What's new
By:
Filters
Christian Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Why does the Gospel require preaching and hearing if it is known naturally?

jmt356 said:
Romans 1:18-2:16 states that the Gospel is known naturally and all are without excuse (Rom 1:18-2:16). However, Romans 10:9-15 states that salvation requires preaching, hearing and believing the Gospel (Rom 10:9-15). If the Gospel is known naturally, why does it require preaching and hearing?
Click to expand...

jmt,

Rom 1 speaks of natural theology - how a person can know the truth of God's existence - but not of salvation history. That's why I debate God's existence through evidence in creation with secular Aussies.

Oz
 
humble soul said:
Slightly off track perhaps, but aren't we better to witness the Gospel rather than preach it?
Click to expand...

humble soul,

The NT Greek word, kerusso, means,

Definition
  1. to be a herald, to officiate as a herald
    1. to proclaim after the manner of a herald
    2. always with the suggestion of formality, gravity and an authority which must be listened to and obeyed
  2. to publish, proclaim openly: something which has been done
  3. used of the public proclamation of the gospel and matters pertaining to it, made by John the Baptist, by Jesus, by the apostles and other Christian teachers
Click to expand...

This word is used throughout the NT. Christians are required to herald, proclaim and publish the Good News of the Gospel.

This link to the definition of kerusso gives a stack of NT verses where public proclamation is necessary.

Oz
 
humble soul said:
I hate to sound preachy but ........
Click to expand...
Preachy is all in the attitude.

If I am preachy at you because it makes me feel righteous and superior, then bad, bad, bad! But if I get preachy at you because I am genuinely concerned for your well-being, then I'd hope you'd put up with it, knowing it is from a heart of concern.

An aside: I think both the verbal and non-verbal communication of the Gospel can be done from good or bad motives. We really need to fight the temptations to do anything not coming from a heart intent on valuing others and wanting their best.

(I know that this may not directly relate to what you have written, but I figured it gave me the opportunity to get my preach on!)
 
How about the scripture that says this in 1 Cor 2 14

But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

Now this to me seems to indicate the Gospel cannot be known by the natural man because its a spiritual message from the Spirit of God.
 
brightfame52 said:
How about the scripture that says this in 1 Cor 2 14

But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

Now this to me seems to indicate the Gospel cannot be known by the natural man because its a spiritual message from the Spirit of God.
Click to expand...

brightfame,

That understanding would clash with what Jesus stated: "And I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all people to myself" (John 12:32 ESV).

Oz
 
brightfame52 said:
How about the scripture that says this in 1 Cor 2 14

But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

Now this to me seems to indicate the Gospel cannot be known by the natural man because its a spiritual message from the Spirit of God.
Click to expand...

The Spirit does indeed help man to understand and obey the Gospel, which is why Paul says... the Gospel is the power of God unto salvation.

  • ... and no one can say that Jesus is Lord except by the Holy Spirit.


JLB
 

All (every) and its variable meanings ... John 12:32​

...An error occurs when there is confusion about whether we refer to a term in a collective sense, or a distributive sense. A collective sense means all the items are considered together as a whole. In a distributive sense, all the items are considered separately, one at a time. The tricky thing is that the word "all" can be used either way. When "all" is used collectively, it means "all together". When "all" is used distributivity, it means "each and every one." The difference is really important and can often be distinguished only from context.
.. Example... Jill says, "All motorcycles have two 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. (Author unknown)

John 12:32 and the word "ALL" (John Owen)
That it is nowhere affirmed in the Scripture that Christ died for all men, or gave himself a ransom for all men, much less for all and every man, we have before declared. That he "gave himself a ransom for all" is expressly affirmed, 1 Timothy 2:6. But now, who this “all” should be:
  1. whether all people, or
  2. all the elect, or
  3. some of all sorts, or
  4. all of every sort (without distinction), is in debate

That the word all, being spoken of among all sorts of men, speaking, writing, any way expressing themselves, but especially in holy writ, is to be taken either collectively for all in general, without exception, or distributively (distinction) for some of all sorts, excluding none, is more apparent than that it can require any illustration. That it is sometimes taken in the first sense, for all collectively, is granted, and I need not prove it, they whom we oppose affirming that this is the only sense of the word, -- though I dare boldly say it is not once in ten times so to be understood in the usage of it through the whole book of God; but that it is commonly, and indeed properly, used in the latter sense, for some of all sorts, concerning whatsoever it is affirmed, a few instances, for many that might be urged, will make it clear.
Thus, then, ye have it, John 12:32, "And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all unto me." That we translate it "all men," as in other places (for though I know the sense may be the same, yet the word men being not in the original, but only pantas), I cannot approve. But who, I pray, are these all? Are they all and every one? Then are all and every one drawn to Christ, made believers, and truly converted, and shall be certainly saved; for those that come unto him by his and his Father's drawing, "he will in no wise cast out," John 6:37. All, then, can here be no other than many, some of all sorts, no sort excluded, according as the word is interpreted in Revelation 5:9, "Thou hast redeemed us out of every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation."

John 12:32 32 And I, if and when I am lifted up from the earth [on the cross], will draw all people to Myself [Gentiles, as well as Jews].” AMP ... the AMP interprets ALL to mean from two groups: Jews and Gentiles ...(Not that the AMP saying so makes it authoritative; rather, that the idea has support by a portion of scholars)

Further commentary by Owens
The whole strength of these argument lies in turning indefinite propositions into universals, concluding that because Christ died for sinners, therefore he died for all sinners; because he died for the unjust, ungodly, and the world, that therefore he died for every one that is unjust, or ungodly, and for everyone in the world; because he died for all, therefore for all and every one of all sorts of men. Now, if this be good arguing, I will furnish you with some more such arguments against you have occasion to use them:-- First, God "justifieth the ungodly," Romans 4:5; therefore, he justifieth everyone that is ungodly. Now, "whom he justifieth, them he also glorifieth;" and therefore every ungodly person shall be glorified. Secondly, When Christ came, "men loved darkness rather than light," John 3:19; therefore, all men did so, and so none believed. Thirdly, "The world knew not Christ," John 1:10; therefore, no man in the world knew him. Fourthly, "The whole world lieth in wickedness," 1 John 5:19; therefore, everyone in the world doth so. Such arguments as these, by turning indefinite propositions into universals, I could easily furnish you withal, for any purpose that you will use them to.

Conclusion: The words "ALL", "EVERYONE" and "WORLD" can mean 'without distinction' or 'without exception'. The meaning is often determined by the bias of the user rather than it's actual meaning. In verses where such 'implicit' words are use one should seek other scriptures on the topic that are 'explicit'.
 
Fastfredy0 said:

All (every) and its variable meanings ... John 12:32​

...An error occurs when there is confusion about whether we refer to a term in a collective sense, or a distributive sense. A collective sense means all the items are considered together as a whole. In a distributive sense, all the items are considered separately, one at a time. The tricky thing is that the word "all" can be used either way. When "all" is used collectively, it means "all together". When "all" is used distributivity, it means "each and every one." The difference is really important and can often be distinguished only from context.
.. Example... Jill says, "All motorcycles have two 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. (Author unknown)

John 12:32 and the word "ALL" (John Owen)
That it is nowhere affirmed in the Scripture that Christ died for all men, or gave himself a ransom for all men, much less for all and every man, we have before declared. That he "gave himself a ransom for all" is expressly affirmed, 1 Timothy 2:6. But now, who this “all” should be:
  1. whether all people, or
  2. all the elect, or
  3. some of all sorts, or
  4. all of every sort (without distinction), is in debate

That the word all, being spoken of among all sorts of men, speaking, writing, any way expressing themselves, but especially in holy writ, is to be taken either collectively for all in general, without exception, or distributively (distinction) for some of all sorts, excluding none, is more apparent than that it can require any illustration. That it is sometimes taken in the first sense, for all collectively, is granted, and I need not prove it, they whom we oppose affirming that this is the only sense of the word, -- though I dare boldly say it is not once in ten times so to be understood in the usage of it through the whole book of God; but that it is commonly, and indeed properly, used in the latter sense, for some of all sorts, concerning whatsoever it is affirmed, a few instances, for many that might be urged, will make it clear.
Thus, then, ye have it, John 12:32, "And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all unto me." That we translate it "all men," as in other places (for though I know the sense may be the same, yet the word men being not in the original, but only pantas), I cannot approve. But who, I pray, are these all? Are they all and every one? Then are all and every one drawn to Christ, made believers, and truly converted, and shall be certainly saved; for those that come unto him by his and his Father's drawing, "he will in no wise cast out," John 6:37. All, then, can here be no other than many, some of all sorts, no sort excluded, according as the word is interpreted in Revelation 5:9, "Thou hast redeemed us out of every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation."

John 12:32 32 And I, if and when I am lifted up from the earth [on the cross], will draw all people to Myself [Gentiles, as well as Jews].” AMP ... the AMP interprets ALL to mean from two groups: Jews and Gentiles ...(Not that the AMP saying so makes it authoritative; rather, that the idea has support by a portion of scholars)

Further commentary by Owens
The whole strength of these argument lies in turning indefinite propositions into universals, concluding that because Christ died for sinners, therefore he died for all sinners; because he died for the unjust, ungodly, and the world, that therefore he died for every one that is unjust, or ungodly, and for everyone in the world; because he died for all, therefore for all and every one of all sorts of men. Now, if this be good arguing, I will furnish you with some more such arguments against you have occasion to use them:-- First, God "justifieth the ungodly," Romans 4:5; therefore, he justifieth everyone that is ungodly. Now, "whom he justifieth, them he also glorifieth;" and therefore every ungodly person shall be glorified. Secondly, When Christ came, "men loved darkness rather than light," John 3:19; therefore, all men did so, and so none believed. Thirdly, "The world knew not Christ," John 1:10; therefore, no man in the world knew him. Fourthly, "The whole world lieth in wickedness," 1 John 5:19; therefore, everyone in the world doth so. Such arguments as these, by turning indefinite propositions into universals, I could easily furnish you withal, for any purpose that you will use them to.

Conclusion: The words "ALL", "EVERYONE" and "WORLD" can mean 'without distinction' or 'without exception'. The meaning is often determined by the bias of the user rather than it's actual meaning. In verses where such 'implicit' words are use one should seek other scriptures on the topic that are 'explicit'.
Click to expand...

Does your study bring you to the conclusion that “world” means people who are saved?




JLB
 
OzSpen said:
What does "ALL" mean in John 12:32?
Click to expand...
See post #31
AMP version says ALL is Jews and Gentiles
Some experts say the use of the word ALL is ambiguous.
Those with bias usually say it "what they want it to say": some everyone with exception, some say every group without distinction, some say 'this grouping' or 'that grouping'.
I say seek other scriptures for clarification.

Examples where a rational person will agree that ALL cannot mean EVERYONE WITH EXCEPTION.
John 14:26 But the Helper (Comforter, Advocate, Intercessor—Counselor, Strengthener, Standby), the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name [in My place, to represent Me and act on My behalf], He will teach you all things. And He will help you remember everything that I have told you. The Spirit has infinite knowledge so the transference of “ALL” without exception is not possible.

Acts 26:4 Paul says, The Jews all know the way I have lived ever since I was a child, from the beginning of my life in my own country, and also in Jerusalem. Does he mean that every Jew without exception knew him? How about those who lived in the past and those who would live in the future?

Romans 5:18 Therefore, as one trespass led to condemnation for all men, so one act of righteousness leads to justification and life for all men. 19 For as by the one man's disobedience the many were made sinners, so by the one man's obedience the many will be made righteous. “All” without exception would validate universalism.

2 Corinthians 5:14 For the love of Christ controls and compels us, because we have concluded this, that One died for all, therefore all died; 15 and He died for all, so that all those who live would no longer live for themselves, but for Him who died and was raised for their sake. It is self-evident that “all without exception” do NOT live for Christ}

Matthew 10:22 All men will hate you because of me, but he who stands firm to the end will be saved. The statement does not intend to say that all human beings without exception would hate Christians, since at least the Christians themselves would love one another.


Examples that people with a bias (or agenda) use to prove God died for everyone without exception.
1 Timothy 2:4 who wishes all people to be saved and to come to the knowledge and recognition of the [divine] truth.

1 Timothy 2:6 who gave Himself as a ransom [a substitutionary sacrifice to atone] for all, the testimony given at the right and proper time.

2 Peter 3:9 The Lord does not delay [as though He were unable to act] and is not slow about His promise, as some count slowness, but is [extraordinarily] patient toward you, not wishing for any to perish but for all to come to repentance.

2 Corinthians 5:14-15


Conclusion: The words "ALL" (not to mention "EVERYONE" and "WORLD") can mean 'without distinction' or 'without exception'. The meaning is often determined by the bias of the user rather than it's actual meaning. In verses where such 'implicit' words are used one should seek clarificaton from other scriptures on the topic that are 'explicit'.
 
fatsf quote of Rom 5 18

Romans 5:18 Therefore, as one trespass led to condemnation for all men, so one act of righteousness leads to justification and life for all men.
Click to expand...

Why does it use the past tense led to condemnation for all men, but the future tense leads to justification of life for all men ? Why not led to justification of life to all men ?

The Amp reads:


So then as through one trespass [Adam’s sin] there resulted condemnation for all men, even so through one act of righteousness there resulted justification of life to all men.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top