The Myth of saying that Jesus Christ died for all men without exception !

[mlqurgw]

By all means tell me that you considered YOUR DOCTRINES to be 'the perfect foundation.'

IF NOT, then we both AGREE that Jesus IS The Perfect Foundation that we ALL build upon and NONE of us 'built Him.'



The only obvious thing I've seen is that you don't want to answer if you AGREE or DISAGREE with the statement by SBG57 IN MY LAST POST.

I certainly understand that you do not seem to be FORTHRIGHT in answering and instead AVOIDED it just as HIS SHEEP did.

It will be there for you and hissheep anytime you want to DISPLAY your POSITION.

enjoy!

smaller

If you are asking whether I believe one who holds to free will works Arminiamism is saved I will unequivocally answer no I do not. I may not totally agree with the statemant as made but I do agree with the sentiment and the reason behind it. The reason I hold this position is not because we have different doctrines but because we worship different Christs. When it comes down to it there can be only one Christ. A christ who desires to save and has done all he can to save but can't actually save unless man makes the difference is not the Christ of the Bible. I have no problem stating that fact and no problem defending it.

 

[mlqurgw]

By all means tell me that you considered YOUR DOCTRINES to be 'the perfect foundation.'

You convieniently ignored the passage I referenced when I made the statement about the foundation. Christ is the foundation and He is the perfect foundation but if you are wrong on Christ you build on a wrong foundation. Are you so willing to stir up strife that you can't even see that was what I was saying?

IF NOT, then we both AGREE that Jesus IS The Perfect Foundation that we ALL build upon and NONE of us 'built Him.'



The only obvious thing I've seen is that you don't want to answer if you AGREE or DISAGREE with the statement by SBG57 IN MY LAST POST.

I certainly understand that you do not seem to be FORTHRIGHT in answering and instead AVOIDED it just as HIS SHEEP did.

It will be there for you and hissheep anytime you want to DISPLAY your POSITION.

enjoy!

smaller

Answered already.

 

[Drew]

The fallacy of your rebuttal is that you presume that God has not ordained the means to His ends.

I understand that you believe that the means are also pre-destined. Fair enough - on your view, God pre-destines both the means and the outcome. But that's not the position I was arguing against. I was arguing against the position that humans need to "freely" tell the gospel to the elect.

If you are going to say both the means and the outcome are pre-destined then obviously your position is internally consistent.

 

[Nathan]

So you have no passage that you want to spring on me? If I say that He has never rejected any whose names are written in the Lamb's book of Life, which is what I would say if I didn't suspect a trap, what would your answer be? Would you then quote Rev. 3:5 or 22:19?

Why do you consider it a trap? No, I would not quote either of those two passages. Niether one would prove anything. They both speak of Christ NOT blotting out their names. It would only be left up to interpretation that Jesus was just giving them 'peace' or 'security' that they would never be blotted out. Even though that would NOT be an accurate interpretation of the passages.

But, alas, there is another passage that specifically, directly, and undeniably speaks of those written in the book of life being erased from it. But, in all honesty, I was sincerely wanting to know just if that was what you believed. Whether or not the "elect" of God could ever have their names blotted out. And you have at last answered that question for me by stating you do not believe they could. And I thank you for simply answering my question.

 

[Drew]

deleted own post.

 

[savedbygrace57]

deavon:

How do you know if you HAVE been a recipient of that level of "sanctification"?

By God !

 

[savedbygrace57]

Christ Loved His Church and gave [died] Himself for it eph 5:

25Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it;

Thats Gospel, For Christ died for our [ The Church] sins ! Not everyman without exception, thats never taught in scripture.

 

[mlqurgw]

Did anyone even bother to read what I wrote way back on page 1 post#13? I believe it states the Calvinist postion pretty well.

 

[mlqurgw]

Why do you consider it a trap? No, I would not quote either of those two passages. Niether one would prove anything. They both speak of Christ NOT blotting out their names. It would only be left up to interpretation that Jesus was just giving them 'peace' or 'security' that they would never be blotted out. Even though that would NOT be an accurate interpretation of the passages.

But, alas, there is another passage that specifically, directly, and undeniably speaks of those written in the book of life being erased from it. But, in all honesty, I was sincerely wanting to know just if that was what you believed. Whether or not the "elect" of God could ever have their names blotted out. And you have at last answered that question for me by stating you do not believe they could. And I thank you for simply answering my question.

I certainly didn't intend to impune your honesty but my experience has been when folks ask questions in that way they are usually setting you up for something. I am new here and you haven't gotten to know me nor I you yet so I will err on the side of caution for the time being. Normally I have no problem being forthright and even blunt in answering questions. As I get to know each person posting here I will be more able to discern which approach to use with them. And you are welcome.

 

[mlqurgw]

Greetings. If I may offer an opinion:

I think that the church is probably off base with some of the ways it characterizes "a relationship with Jesus". I think the church often makes claims about an "experienced personal relationship" that are not really supportable from the Biblical texts. Yes, I believe Jesus is a real living king who is part of a triune Godhead. Yes, I believe He is at work in the world. And so on.

But I see nothing in the Bible that really promises that "warm fuzzy" experience that so many people seem to expect. I suggest that a better way to grasp the truth of the gospel is to not look inward for mystical experience, but instead look at the narrative we get in the Bible about a God who is working within His creation, perhaps using "unspectacular" means to get us "back to the garden".

The Bible story is not really all that centrally concerned with "what Jesus does for me in terms of an experience of God". It is rather more concerned with a grand plan to redeem all of Creation. And we (the church) are the "foot-soldiers" who are privileged to participate in this, even if without an "experience of the divine" in the "mystical" sense that so many people seem to expect.

I can agree with much of your premise but I would have to disagree that the Scriptures are a narrative of God working in His creation to get us back to the Garden. I believe the Scriptures are all about the person and work of Christ. He is the theme, subject and message of the whole book. Since God has determined to exhalt Himself in sovereign mercy, Ex. 33:18-19, and has determined to do it in Christ the whole of the Book is about that one theme. We have the first promise of

Christ given in Gen. 3:15 and He can be easily found even in the act of creation. The Bible is a progressive revelation of Christ.

 

[francisdesales]

I don't think any are denying the fact that we are willing participants in whatever God does through us. And of course the old robot argument is just that old and stale. God doesn't need to make us robots for He controls every circumstance and influence that shapes our decisions and thoughts. We do exactly as we want exactly according to His purpose and sovereign control.

At the end of the day, no one is going to be able to clearly explain this mystery on God's grace and how it works viz a viz man's free will. It is not possible to delineate between the two. We accept both without claiming that one overrides the other.

Regards

 

[Deavonreye]

How do you know you have received that level of santification?

deavon:

By God !

And how did god let you in on this knowledge?

Also, please answer what your definition of "perish" is, and whether or not they [the "perished"] have a choice in their fate.

 

[Deavonreye]

At the end of the day, no one is going to be able to clearly explain this mystery on God's grace and how it works viz a viz man's free will. It is not possible to delineate between the two. We accept both without claiming that one overrides the other.

Regards

And sometimes a "mystery" is actually just man's oversight when religious texts were being written and doctrines stated. God can't be all sovereign while man has free will. I does not work.

 

[Drew]

God can't be all sovereign while man has free will. I does not work.

I agree, but I do think fds would disagree with you. However, it is indeed true that God can indeed ensure that certain objectives are satisfied even if man has some free will.

I think that it is very appealing and re-assuring and "simple" to think that God controls every minute event in the universe. But that is not the picture I see in the Bible. I see a picture of God "vesting" some free will in man, deciding as it were, that creation is to be "run" by human beings to some degree. At the very outset of Genesis we have God deferring to man when it comes to the naming of the animals. So right off the bat we have evidence of a God who, for mysterious reasons perhaps, has "delegated" the running of the universe, at least to some degree (small though that degree may be), to man.

Adam fell, and the universe was out of whack - without a "man" at the helm.

Jesus comes as the second Adam and restores the universe to its proper order, with a human being at the helm.

 

[smaller]

You convieniently ignored the passage I referenced when I made the statement about the foundation. Christ is the foundation and He is the perfect foundation but if you are wrong on Christ you build on a wrong foundation.

And as previously noted there IS NO WRONG CHRIST.

There are, from there, ALL who build with PARTIAL SIGHT. Partial sight can NOT possibly be Perfect.

Are you so willing to stir up strife that you can't even see that was what I was saying?

You can spin the facts however you please.

Men using partial sighted doctrines and condemning other believers to eternal hell over same is a sham christian practice of MANY sects.

None of us have been delivered that DICTATE.

smaller

 

[Deavonreye]

I agree, but I do think fds would disagree with you. However, it is indeed true that God can indeed ensure that certain objectives are satisfied even if man has some free will.

I think that it is very appealing and re-assuring and "simple" to think that God controls every minute event in the universe. But that is not the picture I see in the Bible. I see a picture of God "vesting" some free will in man, deciding as it were, that creation is to be "run" by human beings to some degree. At the very outset of Genesis we have God deferring to man when it comes to the naming of the animals. So right off the bat we have evidence of a God who, for mysterious reasons perhaps, has "delegated" the running of the universe, at least to some degree (small though that degree may be), to man.

Adam fell, and the universe was out of whack - without a "man" at the helm.

Jesus comes as the second Adam and restores the universe to its proper order, with a human being at the helm.

While I don't believe the reality of the Adam story, the point is well taken [about him being given the free will to name animals].

 

[HisSheep]

And BTW, your buddy 'his[supposed]sheep' DECLINED or MISSED this request so I'll put it up to you (and hisheep) again for your response of agreement or disagreement with sbg57's statement as quoted here:

Yea, Nay or waffle?

Either or both of you please.

smaller

I certainly understand that you do not seem to be FORTHRIGHT in answering and instead AVOIDED it just as HIS SHEEP did.

It will be there for you and hissheep anytime you want to DISPLAY your POSITION.

enjoy!

smaller

Yikes!... So much vitriol!... I'm really not avoiding the question, I just can't answer every question as quickly as you might like. I have responsibilities, like work and family… Calm down… It’s only been 18 hours…

First of all, I can’t find SBG57’s post in which he said this; which post # is it? I did find a link to it in post #66, but it takes me to some other post. I’m not denying that he said it… I just wanted to include it here, in my post.

You’re right, this statement regarding eternal destiny being determined (even in part) by acceptance of Calvinist doctrine is bunk. So, you’ve caught me in a mistake. Happy?

I said I agreed with SBG57 and you’ve found one place where I don’t…. I guess I spoke too soon... I do agree with NEARLY everything he says, but not that bit… Even Calvin didn’t say that!

In my opinion there will be many Arminians in Heaven, I’m sure of that. Boy will they be surprised to learn that God actually chose them! We are saved by faith, no matter how God managed to reach us…

Can we lay down the daggers, Smaller?

-HisSheep

 

[smaller]

Yikes!... So much vitriol!...

hmmm? SBG57 condemns everyone apart from his doctrines to eternal hellfire, I question that validity, vile as it is, and you claim 'my' vitriol?

quite funny.

I'm really not avoiding the question, I just can't answer every question as quickly as you might like. I have responsibilities, like work and family… Calm down… It’s only been 18 hours…

Yeah, some people are smart enough to think before they stick their tongue in the fire.

First of all, I can’t find SBG57’s post in which he said this; which post # is it? I did find a link to it in post #66, but it takes me to some other post. I’m not denying that he said it… I just wanted to include it here, in my post.

I've cited it several times. You are welcome to NOT find it and I understand your avoidance.

You’re right, this statement regarding eternal destiny being determined (even in part) by acceptance of Calvinist doctrine is bunk. So, you’ve caught me in a mistake. Happy?

Well, it is good to see 'some' determinists have their heads screwed on straight.

I said I agreed with SBG57 and you’ve found one place where I don’t…. I guess I spoke too soon... I do agree with NEARLY everything he says, but not that bit… Even Calvin didn’t say that!

I am not aware of ANY determinist measures that go to that extent. The fact is that 'most' forms of determinism do not secure the 'fact' that they are even sheep. That determination resides with God Alone.

In my opinion there will be many Arminians in Heaven, I’m sure of that. Boy will they be surprised to learn that God actually chose them! We are saved by faith, no matter how God managed to reach us…

Can we lay down the daggers, Smaller?

You have laid yours down sufficiently and THANK YOU for clarifying.

Blessings!

smaller

 

[savedbygrace57]

deavon:

And how did god let you in on this knowledge?

The Gospel, the good news.

Also, please answer what your definition of "perish" is, and whether or not they [the "perished"] have a choice in their fate.

Going to hell and no they had no choice in their destiny, God detrmined it before they were born, and made them vessels of wrath fitted for destruction.

rom 9:


22What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction:

The word destruction here is the greek word:

apōleia:

) destroying, utter destruction

a) of vessels

2) a perishing, ruin, destruction

a) of money

b) the destruction which consists of eternal misery in hell

So, why would Jesus Christ die for them that He created for perishing, eternal misery in hell ?

And no man can change this .

 

[Deavonreye]

deavon:

The Gospel, the good news.

So, because you believe in "a book", you feel that this god has annointed you to be "a sheep"?

Going to hell and no they had no choice in their destiny, God detrmined it before they were born, and made them vessels of wrath fitted for destruction.

rom 9:


22What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction:

The word destruction here is the greek word:

apōleia:

) destroying, utter destruction

a) of vessels

2) a perishing, ruin, destruction

a) of money

b) the destruction which consists of eternal misery in hell

So, why would Jesus Christ die for them that He created for perishing, eternal misery in hell ?

And no man can change this .

Thank you for taking the time to answer this. Do you believe that I, as a person not called to be "a sheep", deserve to be sent to eternal misery in hell?