at time of Christ) following Christ around Galilee, etc. Wonder how people on all fit for the sermon on the mount.
Is there story of feeding the 400 million... how could 400 million people in the same land mass of Israel all be fed, who told them all to come to Israel, how did the North America get there ... just teasing... the point is you are using an AMBIGUOUS word to support your doctrine when other scripture does not.
Why would a HOLY GOD in which there is no darkness LOVE evil (those going to heaven)? God cannot deny himself. He cannot love evil. This is what you are suggesting IMO. Correct me if I am wrong... tell me how God can love that which is evil unless they be put IN CHRIST?

1 Tim. 4:10, "For it is for this we labor and strive, because we have fixed our hope on the living God, who is the Savior of all men, especially of believers."

I have to smile... Back to the ambiguous use of the word ALL. I explained above.

1 John 2:2, "and He Himself is the propitiation for our sins; and not for ours only, but also for those of the whole world."
1 John 4:14, "And we have beheld and bear witness that the Father has sent the Son to be the Savior of the world."

Again, with the word WORLD. You are going to other ambiguous verses that use the word WORLD.
If God saved the WORLD and the WORLD includes everyone without exception then everyone is saved. I wish that were true. If it is true, then I am convinced that you are correct and God does love everyone without exception.

“Your faith is spoken of throughout the whole world” (Romans 1:8) ... amazing, ... if world means everyone without exception as you propose in your verses, then somehow they ALL (everyone without exception)

Admittedly, ALL and WORLD can mean everyone without exception. That is why one must use EXPLICIT verses to scrutinize IMPLICIT verses. Give me some EXPLICIT verses. Show me where God says He loves someone we know is in hell, even one person. Explain how God can love ALL people yet give billions NO CHANCE of salvation, tell me why you think a HOLY GOD can loves those are evil. Love is a volition to favor ... how is it you feel that a majority of mankind will spend 99.99999999% of their existence in HELL and yet say these people are favored/loved by God????? Maybe you set the bar on the definition of LOVE very, very low.

Thanks for your patience with me. In point of fact, I think you very knowledgeable. I am still shocked you had heard of Vincent Cheung (maybe he is more famous than I had supposed).

 

[Hopeful]

Interesting take/assumption. Do you have a scripture to back it up like "in the year 50 A.D. no one in China or Japan wanted to know or serve God".

How can you know that?
Didn't they all have their own "religions" even before Christianity?
It seems they were searching for something, doesn't it?
Fastfredy0:
(Google est. pop. of China at 100 million around 50 A.D. ... so 0 in 100 million "wanted to know and serve God ... makes Americans looks VERY GOOD)

It is a HUGE coincidence that a significant portion of those that have never heard the gospel are concentrated in geographical areas. For instance, no person in all North America ever heard the gospel until after Columbus discovered America. It is like the location on the earth determined who had any possibility of, as you say, "want[ing] to know and serve a god".
I think you are gasping at straws to explain empirical data that apparently contradicts your understanding of how God interacts with man (not that we don't all do it).

Didn't the native-Americans have a Great Spirit?
Were they not serving a "god"?

Well, there is a sense that God wants all men to come to us, (sic) this I grant. God also wishes everyone would not sin in a sense too ... but in another sense God has ensured all will sin. Romans 11:32 For God has consigned everyone to disobedience so that He may have mercy on everyone.
Similar story with God's "love". If God loved (volition to favor) everyone to the point He wished them no harm, He could simply have not allowed anyone he foresaw would not believe to not be allowed to impregnate a woman's egg. Thus, no eternity in hell for anyone and God's love for everyone without exception.
You also, when saying God loves everyone, have a huge problem. How can a Holy (“God is light, and in him is no darkness at all”) love those that are evil, sons of Satan.
Yeah, God loves (favors) everyone to the extent that the rain falls on the good and the bad ... this I grant.

Ok...

Agreed. It's the method by which He is omniscient that is interesting. I say God determines all things (Heb. 1:3) and most others say God in eternity past somehow determined what NOTHING would do (which is irrational as Nothing comes from Nothing)

Thanks for your civil and interesting comments. We don't always agree, but I do appreciate your ability to communicate your ideas. Hopefully (no pun intended), God's glory is reflected back to Him from us as we squabble about how GREAT He is from various view points. I wonder if He gets 'ticked off' by us getting it wrong so often.

Our loving God is pleased anyone at all seeks Him and His wisdom.
The angels rejoice when a man turns from sin.

 

[GodsGrace]

Well I guess this conversation is over !

You're such a scardy cat.
Afraid to answer any of my questions.
Wonder why.

Anyway, I made my point.
We cannot be saved from birth otherwise salvation is not necessary!
Common sense.

 

[tdidymas]

Hi Tdidymas,
Your link brought me here.

Paul said IF many times, which means that we have a choice to make between as to following the flesh or the spirit. This is true even of believers who can always go back to their old ways if they so choose. He also gave many warnings.

I LOVE your idea of OSAS being a false sense of security...I have also said this many times, which is why it is one of the most important ideas to understand about our Christianity.

I did not say OSAS was a false sense of security. I'm surprised that you would put words in my mouth, since you griped about that to the other poster. What I said was that what the OP and the other poster said was a false sense of security, namely the statement that there never was any time that the elect were under the wrath of God. My point is a disagreement with that statement, as I believe the scripture teaches the contrary for all who are unregenerate, even the elect before they are regenerated. I hope you understand what I am saying. This is something that the Westminster Confession says concerning the unregenerate being under the wrath of God (whether those unregenerate be among the future elect or not):
"VI. Every sin, both original and actual, being a transgression of the righteous law of God, and contrary thereunto, doth, in its own nature, bring guilt upon the sinner; whereby he is bound over to the wrath of God, and curse of the law, and so made subject to death, with all miseries spiritual, temporal, and eternal." So what these two guys are teaching is contrary to reformed teaching as well as scripture.

I had asked you what you mean by the elect because it's a term used by the reformed, but you don't sound like one to me.
To me, and to all of Christian denominations EXCEPT the reformed,,,the elect simply means the chosen ones. The chosen ones are chosen because they wish to follow the conditions God has set on being saved. It is the person's choice as to whether or not he cares to accept the gift of salvation offered by God to all of humanity.
1 Timothy 2:4 God desires all to be saved. (but not all wish to be saved).
John 3:16 Whoever believes in Jesus will be saved.

This is a side issue and doesn't address the OP. But scripture mentions the elect, so we surely must deal with what it means, as we must also deal with the meaning of predestination, since scripture deals with that also.

Agreed.






Agreed!
So right about James 3.1


Matthew 24:24 came to mind...but it's not in context to the above.
It speaks of false prophets doing great miracles that even the elect could be deceived.
However, I don't see any great miracles these days.
I do, however, believe the elect could be deceived because I see the deception if the reformed faith.
I also believe the O.P. is making rather arrogant statements since the reformed person will not know until
the end of their life whether or not they are saved because it is possible for God to take away that salvation at
any time He so chooses. A worry not shared by those that choose God for salvation of their own free will.

Besides this there is a special call which, for the most part, God bestows on believers only, when by the internal illumination of the Spirit he causes the word preached to take deep root in their hearts.
Sometimes, however, he communicates it also to those whom he enlightens only for a time, and whom afterwards,
in just punishment for their ingratitude, he abandons and smites with greater blindness.

Institutes of the Christian Religion, John Calvin
Book 3 Chapter 24 Paragraph 8

I do not agree with you about reformed teaching, as I get the idea you don't really understand it. But that is for a different thread.

 

[tdidymas]

Aside:
Christians have been hindered in their spiritual progress by an erroneous understanding and outrageous application of Isaiah 55:8-9: "'For my thoughts are not your thoughts,neither are your ways my ways,' declares the LORD. 'As the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways and my thoughts than your thoughts.'"
It is said that this means man can never think or understand God's thoughts. But if this is true, then no one can understand Isaiah 55:8-9! It is because our thoughts do not correspond to God's thoughts that we need to renew our thinking to match his thinking. Since our thoughts are not his thoughts, we must read the Scripture to know God's thoughts, so that we may change our minds, and conform our thinking to his thinking. V. Cheung
Thus, to a very limited degree I know God thoughts. When God tells me He knows all things I know the God knows who are the elect. It is not arrogance, but God's condescension for create special revelation and the Spirit's teaching that enable me to know a few of God's thoughts.

Once we accept a false view of God's POV (not the entirety of it), the rest of the system cannot be Christian.

I agree with your last statement. As for the rest of it, I mostly agree with this qualification: what God says in the Bible is the standard of what "God's POV" is, and anyone who goes beyond it and does not adhere to it is adopting a false view of God's POV. This is why we have 2 John 1:9.

 

[tdidymas]

You have proven you don't understand what I am saying or
I am not able to communicate well
or both
... so not much point responding.
...from my POV you love God...so I will leave it at that.

I think I do understand what you are saying. You stated that there was (and is) never a time when the elect are under the wrath of God (in agreement with the OP). Isn't this what you said or what you meant? Am I understanding your communication correctly? Let me quote one of your statements: "If the probability if 0% then then is NO REAL DANGER." (that is, the probability of one of the elect going to hell while he is in the unregenerate condition).

Am I misunderstanding you? If not, then we disagree, because the scripture very clearly in many places says that the unregenerate are in danger of hell. This includes the elect as long as they are unregenerate. So I get the idea that you are not understanding me, or what I am saying, or my reasoning about what the scripture is teaching. I'm beginning to wonder if you are even reading what I wrote.

And if God is telling us the truth about the danger of going to hell, then it is a distinct possibility. If God says we are subject to His wrath in the unregenerate state, then it is certainly true and not a human deception. Yes, the danger is real, not fake. So your "if" statement is just hypothetical nonsense.

Here is what the Westminster Confession states about the spiritual condition of unregenerate man, even the elect in their unregenerate state (that is, all men including the elect): "VI. Every sin, both original and actual, being a transgression of the righteous law of God, and contrary thereunto, doth, in its own nature, bring guilt upon the sinner; whereby he is bound over to the wrath of God, and curse of the law, and so made subject to death, with all miseries spiritual, temporal, and eternal."

If I'm misunderstanding you, please explain exactly what I am misunderstanding.

 

[Fastfredy0]

How can you know that? [referring to my statement: "in the year 50 A.D. no one in China or Japan wanted to know or serve God".] "
Didn't they all have their own "religions" even before Christianity?
It seems they were searching for something, doesn't it?

I see what you are saying. But it is not possible for someone whom has never heard of Christ to KNOW GOD LEADING TO SALVATION (God's acceptance/adoption).

My reasoning: 'No one comes to the Father except through me' means that Jesus is the only way through which mankind should worship God. So anyone supposedly 'seeking' and 'worshiping' God in China in 50 A.D. would be simply indulging in idol worship. I suppose the Jews worshiping the golden calf were seeking to know and worship God and we know what that resulted in ... in a similar way, God ONLY accepts worship thru Christ ... and since there are est. a billion or more people today that have never heard of Christ (Google search) we can safely assume that the people in CHINA in 50 A.D. had never heard of Christ.
Aside: Of course, if you can show me how their worship and seeking of God for those whom had never heard of Christ satisfies God, I am all ears.
Aside2: I agree with you that they were searching for something, but what they found was of NO VALUE for 'No one comes to the Father except through me'.
Aside3: This is further evidence that "No one seeks God". God has to seek them. Since salvation is only through Christ and since they never heard of Christ we can conclude their seeking is in vain and God did not seek them.

Didn't the native-Americans have a Great Spirit?
Were they not serving a "god"?

Agreed, they were serving a false god. I don't see how serving a false god is relevant to the subject of serving/worshiping the true God for God is not satisfied by the worship of idols ... even if their motives were good from man's POV, it wasn't accepted by God.

Our loving God is pleased anyone at all seeks Him and His wisdom.
The angels rejoice when a man turns from sin.

Agreed.
Aside: God can only be pleased by His own handiwork. Thus our 'seeking' is caused by God.
1 Corinthians 4:7 For who separates you from the others [as a faction leader]? [Who makes you superior and sets you apart from another, giving you the preeminence?] What have you that was not given to you? If then you received it [from someone], why do you boast as if you had not received [but had gained it by your own efforts]?
Job 35:7 “If you are righteous, what do you give God, Or what does He receive from your hand? 8 “Your wickedness affects only a man such as you, And your righteousness affects only a son of man”.
All our works are filthy rags ... God only crowns His own works ... nothing we do of ourselves adds to God's glory for He does not change.

 

[Hopeful]

I see what you are saying. But it is not possible for someone whom has never heard of Christ to KNOW GOD LEADING TO SALVATION (God's acceptance/adoption).

My reasoning: 'No one comes to the Father except through me' means that Jesus is the only way through which mankind should worship God. So anyone supposedly 'seeking' and 'worshiping' God in China in 50 A.D. would be simply indulging in idol worship.

You do realize that the Jews had no knowledge of Jesus Christ in 50 AD either.
They worshipped THE God, while the Chinese worshipped A god.
Had the Chinese really sought after the Lord, He would have been made manifest unto them.

I suppose the Jews worshiping the golden calf were seeking to know and worship God and we know what that resulted in ... in a similar way, God ONLY accepts worship thru Christ ... and since there are est. a billion or more people today that have never heard of Christ (Google search) we can safely assume that the people in CHINA in 50 A.D. had never heard of Christ.

Didn't God hear Noah, Moses, David, Elijah, Samuel, etc. without the intercession of Jesus?

Aside: Of course, if you can show me how their worship and seeking of God for those whom had never heard of Christ satisfies God, I am all ears.

See above.

Aside2: I agree with you that they were searching for something, but what they found was of NO VALUE for 'No one comes to the Father except through me'.

Agreed, but not everything is written, so who knows if a native American, Chinese, or Amazonian, ever did see God.

Aside3: This is further evidence that "No one seeks God". God has to seek them. Since salvation is only through Christ and since they never heard of Christ we can conclude their seeking is in vain and God did not seek them.

Tell that to Noah.

Agreed, they were serving a false god. I don't see how serving a false god is relevant to the subject of serving/worshiping the true God for God is not satisfied by the worship of idols ... even if their motives were good from man's POV, it wasn't accepted by God.

True, but again, not everything is known by men, so who is to say whether or not any ever really did seek after the true God.

Agreed.
Aside: God can only be pleased by His own handiwork. Thus our 'seeking' is caused by God.
1 Corinthians 4:7 For who separates you from the others [as a faction leader]? [Who makes you superior and sets you apart from another, giving you the preeminence?] What have you that was not given to you? If then you received it [from someone], why do you boast as if you had not received [but had gained it by your own efforts]?
Job 35:7 “If you are righteous, what do you give God, Or what does He receive from your hand? 8 “Your wickedness affects only a man such as you, And your righteousness affects only a son of man”.
All our works are filthy rags ... God only crowns His own works ... nothing we do of ourselves adds to God's glory for He does not change.

Sort of like a moth to a flame.
The "Light" is there, but unfortunately, not all are drawn to it.
If you see that phenomenon as the Light causing the draw, so be it.
But if He is causing it, why do so many evade it?
The "Light" is out there, so it is man's fault for not drawing closer to it.
Not God's, as you seem to infer.

 

[Fastfredy0]

Sort of like a moth to a flame.
The "Light" is there, but unfortunately, not all are drawn to it.
If you see that phenomenon as the Light causing the draw, so be it.
But if He is causing it, why do so many evade it?

Moths, flame, light ...lots of metaphors. Usually the 'light' is God ... and going towards the 'light' leads to salvation I guess. But the metaphor has a moth (Christian) finding the light (God) and dying (moths die when hitting the flame) .... I don't get it. Maybe the flame is Hell and people's sin nature causes them to be burnt. Maybe "HE IS CAUSING IT" is Satan. Best to speak plainly so I can understand.

You said people who had never heard of Christ are searching for Him.
I ask:

1. You implied the estimated 50 million people in 50 A.D. in China seek God, how many found him leading to salvation and what is necessary to believe for them?

 

[GodsGrace]

I did not say OSAS was a false sense of security. I'm surprised that you would put words in my mouth, since you griped about that to the other poster. What I said was that what the OP and the other poster said was a false sense of security, namely the statement that there never was any time that the elect were under the wrath of God. My point is a disagreement with that statement, as I believe the scripture teaches the contrary for all who are unregenerate, even the elect before they are regenerated. I hope you understand what I am saying. This is something that the Westminster Confession says concerning the unregenerate being under the wrath of God (whether those unregenerate be among the future elect or not):
"VI. Every sin, both original and actual, being a transgression of the righteous law of God, and contrary thereunto, doth, in its own nature, bring guilt upon the sinner; whereby he is bound over to the wrath of God, and curse of the law, and so made subject to death, with all miseries spiritual, temporal, and eternal." So what these two guys are teaching is contrary to reformed teaching as well as scripture.

This is a side issue and doesn't address the OP. But scripture mentions the elect, so we surely must deal with what it means, as we must also deal with the meaning of predestination, since scripture deals with that also.

I do not agree with you about reformed teaching, as I get the idea you don't really understand it. But that is for a different thread.

I put words in your mouth...
You believe in regeneration of the elect...
You quote the Westminster Confession of Faith...
(which I agree with in this case)
We have here "side issues" that do not address the O.P.....
AND....I don't agree with it...but I understand the reformed faith VERY WELL and there is nothing biblical about it.

And, everything you've mentioned you say is for a different thread...
SO,,,I guess there's nothing to talk about.

 

[GodsGrace]

Well I guess this conversation is over !

Of course it is.
There is no cooperation from you.
Anyway, you know I disagree with your biblical exegesis...
your world view....
your idea of what God is like...
and just about everything else you post.

 

[for_his_glory]

I can follow it. Some of your opinions contradict reality IMO or are dependent upon implicit interpretation that fit your Christian views. See below:


This is true. But ALL is an ambiguous term. The definition on Google is: used to refer to the whole quantity or extent of a particular group or thing. You use ALL to mean whatever fits your theology. When God says He died for ALL it could mean 'everyone without exception' as you propose .... or ALL could mean a 'particular group'...like for Jews and Gentiles being one of many examples.
The empirical evidence proves you wrong to say Christ died for everyone without exception:
Premise1: Faith cometh by hearing the gospel
Permise2: Faith is required to go to heaven
Permise3: Billions of people have died not hearing the gospel (you can do a google search)
Conclusions:

1. Either Christ did not did for everyone without exception (referring to the word ALL) or
2. Christ died for everyone without exception, but he died in vain for the most part or
3. Christ died for ALL and ALL refers to 'group(s)' as I pointed out in the dictionary

God is rational (I assume you agree) ... so take your pick or discredit the syllogism.
Consider: Jill says, "All motorcycles have 2 wheels. " Greg responds, "That's ridiculous. A single motorcycle has two wheels. And there are of 200,000,000 motorcycles in the world. Therefore, all motorcycles would have over 400,000,000 wheels. Thus the word ALL is ambiguous and often construed by one's bias.


The word WORLD is ambiguous. If by WORLD you mean everyone with exception then hallelujah, we are all saved for all our sins are taken away. I've always voted for universal salvation.


Same argument as above. WORLD is ambiguous. You use it to suit your doctrine. The syllogism above proves God did not die for everyone (or He died in vain).... or perhaps you can give me a scripture of even one person in the Bible that we know is in Hell that Jesus specifically said He loved. Like, Judas Iscariot, I love you .... or anyone you can find.
Why did Christ not say "Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated [and loved].
Why does Christ hate so many people he loves?
Psalm 5:4 For You are not a God who takes pleasure in wickedness; No evil [person] dwells with You. 5 The boastful and the arrogant will not stand in Your sight; You hate all who do evil. 6 You destroy those who tell lies; The Lord detests and rejects the bloodthirsty and deceitful man. By saying God loves everyone without exception you are saying God loves evil for evil is NOT a thing as it cannot exist on its own ... it must have a host and that host is man. You contend that a holy God loves evil men. (How do you define HOLY?)


LOL.... your theology surely relies on the ambiguous word WORLD. Maybe WORLD means planet, though I admit that does agree with other scripture. But if you can isolate scripture for your purposes, why shouldn't I say WORLD means the planet, though I don't so contend.
“Behold, the world is gone after Him” (John 12:19) .... using your definition of WORLD in this verse means there were 400 million people (Google est. at time of Christ) following Christ around Galilee, etc. Wonder how people on all fit for the sermon on the mount.
Is there story of feeding the 400 million... how could 400 million people in the same land mass of Israel all be fed, who told them all to come to Israel, how did the North America get there ... just teasing... the point is you are using an AMBIGUOUS word to support your doctrine when other scripture does not.
Why would a HOLY GOD in which there is no darkness LOVE evil (those going to heaven)? God cannot deny himself. He cannot love evil. This is what you are suggesting IMO. Correct me if I am wrong... tell me how God can love that which is evil unless they be put IN CHRIST?


I have to smile... Back to the ambiguous use of the word ALL. I explained above.



Again, with the word WORLD. You are going to other ambiguous verses that use the word WORLD.
If God saved the WORLD and the WORLD includes everyone without exception then everyone is saved. I wish that were true. If it is true, then I am convinced that you are correct and God does love everyone without exception.

“Your faith is spoken of throughout the whole world” (Romans 1:8) ... amazing, ... if world means everyone without exception as you propose in your verses, then somehow they ALL (everyone without exception)

Admittedly, ALL and WORLD can mean everyone without exception. That is why one must use EXPLICIT verses to scrutinize IMPLICIT verses. Give me some EXPLICIT verses. Show me where God says He loves someone we know is in hell, even one person. Explain how God can love ALL people yet give billions NO CHANCE of salvation, tell me why you think a HOLY GOD can loves those are evil. Love is a volition to favor ... how is it you feel that a majority of mankind will spend 99.99999999% of their existence in HELL and yet say these people are favored/loved by God????? Maybe you set the bar on the definition of LOVE very, very low.

Thanks for your patience with me. In point of fact, I think you very knowledgeable. I am still shocked you had heard of Vincent Cheung (maybe he is more famous than I had supposed).

Seriously, you are agreeing with me where I said "The Bible says that Jesus died for all; therefore, Jesus died for all", then turn around and debate the word "all"!!!

Your Google definition is right, but Christ died for those who will come to faith in Him as by His sacrifice whosoever believes in Him will have eternal life with Him. Everyone is given that chance before the door of salvation is closed forever as God's grace is extended to all throughout the whole world, but not all will accept it.

 

[Hopeful]

Moths, flame, light ...lots of metaphors. Usually the 'light' is God ... and going towards the 'light' leads to salvation I guess. But the metaphor has a moth (Christian) finding the light (God) and dying (moths die when hitting the flame) .... I don't get it. Maybe the flame is Hell and people's sin nature causes them to be burnt. Maybe "HE IS CAUSING IT" is Satan. Best to speak plainly so I can understand.

You said people who had never heard of Christ are searching for Him.
I ask:

1. You implied the estimated 50 million people in 50 A.D. in China seek God, how many found him leading to salvation and what is necessary to believe for them?

 

[Hopeful]

Moths, flame, light ...lots of metaphors. Usually the 'light' is God ... and going towards the 'light' leads to salvation I guess.

You got it !
Fastfrady0:
But the metaphor has a moth (Christian) finding the light (God) and dying (moths die when hitting the flame) .... I don't get it. Maybe the flame is Hell and people's sin nature causes them to be burnt. Maybe "HE IS CAUSING IT" is Satan. Best to speak plainly so I can understand.
The moth in my scenario are those who seek a god, and thereby, salvation.
They just might be native American or Chinese.
But if they are seeking a god to serve and please, I feel that God will not ignore them.
Fastfredy0:
You said people who had never heard of Christ are searching for Him.
I ask:
You implied the estimated 50 million people in 50 A.D. in China seek God, how many found him leading to salvation and what is necessary to believe for them?

I don't know about all 50 million, but if even one sought after God, he would find Him.
All of the 50 million will be judged by their consciences. (Rom 2:11-16)

 

[Fastfredy0]

Seriously, you are agreeing with me where I said "The Bible says that Jesus died for all; therefore, Jesus died for all", then turn around and debate the word "all"!!!

I agree with everything the Bible says so when you quote a verse I always agree. What I don't do is agree with your interpretation. I explained use the authority of a dictionary and a 'motorcycle' example that ALL can mean 'everyone without exception' or 'all groups'. The verse is not clear which definition is in view nor understand my point about the definition of ALL being ambiguous despite the source of a dictionary and an example. So, that's that. I respect your right to disagree.

'No one comes to the Father except through me' unless you are a 1282 N. A. indian ... they can come to God without coming to God.

 

[Fastfredy0]

I don't know about all 50 million, but if even one sought after God, he would find Him.
All of the 50 million will be judged by their consciences. (Rom 2:11-16)

'No one comes to the Father except through me' unless you are one of 50 million people living in China in 50 A.D. ... they can come to God without coming to God the Son. (this is the consequence of your theology as I see it, that God contradicts himself in John 14:6)

Premise 1: No one comes to the Father except through me [Christ]
Premise 2: 50 million people in China in 50 A.D. never heard of Christ
Conclusion1: 50 million people in China in 50 A.D. are in hell

using your premise of people seeking God will find him we can conclude
Premise 1: People who seek God will be saved
Premise 2: 50 million people in China in 50 A.D. are in hell per conclusion 1
Conclusion 2: No one seeks God

 

[Hopeful]

I agree with everything the Bible says so when you quote a verse I always agree. What I don't do is agree with your interpretation. I explained use the authority of a dictionary and a 'motorcycle' example that ALL can mean 'everyone without exception' or 'all groups'. The verse is not clear which definition is in view nor understand my point about the definition of ALL being ambiguous despite the source of a dictionary and an example. So, that's that. I respect your right to disagree.
'No one comes to the Father except through me' unless you are a 1282 N. A. indian ... they can come to God without coming to God.

No contradiction at all.
Those who really seek after God, Jesus will deliver.
I'll use those from Macedonia as my example. (Acts 16:9-)
The Macedonians wanted help, and a vision was given to Paul in order to make it happen.
Who can say that never happened for the Chinese man or the native American?
I trust that God won't allow someone to wallow in sin with no hope of righteousness and its reward.

'No one comes to the Father except through me' unless you are one of 50 million people living in China in 50 A.D. ... they can come to God without coming to God the Son. (this is the consequence of your theology as I see it, that God contradicts himself in John 14:6)

Premise 1: No one comes to the Father except through me [Christ]
Premise 2: 50 million people in China in 50 A.D. never heard of Christ
Conclusion1: 50 million people in China in 50 A.D. are in hell

We don't know that nobody heard of Jesus. That is only your POV, not mine.

using your premise of people seeking God will find him we can conclude
Premise 1: People who seek God will be saved
Premise 2: 50 million people in China in 50 A.D. are in hell per conclusion 1
Conclusion 2: No one seeks God

Do you think that nobody seeks God?
As our own country could probably now challenge China for Godlessness, I found Jesus and God...so am an illustration that it can happen in the most evil of circumstances.
All praise and glory to the Creator, forever.

 

[GodsGrace]

I agree with everything the Bible says so when you quote a verse I always agree. What I don't do is agree with your interpretation. I explained use the authority of a dictionary and a 'motorcycle' example that ALL can mean 'everyone without exception' or 'all groups'. The verse is not clear which definition is in view nor understand my point about the definition of ALL being ambiguous despite the source of a dictionary and an example. So, that's that. I respect your right to disagree.

'No one comes to the Father except through me' unless you are a 1282 N. A. indian ... they can come to God without coming to God.

Fred,
Two persons cannot both agree with the bible and both be correct.
One of them has to be wrong with their interpretation.
BTW,,,this is not the interpretation of for_his_glory , it is the interpretation of all denominations EXCEPT for the reformed.

In the case you're discussing, ALL means ALL.
Christ died for the sins of the whole world.
Christ died for the sins of all person that were ever born, are born now, or will be born in the future.

1 John 2:2 tells us that Jesus died for the sins of the whole world, not just for the sins of the believers that were being addressed when John wrote this.

Hebrews 10:10 tells us that Jesus died for our sins once and for all.

Hebrews 9:28 tells us that Jesus will appear a second time...not to deal with sin...but to save those that eagerly await Him.

Hebrews 9:26 says that Jesus PUT AWAY SIN.


If we put all of the above ideas together, we find that the priests of the O.T. had to offer sacrifices for sins over and over again.
Hebrews 10:11

However, Jesus, has come and sacrificed Himself once and for all time to DEAL WITH SIN...so the second time He returns it will not to deal with sin...Hebrews 9:28

IOW...Jesus died for all of humanity just as Adam cursed all of humanity.
Adam sold us to satan....
Jesus buys us back from satan....

Not just us, the believers, but ALL, EVERYBODY, is bought back from satan....
Those who wish to take opportunity of this free gift of salvation can do so by believing in God and His sacrificial Lamb, Jesus.

Adam sold humanity to satan.
Jesus bought it back.

 

[Hopeful]

Fred,
Two persons cannot both agree with the bible and both be correct.
One of them has to be wrong with their interpretation.
BTW,,,this is not the interpretation of for_his_glory , it is the interpretation of all denominations EXCEPT for the reformed.

In the case you're discussing, ALL means ALL.
Christ died for the sins of the whole world.
Christ died for the sins of all person that were ever born, are born now, or will be born in the future.

1 John 2:2 tells us that Jesus died for the sins of the whole world, not just for the sins of the believers that were being addressed when John wrote this.

Hebrews 10:10 tells us that Jesus died for our sins once and for all.

Hebrews 9:28 tells us that Jesus will appear a second time...not to deal with sin...but to save those that eagerly await Him.

Hebrews 9:26 says that Jesus PUT AWAY SIN.


If we put all of the above ideas together, we find that the priests of the O.T. had to offer sacrifices for sins over and over again.
Hebrews 10:11

However, Jesus, has come and sacrificed Himself once and for all time to DEAL WITH SIN...so the second time He returns it will not to deal with sin...Hebrews 9:28

IOW...Jesus died for all of humanity just as Adam cursed all of humanity.
Adam sold us to satan....
Jesus buys us back from satan....

Not just us, the believers, but ALL, EVERYBODY, is bought back from satan....
Those who wish to take opportunity of this free gift of salvation can do so by believing in God and His sacrificial Lamb, Jesus.

Adam sold humanity to satan.
Jesus bought it back.

I agree.
The "credit card" is on the table...so to speak.
Men just have to pick it up.

 

[GodsGrace]

'No one comes to the Father except through me' unless you are one of 50 million people living in China in 50 A.D. ... they can come to God without coming to God the Son. (this is the consequence of your theology as I see it, that God contradicts himself in John 14:6)

Premise 1: No one comes to the Father except through me [Christ]
Premise 2: 50 million people in China in 50 A.D. never heard of Christ
Conclusion1: 50 million people in China in 50 A.D. are in hell

using your premise of people seeking God will find him we can conclude
Premise 1: People who seek God will be saved
Premise 2: 50 million people in China in 50 A.D. are in hell per conclusion 1
Conclusion 2: No one seeks God

Which is it Fred?

No one comes to the Father except through Christ......
John 14:6

OR
No one can come to Jesus unless the Father draws him...
John 6:44


Is Jesus God?
Is Father God?

Why make the distinction?
The Father draws all...those that care to be saved are saved through Christ WHO DIED FOR ALL.

Jesus as the Son will draw all men to God...this was His mission.
IF we are exposed to Jesus we will have to decide whether or not to believe Him and if we do, we will be called
children of God.

As to your Indians and Chinese and 50 million persons and billions of persons...
why not read Romans 1:19-20 and let it sink in?


Romans 1:19-20
18For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who suppress the truth in unrighteousness,
19because that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them.
20For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse.


NO ONE will be without excuse on judegment day because ALL will have been aware of God because God will make it evident to them by His invisible attributes, His eternal power, His divine nature, having been clearly seen and understood through WHAT HAS BEEN MADE.

No one will be without excuse.
Everyone knows there is a God.
Some wish to believe Him...some do not.